Anyone who commits acts of sabotage against any critical infrastructure of society, and is aware that it may cause damage, deterioration, or danger, will be considered guilty of a sabotage crime.
This is established in Ruling 475, approved by the Governing Council of the Supreme People's Court, to interpret and standardize the judicial practice of acts of sabotage that have affected means of public transportation; generators and photovoltaic parks that are part of the National Electric System; as well as telecommunications infrastructure and services, and information and communications technologies.
Regarding the document, published yesterday in the extraordinary edition number 29 of the Official Gazette of the Republic, Vice-President of the People's Supreme Court Maricela Sosa Ravelo explained that it is determined that when the acts committed cause serious injuries, the death of persons, or endanger collective security, it is considered an aggravated modality, which provides for penalties of ten to 30 years of imprisonment, the penalty of life imprisonment, or the penalty of death.
In the case that it does not endanger the welfare of the person, the sanctioning framework is seven to 15 years of deprivation of liberty, as contemplated in the Penal Code.
Sosa Ravelo stated that the opinion also pronounces on those accessory sanctions that may be accompanied by the main sanctions named above.
Regarding the accessory sanctions that may be accompanied by the main actions described above, the confiscation or forfeiture of the assets, and the prohibition to leave the national territory will be appealed and, “until the offender pays those damages, he/she will also not be able to leave the national territory, even if he/she has served the sanction of deprivation of liberty imposed on him/her”.
The vice-president of the People's Supreme Court stated that this norm requires rationality, rigor in the sanction, speed in the processing of cases, as well as individualization, depending on the conditions and personal characteristics of the person who commits the crime that affects the population.
A novel aspect, stated Sosa Ravelo, is that the sanctioning court, at the moment it considers that the person is the author of the crime and imposes a sanction, may decide that he/she is not entitled to parole until he/she has served at least two-thirds of the sanction.
The commissioners declared responsible for the crimes are subject to the aggravating circumstances regulated in article 80 of the Criminal Code, referring to the intervention as a member of a group composed of three or more persons, the participation of minors under 18 years of age, the use of means that provoke common danger, the use of nighttime, for profit, if they are under the effects of the ingestion of alcoholic beverages or illicit substances, as well as the case of having foreseen the consequences of their action.
When deciding on the early release of persons sentenced for crimes of this nature, the judges and judicial assistants, in charge of the control of the execution, will increase the surveillance and monitoring of the behavior of the offenders, and how they fulfill their obligations of conduct, both in the place of residence and in the workplace.
In this regard, the vice-president of the Supreme Court stated that repeated failure to comply with these obligations will lead to the revocation of the benefit and their placement in prison, for the time remaining of the originally imposed sanction. (Granma)
