Updated to LO 1/2026 and LO 1/2025 · Reviewed July 2026 · Author: Francisco Javier Martín Porras, criminal lawyer and court expert · SCJE team
Insults (injurias) and slander (calumnias) between private individuals are the only strictly private offences: no prosecutor, driven exclusively by the offended party and with their own tolls: a mandatory prior conciliation act, judicial licence if the expressions were uttered in court proceedings, and a fleeting one-year limitation period. A procedure full of formal traps where winnable cases are lost. We comment on it with an eye on digital honour: reviews, social networks and media.
In brief. In brief. They are prosecuted only through a querella by the offended party: no prosecutor and no actio popularis. Admissibility requirement: certification of the prior conciliation act (art. 804 LECrim). Limitation period of 1 year from publication: the fastest clock in the Code. The offended party’s pardon extinguishes the action at any moment.
Insults and slander between private individuals are prosecuted exclusively through a querella by the offended party, without a prosecutor and without the actio popularis, and with their own procedural tolls: the certification of the prior conciliation act as an admissibility requirement (art. 804 LECrim), the judicial licence when the expressions were uttered in court proceedings (art. 805) and a one-year limitation period from publication (art. 131 CP). Substantively, slander is the imputation of an offence with knowledge of its falsity or reckless disregard for the truth (art. 205 CP, with full exceptio veritatis), and insult is the serious injury to dignity (art. 208 CP: only serious ones are an offence; with publicity, higher penalties).
Our practice on both sides: well-drafted conciliations that often resolve the matter without a querella (rectification, deletion); careful computation of the limitation period in persistent digital publications; the exceptio veritatis as a shield when defending persons accused for reporting corruption or abuse; and retraction and offers of rectification as dignified exits. In digital honour, whoever certifies first litigates better.
| Element | Legal basis | Content | Practical key |
|---|---|---|---|
| Private prosecution only | Arts. 205 to 216 CP and LECrim | Querella by the offended party; no prosecutor, no actio popularis | A police report is not the channel for these offences |
| Prior conciliation | Art. 804 LECrim | Certification of the act held or attempted without effect | It suspends limitation and often obtains retractions |
| Licence for court expressions | Art. 805 LECrim | Authorisation from the court that heard the proceedings | Denied save manifest gratuitousness; recklessness is costly |
| Documentary evidence | Arts. 806 and 813 LECrim | The document or certified capture identifying the expressions | Simple screenshots are challenged; certify with hash or notary |
| Slander | Art. 205 CP | Imputation of an offence knowing its falsity | Full exceptio veritatis: proving the offence acquits |
| Insult | Art. 208 CP | Serious injury to dignity; higher penalties with publicity | Only serious insults are an offence; criticism is protected |
| Limitation | Art. 131 CP | One year from publication | Relevant republications may open new periods |
| Reparation | Art. 216 CP | Publication of the judgment and compensation | Publication in the attack channel rebuilds reputation |
Summary drawn from the Spanish source page for orientation purposes. The applicable provisions are those in force at the relevant time; each case requires individual analysis by a criminal lawyer.
Original commentary by the firm, checked against the reference work in our library: Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal Comentada, Lefebvre-El Derecho, 13th edition, May 2026. A procedure full of formal traps where winnable cases are lost: conciliation, licence, one-year limitation and certified evidence decide before the merits do.
The circuit is querella, not police report: forensic certification today, conciliation this week, querella within the year. The order matters as much as the merits.
Serious accusations of criminal facts in reviews can be slander; opinions, even acid ones, are protected criticism. The certified capture and the technical analysis of dissemination decide the case.
Three layers of defence: freedom of expression and criticism, absence of the required seriousness and, in slander, the truth of what was imputed. Plus the formal ones: conciliation, time limit and specific expressions.
The full exceptio veritatis inverts the game: proving the imputed offence acquits. We use it as a shield for those who reported corruption or abuse.
Speak to a criminal lawyer
Criminal defence in English before the courts of Alicante and the rest of Spain, for residents and for visitors who have flown home.
Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert is a law firm with offices in Madrid, Alicante, London and Paris, specialising in criminal law, technology law and economic and corporate crime. We provide strategic guidance in complex criminal proceedings, intellectual property and technological resources for legal decision-making with advanced forensic analysis. Our multidisciplinary team combines legal experience, legal intelligence and personal attention to deliver effective solutions adapted to each case. Legal assistance available 24 hours a day and online consultations.
Copyright © 2026 Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert S.L.