Habitual domestic violence: an attack on human dignity

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. Habitual nature of the conduct. Concept and case law doctrine. The concept of "habitual nature" should not be interpreted in the strict legal sense of repeated convictions for the minor offense of mistreatment—which could even raise non bis in idem. It is more appropriate to adopt a naturalistic criterion, defining this habitual nature as the repetition of acts involving the same type of physical or psychological violence. It is not merely the plurality of acts that transforms the minor offense into a serious crime, but rather the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim combined with the frequency of the acts—specifically, the persistence of violent treatment that creates a situation of male-dominated control—thereby necessitating its classification as a distinct, autonomous offense. This is the case here, as evidenced by the testimony of the victim and the couple's child, who described episodes of physical assault, verbal abuse, and even sexual assault—accounts corroborated by other objective evidence. Individualized sentencing for result-based offenses. No error in the assessment of evidence.

The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court dismisses the appeal in cassation and upholds the judgment of the High Court of Justice, which in turn affirmed the conviction handed down by the Provincial Court of Navarre for the crime of habitual domestic violence, a crime of sexual assault, and several crimes of domestic mistreatment.