Los usos de la alegalidad en el lenguaje jurídico.

This paper analyzes the uses in legal language of the terms allegality or allegal. Recently these terms have been incorporated into the Dictionary of The Royal Academic Spanish Academy of Language, however, there is a use of them in doctrinal, jurisprudential and even legal language. Firstly, the very definition provided by the Dictionary and its confusing or contradictory nature is studied. Next, the relationship of legality with the principle of permission is raised, that is, if in any case the absence of express regulation of a matter implies that there are a series of behaviors that are allowed by the legal system. On the other hand, it is evaluated if the allegality, the lack of a legal norm that regulates an area of social life, means that we are facing a legal gap or before spaces that cannot and should not be regulated by law. That is to say, if the behaviors not regulated by the law necessarily have to be resolved through the integration of the law or if they are aspects that do not belong to the legal sphere. We also study the fact that the allegal may represent a problem not so much of integration of legal norms but of interpretation of law, in which the attribution of meaning to normative statements may imply a lack of legal response. An analysis is made, below, of the use of terms «allegal» and «allegality» in the legal, jurisprudential and doctrinal discourse. From the legislative point of view, there are few cases in which the normative statements contain the terms allegal or allegality. Very exceptionally, in norms with a lower rank, and in general in the Statement of Reasons, these expressions are used. These terms are used in this speech as a synonymous with illegal. In the jurisprudential discourse we find that our courts make more frequent use of the terms allegal or allegality, even long before its incorporation into the Dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy of Language. In this language, a plurality of meanings is given to the these statements, perhaps predominating their identification with the assumptions of illegality, the allegal is illegal. However, in other cases these expressions are used to refer to a legal situation with legal significance and the judge integrates the law to provide a legal response. The gaps in the law are resolved through the self-integration mechanisms provided by the legal system itself. But there are also cases in which legality is understood to be those cases that have no legal significance and therefore are unrelated to the judicial decision. The judicial discourse refers to these cases as cases that do not have to be regulated by the legal norm. As for the doctrinal language, it is necessary to point out that terms allegality o allegal also have a plurivocal character, probably having a greater weight than that in which the regulation of a matter is requested, de lege ferenda, citing reasons that would improve insufficient regulation. In most cases, the regulation and prohibition of certain behaviors is postulated. In this sense, the authors allude to the allegal as a pathology of the legal system that must be remedied by the legislator. Notwithstanding this, there are also cases in which conducts contrary to law and, therefore, punishable are indentified with illegality. This plurality of meanings and their redundant nature in some cases mean that we must reconsider the incorporation of these terms into legal language. From our point o view, they do not provide security and create confusion in different legal discourses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]