GLORIFICATION OF TERRORISM, INCITEMENT TO VIOLENCE AND CLIMATE OF OPINION

Abstract

Contrary to the majority interpretation of the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court, which un-derstood the crime of glorification of terrorism as an offense, STC 112/2016, June 20 restricted its application to cases in which there is an incitement, even indirect, to violence. However, the understanding of indirect incitement as the creation of ideological climate actually entails main-taining the previous conception of the crime as a mere offense, incurring in a disproportionate limitation of freedom of expression. It is therefore necessary to adopt a more restrictive crite-rion of indirect incitement to violence, requiring an imminent risk of terrorist acts. More recent rulings such as STC 35/2020, February 25 (César Strawberry case) or the STEDH Erkizia Almandoz vs. Spain, June 22, 2021, make it possible to support this restrictive line, even though the literal wording of the precept makes it difficult to adopt such an interpretation