Criminal responsibility in matters of Prevention of Occupational Risks
The legal-criminal protection of the life and health of workers is specifically relied on arts. 316 to 317 of the Penal Code.
The art. 316 of the Penal Code establishes that: "Those who, in violation of the occupational risk prevention rules and being legally obliged, do not provide the necessary means for workers to carry out the activity with the appropriate safety and hygiene measures, so as to put them, in serious danger to their life, health or physical integrity, they will be punished with prison sentences of six months to three years and a fine of six to twelve months.
Thus, it is evident that the provision generally refers to the violation of occupational risk prevention regulations.
For their part, court rulings understand that said reference is both to the provisions of the LPRL, and to those contained in any other norm issued on the matter, regardless of its rank.
Furthermore, there must be a specific causal relationship between the violation of the occupational risk prevention standard and the serious danger for the life and health of workers. In this way, the first must provoke the second.
Concurrence with other crimes
However, when as a consequence of the violation of occupational risk prevention regulations the harmful result that was intended to be avoided occurs, it could be thought that the crime of result (the death or injury of the worker) will absorb the crime of danger. However, this should not always be the case, since, as has been said, typical behaviour consists of endangering the life or health of the workers, in the plural, of the group. Therefore, it will not be absorbed by the subsequent crime of injury or death of one or some of the specific and individual workers, provided that there were more employees who, even if they had not suffered an injurious or harmful result, had nevertheless been exposed and working in the same dangerous situation. In these cases, there will be a concurrence of crimes.