By: Lic. Jonatan J. Ravelo González
The Senate took a historic step by approving the first and second readings of the bill for the new Criminal Code, consisting of 413 articles and characterized by the incorporation of modern criminal offenses and harsher penalties.
What innovations does this reform introduce?
- New criminal offenses addressing issues such as terrorism, genocide, enforced disappearance, femicide —including aggravating circumstances—, contract killing, sexual harassment, cybercrime, bullying, administrative corruption, among others.
- Cumulative sentencing: the possibility of imposing up to 60 years in prison when multiple offenses are committed.
- Increase in maximum sentences: from 30 to 40 years in prison.
- Alternative sentences: introduction of “semi-liberty,” allowing sentences to be served on weekends for convictions of two years or less.
- Criminal liability of legal entities and stronger measures against corruption and influence peddling.
These innovations are undoubtedly necessary to modernize a criminal law framework dating back to 1884 and originally based on the Napoleonic Code. However, they also raise significant challenges regarding both their practical implementation and their social impact.
The divisive issue: the three grounds for abortion were left out
The bill excludes the three grounds for the decriminalization of abortion (risk to the mother’s life or health, rape/incest, and fetal conditions incompatible with life) and maintains criminal penalties for abortion of up to three years in prison. Feminist groups have described the outcome as a “setback disguised as modernity,” referring to it as a “Criminal Code of shame.”
Professional opinion
As a criminal defense attorney, I view positively the move toward more comprehensive and up-to-date criminal legislation, capable of clearly defining contemporary criminal conduct and strengthening the fight against impunity. Likewise, the adoption of alternative sentences and corporate criminal liability reflects a well-considered vision of a 21st-century criminal justice system.
It is also important to note that the omission of the three grounds leaves a regulatory gap that continues to be the subject of public and political debate. Regardless of the position ultimately adopted, this is an issue that will at some point require a clear legislative solution capable of balancing the protection of life, women’s autonomy, and respect for the constitutional framework.