Civil Guard sergeant convicted for threatening local police officers
The Military Chamber of the Supreme Court upheld disciplinary sanctions against a Civil Guard sergeant for an incident in Arahal where he threatened and pushed local police officers while they were on duty.
Sergeant convicted for overbearing conduct against police
The Military Chamber of the Supreme Court has upheld the disciplinary sanction against a Civil Guard sergeant from Seville for a serious breach that occurred in Arahal in the early hours of 30 March 2022. According to diariodesevilla.es, the non-commissioned officer was punished with the loss of five days' pay and suspension from duties after confronting local police officers in a bar in what the judges described as an "overbearing, threatening and violent" manner.
The incident began when the Arahal Local Police responded to a call from a neighbour complaining of noise coming from an establishment. At around 05:10 hours, two officers went to the premises and found the shutter down with voices inside. After raising the shutter, several people came out, including the sergeant, who was off duty at the time and in plain clothes.
The sergeant immediately intervened in the police officers' actions, confronting them. When one of the officers pointed out that he was merely a customer at that moment, the non-commissioned officer reacted defiantly: "I am a Civil Guard 24 hours a day, and moreover I am a sergeant commander of the post and a lawyer and you have to stand to attention in front of me." He then pushed one of the officers on two occasions.
When warned that his conduct could have criminal and administrative consequences, the sergeant responded: "You don't have the nerve to report me; I'm going to file a complaint against you for raising the door when you shouldn't have done so." Despite partially calming down, he continued to interfere in the police officers' work, disrupting their conversation with the premises owner and insisting that their actions were incorrect.
The officers drew up a report for breach of closure requirements and subsequently prepared a report and complaint for lack of respect. The following day, the sergeant presented himself at the Arahal Local Police headquarters, where he acknowledged that "his attitude may not have been the most correct" and apologised repeatedly, stating that he had no intention of undermining the authority of the officers. The police officers accepted his apologies and attributed the situation to a misunderstanding arising from the circumstances that prompted the intervention.
However, the Supreme Court confirmed that the conduct constituted a serious disciplinary breach. The judges emphasised that the sergeant "interfered with and obstructed the work of the local police officers" in a defiant tone, even going so far as to physically push one of them. The ruling stresses that "the conduct of the appellant, acting in an overbearing, threatening and even violent manner towards police officers who were merely fulfilling their duty, reveals behaviour seriously contrary to the principles, values and standards of conduct by which the Honourable Institute is governed."
The court emphasised a fundamental principle for Civil Guard members: "Members of the Civil Guard must demonstrate impeccable conduct at all times, not only in acts of service and in relations with their superiors, equals or subordinates, but also in their relations with third parties outside the Civil Guard." This rule is set out in article 5 of Organic Law 2/1986 on Security Forces and Bodies, among other provisions regulating the conduct of security officers.
The judges concluded that the facts constituted a violation of the institutional dignity of the Civil Guard. The final ruling confirmed that the disciplinary sanction was appropriate as a response to conduct that compromised the fundamental values of the armed institute, regardless of the fact that the sergeant had subsequently offered an apology.
Source: Google News ES — Crime (es)