Portuguese criminal procedure is set to undergo significant changes aimed at making case processing faster and limiting mechanisms that could unjustifiably delay the conclusion of cases.
Law No. 34/2026 mainly amends the Code of Criminal Procedure, though it also introduces a specific amendment to the Criminal Code and modifies the court-fee regime.
The new rules take effect on September 1, 2026.
In summary
The reform seeks to strengthen the courts’ ability to actively manage cases and respond to conduct considered merely dilatory.
Among the main changes are:
- creation of an express duty of case management and procedural adaptation;
- the possibility of imposing substantial fines for delaying tactics;
- mechanisms to prevent manifestly unfounded incidents from blocking the finalization of decisions;
- more structured presentation of indictments, pre-trial investigation requests, and defense statements;
- new rules for exceptionally complex cases;
- expanded scope for summary proceedings;
- changes to the effects of a full, unreserved confession;
- limits on appeals concerning certain evidentiary decisions;
- increases to some court fees;
- a new cause for suspension of the statute of limitations related to the replacement of defense counsel.
The overall goal is to allow more active case management and reduce delays that do not stem from the need to ensure the right of defense or the discovery of truth.
1. Greater case-management power
One of the main innovations is the creation of a duty of case management and procedural adaptation.
The judge responsible for a case now has an express duty to promote its swift progress, order the necessary steps, and reject anything deemed irrelevant or merely dilatory.
The judge may also adapt the procedure and the form of procedural acts to the case’s specific needs, after hearing the parties involved.
These decisions may not affect fundamental rights, freedoms, and guarantees, and, outside those situations, will generally not be subject to appeal.
2. Fines for delaying tactics
A specific mechanism is created to sanction manifestly unfounded acts intended to, or having the effect of, delaying the case or unjustifiably consuming time and resources.
The defendant, private prosecutor, civil party, or another person affected by the proceedings may be fined between 2 and 100 accounting units.
There is also a notable consequence for lawyers: in the case of a second conviction in the same case, when the acts were carried out through a lawyer, a certified copy is sent to the Bar Association for possible disciplinary proceedings.
The reform does not, of course, eliminate the right to file motions, incidental proceedings, or appeals. What it targets are actions the court deems manifestly unfounded and intended or apt to delay the case.
3. Incidental proceedings no longer automatically block the finalization of decisions
A mechanism to guard against abusive delay tactics is also created.
When, at the appeal stage, a manifestly unfounded incidental proceeding is filed aiming to prevent compliance with a decision, the case being sent down, or its finalization, that incidental proceeding may now run separately.
The main case then continues its normal course.
More significantly, if the panel finds the incidental proceeding to be manifestly unfounded, the challenged decision is considered, for all purposes, final and binding, without prejudice to reversal should the incidental proceeding later succeed.
4. A request to disqualify a judge no longer suspends the case
Another change with practical impact concerns requests to disqualify a judge.
Filing a disqualification request no longer suspends subsequent proceedings in the case.
The aim is to prevent this mechanism from being used merely to stall proceedings, without eliminating the possibility of raising a genuine concern about the court’s impartiality.
5. Indictments, pre-trial requests, and defense statements become more structured
The reform also introduces important formal changes to key procedural filings.
The indictment must present the narrative of facts organized by numbered points.
The request to open a pre-trial investigation must likewise be structured by numbered points, and the defendant’s statement of defense must follow the same structure.
The goal is to make clearer the delimitation of facts, the parties’ positions, and the relevant evidence, especially in larger cases.
6. Exceptionally complex cases
In cases formally declared to be of exceptional complexity, several procedural deadlines are doubled.
For appeals of final decisions, when the complexity of the case justifies it, the court may also grant, upon request, an extension of up to 30 days.
This solution seeks to reconcile the goal of speeding up proceedings with the reality of cases involving thousands of documents, multiple defendants, or particularly extensive factual matter.
