• Courts Judicial offensive to prevent the demolition of Valdecañas ordered by the Supreme Court
  • Amparo appeals A divided Constitutional Court stops the total demolition of the Island of Valdecañas by admitting the appeals for amparo

The Prosecutor's Office of the Constitutional Court opposes in categorical terms the arguments given by the Junta de Extremadura chaired by Guillermo Fernández Vara to try to avoid the demolition of the tourist complex of the Island of Vadecañas (Cáceres). In the allegations sent to the court of guarantees, which last November admitted to processing the appeals for amparo presented by the Junta Extremadura, the City Councils of El Gordo and Berrocalejo and the owners of the villas of the Isla de Valdecañas complex, the chief prosecutor of the TC, Pedro Crespo, requests that the application for amparo promoted by the regional government be dismissed as it does not appreciate any violation of fundamental rights.

The Supreme Court ordered in February 2022 the demolition of a luxury resort that began construction in 2007 on land that was part of a Special Protection Zone. The Contentious-Administrative Chamber upheld the appeal filed by the entity Ecologists in Action against the order issued by the High Court of Justice of Extremadura in execution of the judgments that declared null and void Decree 55/2007 of the Junta Extremadura by which the Project of Regional Interest promoted by Marina Isla de Valdecañas S.A was definitively approved. . The High Court considered that there was no material impossibility of the demolition of the tourist complex.

"The appellant Administration does not agree with that consistent legal reasoning, based on respect for current legislation, nor with its consequences, because it was more convenient to their interests what was resolved by the married and annulled order, but that does not mean that there is any injury to their fundamental right to effective judicial protection, "says the Prosecutor's Office in its harsh report, to which EL MUNDO has had access.

Similarly, the prosecutor adds that it is "striking" that "a public administration of a State of law qualifies as apriorism bordering on bias the affirmation that the laws must be complied with and this cannot be opposed by the convenience of attending to other interests", in reference to the sentence of the TS that the Executive of the socialist Fernández Vara now asks to annul in the body of guarantees.

In its judgment, the Administrative Chamber answered the question of 'whether it is possible to find that it is physically impossible to enforce a judgment - with respect to everything that has already been built - when, otherwise, socio-economic or other interests would be seriously affected, provided that environmental integrity is duly guaranteed'. The answer of the Supreme Court, which supports the Constitutional Prosecutor's Office, is no. "And it is that not because even guaranteed environmental integrity, the preposition of those other interests would lead to the perpetuation of a result prohibited by European, state and regional law," adds Crespo.

The prosecutor of Sala recalls that "it is not possible to transform into developable land - and urbanized - a land included in a specially protected area, without it being possible to contrast with that objective the particular assessment of the lack of impact on the environment in the specific case, or the socio-economic, demographic or other interests that are compromised". Finally, the Public Prosecutor's Office also does not appreciate that the right to an impartial judge has been violated by the participation of judges Inés Huerta and Wenceslao Olea in the cassation judgment.

According to The Trust Project criteria

Learn more

  • Constitutional court
  • Supreme Court
  • Extremadura
  • Guillermo Fernández Vara
  • Justice