The Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Catalunya (TSJC) has unanimously annulled the conviction of footballer Dani Alves for sexual assault, a decision that has sent shockwaves through the sports world. On March 28, 2025, the court ruled in favor of Alves, stating that the evidence presented during the initial trial was insufficient to uphold the four-and-a-half-year sentence imposed by the Barcelona Court. The ruling has raised significant questions about the reliability of witness testimonies in sexual assault cases and the judicial process involved.
The TSJC's decision came after a thorough review of the case, which centered around an incident that occurred in December 2022 at the Sutton nightclub in Barcelona. Alves had been accused of raping a 23-year-old woman in a bathroom within a reserved area of the venue. Following the accusations, he was held in pre-trial detention for fourteen months before being released on bail in March 2024, with a bond set at one million euros.
In its ruling, the TSJC criticized the initial conviction, asserting that the testimony of the complainant was not sufficiently conclusive. The court noted that the original judgment contained "imprecisions, inconsistencies, and contradictions." The magistrates expressed concern over the credibility of the complainant's account, which was contradicted by video footage from the nightclub showing Alves and the woman dancing and drinking together prior to the alleged assault.
The court highlighted that the original sentencing had acknowledged the "lack of reliability" in the complainant's testimony, particularly regarding the details captured on video. The TSJC pointed out that while the Barcelona Court had recognized discrepancies between the complainant's account and the video evidence, it still accepted her testimony without sufficient corroboration from other evidence, such as fingerprint analysis or DNA testing.
"The tribunal of instance has opted to accept a subjective belief of what happened inside the bathroom, limited solely to the fact that the vaginal penetration was non-consensual, as claimed by the complainant," the TSJC stated. This assertion raises critical concerns about the standards of proof required in sexual assault cases and how subjective interpretations can impact judicial outcomes.
Moreover, the TSJC emphasized that the burden of proof must meet the standards of the presumption of innocence, as mandated by European parliamentary directives. The court criticized the initial ruling for using the term "credibility" interchangeably with "reliability," without adequately explaining why it accepted unverified testimony from a witness deemed unreliable in other aspects of her account.
In its ruling, the TSJC also reiterated the importance of individual sexual freedom, stating that adults have the right to engage in sexual activities freely and consensually. The court concluded that the complainant's behavior, as observed in the video footage, did not indicate any lack of consent at the time of the encounter.
The decision to annul Alves' conviction was not only welcomed by his defense team but also sparked reactions from various stakeholders, including the prosecution and the complainant's side, who had sought a harsher penalty. The prosecution had initially requested a nine-year sentence, while the complainant's legal representation sought twelve years.
Throughout the case, Alves had changed his account of the events several times, ultimately maintaining that any sexual encounter was consensual. In court, he described the complainant as having shown sexual interest in him and even reenacted the positions in which they allegedly engaged in sexual acts.
The victim's testimony was delivered in a closed session to protect her identity, with measures in place to ensure she was not identifiable during the proceedings. Her friends also testified, describing Alves' behavior as inappropriate and making them uncomfortable during the night in question.
Despite the acquittal, the case has left a profound impact on discussions surrounding sexual assault, consent, and the judicial process in Spain. The TSJC's ruling has been seen as a significant moment in the ongoing debate about how sexual assault cases are handled in the legal system, particularly regarding the weight given to witness testimonies.
In a related controversy, Alves' mother faced backlash after she posted a video compilation of the complainant on social media, which included images of her set to music in defense of her son. This action drew the attention of the prosecution, although no formal investigation was initiated since the matter had already been judicialized.
The TSJC's ruling can still be appealed, and it remains to be seen how this case will evolve in the coming months. As the legal proceedings continue, both sides of the debate on sexual assault and the judicial process are likely to remain highly charged and contentious.
The annulment of Dani Alves' conviction highlights the complexities of sexual assault cases and the critical importance of ensuring that the legal standards for evidence and testimony are rigorously upheld. As society grapples with these issues, the implications of this ruling will resonate far beyond the courtroom, influencing public perceptions and legal practices in the realm of sexual violence.