7. New rules on evidence and witnesses
The limit of 20 witnesses remains the rule, but the law reorganizes how evidence must be presented and assessed.
The court will now also review evidentiary requests in advance, before scheduling the hearing.
In addition, the order determining the evidence the court considers necessary will, as a rule, be non-appealable, while preserving the possibility of challenge where prohibited evidence or evidence obtained without observing legal requirements is at issue.
8. Full confession now applies to more serious crimes as well
The rule preventing a full, unreserved confession from automatically producing its normal effects in cases involving crimes punishable by more than five years’ imprisonment is eliminated.
Thus, provided the remaining legal conditions are met, a full, unreserved confession may allow the facts to be deemed proven and the case to move forward to sentencing, even in these more serious cases.
This change could have a significant impact on the length of trials in cases where the facts are no longer in dispute.
9. Summary proceedings get a broader scope
The scope of summary proceedings is also significantly expanded.
The new law bases the availability of this procedural form on the existence of simple and clear evidence giving rise to sufficient indications of the crime and its perpetrator, removing one of the previous limitations tied to the abstract severity of the crime.
Summary proceedings benefit from faster processing, and their trial takes precedence over ordinary cases, without prejudice to cases that are legally classified as urgent.
10. Change to the statute of limitations
The main change made directly to the Criminal Code concerns the statute of limitations.
The statute of limitations for criminal prosecution will now be suspended during any period in which the pre-trial hearing, the trial, or another act requiring the defendant’s presence is interrupted or postponed due to the replacement of the defendant’s counsel.
The intent is to prevent a change of defense counsel — and the resulting interruption or postponement of procedural acts — from simultaneously running down the limitation period.
11. Higher court fees
The reform also raises some court-fee limits.
Among other examples:
- ordinary proceedings may now carry a fee of up to 12 accounting units;
- an appeal to the Court of Appeal, up to 12 accounting units;
- an appeal to the Supreme Court of Justice, up to 20 accounting units.
What does this reform mean in practice?
Law No. 34/2026 represents a clear move toward more interventionist case management.
Courts and the Public Prosecution Service now have additional tools to organize complex cases, focus the discussion on what they consider genuinely relevant, and respond to motions or incidental proceedings deemed dilatory.
For defendants, private prosecutors, and their legal representatives, it becomes increasingly important to clearly justify the necessity and usefulness of each procedural act.
These changes carry particular weight in large-scale cases and economic/financial crime cases, where a succession of incidental proceedings, appeals, large volumes of evidence, and multiple parties can significantly extend how long a case takes.
Frequently asked questions
Are the new rules already in force?
Not yet. Law No. 34/2026 takes effect on September 1, 2026.
Can a motion that is denied be considered a delaying tactic?
Not automatically. The law requires that the act be manifestly unfounded and aimed at, or have the effect of, hindering or delaying the case’s progress, or causing an unjustified, substantial waste of time and resources.
Is filing a defense statement still optional for the defendant?
Yes. The defendant may still choose whether to file a statement of defense. The change mainly concerns its form: when filed, it must now be organized by numbered points.
Does the reform change the penalties set for crimes?
Generally, no. Law No. 34/2026 is essentially a criminal procedure reform. The direct amendment to the Criminal Code concerns the suspension of the statute of limitations in cases of postponement or interruption caused by the replacement of defense counsel.
How we can help
URB Law Services provides legal support in criminal and administrative-offense matters, including:
- analysis and support throughout criminal proceedings;
- representation of defendants and private prosecutors;
- preparation of procedural filings and motions;
- support during the investigation, pre-trial, and trial phases;
- filing and following up on appeals;
- analysis of how the new procedural rules affect ongoing cases.
With an office in Almancil, in the Algarve, and representation in Lisbon, URB Law Services provides legal support to domestic and international clients in Portugal.
The changes introduced by Law No. 34/2026 represent a significant shift in how criminal cases will be managed and processed starting in September.
Contact us to learn more.
