Andorra Tribunal Reviews Chiropractor's Rape Conviction Appeal

Andorra's Constitutional Tribunal has admitted a writ of protection from a chiropractor imprisoned since March 2024, agreeing to review his nine-year-and-three-month sentence for two rapes and one sexual assault against three patients.

The high court accepted the appeal against the Superior Court's penal chamber ruling from May 5, which upheld the Tribunal de Corts conviction. Admission to proceedings allows the Constitutional Tribunal to examine claims of fundamental rights violations, including the right to jurisdiction under Article 10 of the Constitution—specifically, rights to a legally grounded decision, due process, defense, and presumption of innocence. The chiropractor seeks annulment of the sentence and a new ruling from the Superior Court that respects these protections. The process does not suspend the conviction's effects.

The Andorran practitioner, who shared a practice in Escaldes-Engordany with his partner, has maintained his innocence throughout. He described his therapies as non-traditional physiotherapy involving mental relaxation and patient awareness, with support from multiple witnesses who testified positively at trial. Despite this, both lower and appellate courts endorsed the victims' accounts, bolstered by psychiatric reports confirming their trauma after trusting a professional.

Separately, on Thursday the Superior Court heard appeals in two unrelated nightclub rape convictions from late 2024 and March 2025, upholding the factual findings of rape from lower courts while debating sentences. Rulings in those cases are due for notification on July 31 at noon.

In the first, prosecutors pushed to raise a French tourist's four-year term—16 months firm—for an October 2024 assault in an Andorra la Vella nightclub bathroom, citing the young Catalan victim's injuries, consistent testimony, and evidence like lesions and witness observations. They requested eight years and two months, a €2,000 fine, and 20-year entry ban. Defense sought acquittal, questioning proof beyond doubt, DNA absence, and consent.

The second involved a 21-year-old Madrid man given three years for aggravated rape against a Catalan worker in Pas de la Casa, with most suspended after bail. Prosecutors wanted six firm years, highlighting her repeated "no"s, footage, and his comments. Defense argued for acquittal based on inconsistencies and context. No decisions emerged from the closed hearings.