The trial of the 11 March 2004 Madrid terrorist attacks
| DOI | 10.1177/2032284417711578 |
| Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Published date | 01 June 2017 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
The trial of the 11 March 2004
Madrid terrorist attacks
Helena Soleto Mun
˜oz
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Spain
Abstract
On 11 March 2004, 10 bombs exploded on different commuter trains in Madrid. These attacks
caused 191 deaths – plus a policeman who died in a related explosion on 3rd April – and more than
1800 injured. The inquiry started that day, and after 3 years of investigation, 29 people were
brought to trial and finally 18 were convicted. The management of the case was correct even if
some significant difficulties were caused by the particularities of the inquiry and the magnitude of
the process and other common wrong practices in the Spanish criminal justice system regarding
identification.
Keywords
Terrorism, complex criminal case, identification, secrecy, inquiry, due process.
Introduction to the 11 March 2004 attacks
On the morning of 11 March 2004, at around 07:30 a.m. (local time), 10 bombs exploded on 4
commuter trains in Madrid. The blasts killed 191 people and injured or maimed 1857.
1
Ten of the thirteen bombs that had been planted exploded on four commuter trains that connect
the east and southeast of the region of Madrid with Atocha station, one of the main nerve centres of
the southern area of the Spanish capital.
The bombs exploded within 4 min: three bombs went off inside the station, four on the railway
leading into Atocha, two more exploded in two stations before the end of the line and another bomb
went off only one stop away from the end of the track.
Corresponding author:
Helena Soleto, University Carlos III de Madrid, Department of Criminal Procedural Law, Alonso Martı
´nez Institute, Uni-
versidad Carlos III de Madrid, Calle Madrid, 126, 28903 Getafe, Madrid, Spain.
E-mail: hsoleto@der-pu.uc3m.es
1. Ruling by Spain’s Supreme Court (Tribunal Supremo) on 17 July 2008, Resolution no. 53/2008, and Ruling by Spain’s
National Criminal Court (Audiencia Nacional) on 31 October 2007.
New Journal of European Criminal Law
2017, Vol. 8(2) 216–235
ªThe Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/2032284417711578
njecl.sagepub.com
NJECL
NJECL
The morning rush hour trains were packed with commuters from neighbourhoods and areas to
the south of the capital, and they were on their way to work in the centre or north of the city.
2
The attacks took place only 3 days before the general election set to be held on 14th of March,
and in the first few days after the bombings, the Spanish Ministry of the Interior initially blamed
Basque separatists ETA
3
, a terrorist group that was by then responsible for more than 800 deaths
since the 1960s. Nevertheless, the information that the police had and which was later filtered to
the press was that the attacks were most likely the work of Jihadist groups.
4
This was without a doubt the worst terror attack in Spain’s history, and one of the most violent
in the world, and so, it comes as no surprise that in the aftermath of the bombings millions of
people took to the streets to protest against the attacks throughout the whole country.
A few weeks later, on 3 April, investigations led police to a flat in the town of Legane´s, in the southern
area of the region of Madrid. Seven Jihadists blew themselves up as a unit of Spain’s special antiterrorist
group (GEO
5
) tried to blast their way into the flat. One of the policemen also died during the raid.
Sometime later, 29 people were brought to justice and accused of involvement in the train
bombings. After a long and complex trial, on the resolution on 31 October 2007, 21 of the suspects
were convicted by the National Criminal Court (Audiencia Nacional).
The court’s decision was appealed (casacio´n), and finally the Spanish Supreme Court (Tribunal
Supremo) pronounced the final judgment on 17 July 2008. This final ruling brought the total
number of convictions to 18, declared that the bombers responsible for the attacks belonged to
a radical Jihadist group and that the masterminds behind the plot were members of the cell that
committed suicide in Legane´s.
6
The inquiry
The inquiry into the bombings became the priority of all forces involved in the case. A judge of the
Audiencia Nacional court, an examining magistrate (Juez Central de Instruccio´n), was in charge of
the investigation, and almost 120 suspects were arrested in the days following the bombings.
Procedural peculiarities in terrorism cases
Spanish CriminalLaw and Procedural Law show a number of distinctive features presentin both the
investigation stage and the prosecution of suspected members of terrorist organisations or armed
2. In Madrid, the southern and south-eastern areas are among the most deprived in socio-economic terms. See the INEQ-
CITIES study at the website Available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ineqcities/atlas/cities/madrid/madrid-sei (accessed 1
December 2016). The neighbourhoods and towns the commuter trains went through are less economically developed
areas, and they have significant numbers of immigrants residing there.
3. ETA is an acronym of Euskadi Ta Askatasuna in Euskera, that means Basque Country and Freedom.
4. At the time, the party in power was conservative Partido Popular (PP), led by Prime Minister Jose´ Marı´a Aznar. On the
14th of March 2004 general elections were held in Spain, and the result could mean either the continuation of the ruling
PP party in power, although under a different leader (Mariano Rajoy instead of Jose´ Marı´a Aznar), or the rise of the left-
wing socialist party PSOE, under Jose´ Luis Rodrı´guez Zapatero. Ever since that day, political experts and journalists
have studied the connection between the terrorist attacks and the result of the election.
5. GEO, Spanish police Grupo de Operaciones Especiales, special police unit.
6. Both the National Criminal Court and the Supreme Court rulings start with the statement that the suspects that com-
mitted suicide in Legane´s were the terrorists responsible for the attacks; they were not tried for murder as criminal
responsibility disappears with the wrongdoer’s death.
Mun˜oz 217
To continue reading
Request your trial