Las presunciones legales iuris tantum en la figura del decomiso

Abstract

El recurso a presunciones legales iuris tantum para configurar tipos penales que permitan sancionar a los sujetos que obtienen un beneficio económico es en el momento actual una realidad que ha quedado constatada en la última reforma del Código Penal con la introducción de figuras como el decomiso ampliado y el decomiso autónomo en los arts. 127 bis y siguientes del Código Penal. Doctrina y jurisprudencia admiten de una u otra forma su licitud y conformidad con nuestra Norma Fundamental y con los principios en ella contenidos. En cambio, otras figuras similares al decomiso, como el enriquecimiento ilícito, no han tenido la misma suerte y ha sido apartada indefinidamente de la posibilidad de configurarse como un tipo delictivo. En el presente trabajo se analizan las razones y fundamentos que han llevado al legislador, a la doctrina y a la jurisprudencia a considerar la procedencia de utilizar presunciones legales iuris tantum para configurar el decomiso para, posteriormente, demostrar de modo más breve que razonamientos similares llevarían a admitir la licitud de la figura del enriquecimiento ilícito dentro de nuestro sistema normativo.

The calling upon the use of presumptions iuris tantum by the Spanish legislator in order to set down the possibilty of imposing a criminal punishment to those who have obtained an economic benefit from a criminal act, that is the so called “profit-driven crime” is at present, a reality that has been verified in the latest reform of the Criminal Code, where it has been introduced new criminal types such as the extended confiscation order and the confiscation order in articles 127 bis…Criminal Code. Both academic literature and jurisprudence have admited in one way or another the legality and the compliance of those new criminal types, with the Spanish Constitution, and Fundamental Rigths, and with the principles contained therein. On the other hand, other criminal types, and similar to confiscation, such as the unjust enrichment, have not had the same fate, and have been removed indefinitely from the possibility of being configured as a type of crime. In this paper we analyse the reasons and grounds that have led the Spanish legislator, the academic literatura, and the jurisprudence to consider the appropriateness of using legal presumptions iuris tantum in order to configure the term “confiscation” to, subsequently, demonstrate more briefly that similar reasoning would lead to admit the legality of the “unjust enrichment” within our normative system.