The Criminal Court Number 3 of Arrecife has given the promoters of La Bufona, Federico Echevarría and Antonio Caro, six months to execute the sentence that condemned them for a crime against land planning and ordered the partial demolition of 14 homes. The order, dated March 1, states that both must "pay for the work to restore the physical reality to its state prior to its execution."
However, Echevarría and Caro insist that those who should pay for that demolition are the buyers of the homes, who after receiving the houses carried out more unlicensed works, in the rear and walled part of the homes, including the execution of swimming pools, pergolas and expansion of rooms, occupying rustic land. Among the owners of these houses are the island president of the PP, Ástrid Pérez, and the then coordinating prosecutor of Lanzarote, Miguel Palláres. "No, I don't think so," Pallarés replied when he testified as a witness in that trial, and was asked if he requested a license for the works on his pool.
"The owners of the homes have done whatever they wanted within that area," Echevarría said during the hearing. Now, the two convicted promoters have requested a "clarification" of the order to execute the demolition. "It does not clarify or specify which are the works to be demolished, since, as we have already indicated actively and passively, except for the perimeter enclosure of the plot, the interior works that are not part of the building, were carried out by the respective owners."
Thus, they point out that it is not "possible to demand that the condemned demolish something in which they have not had any participation." In addition, they add that those owners "do not allow entry into their plots to execute the sentence, much less demolish the works carried out by them".
The houses themselves also occupy protected land
However, the truth is that the order is clear in pointing out what should be demolished: "the works referred to in the section on proven facts of the sentence." And in that section, not only are the subsequent works that were carried out without a license in the back of the houses reflected, but also the part of the houses that was built on rustic land. "They invaded specially protected land, also not respecting the limits of surface area and building volumes allowed by the Arrecife City Council in the license", the ruling stated, making it clear that even the work that was covered by the license, "invaded" protected land.
Next, it detailed house by house how many meters are located on rustic land, with figures ranging between 212 and 254 square meters per house. In total, with 10 homes corresponding to two plots, 3,114 square meters of protected rustic land were occupied, while in another two the "invasion" was 450 square meters, according to the sentence.
Another demolition order in administrative proceedings
From the private prosecution representing the complainant in the case, Gonzalo Murillo, they emphasize that the demolition order issued in this criminal proceeding cannot be confused with the one that already exists from the Agency for the Protection of the Urban and Natural Environment, and which reached the contentious-administrative route due to the appeals filed by the buyers of the houses.
In the case of the Apmun, the demolition order expressly affects the subsequent works that were carried out without a license, and for which the promoters hold the owners of the houses responsible. In fact, it is the buyers themselves who appealed those orders from the Apmun in the courts. Orders that have not yet been executed, despite the fact that most of the cases already have a final judgment, rejecting the appeals of the owners of the homes.
Thus, two demolition orders are pending on the homes - affecting a larger area in the case of the one issued in criminal proceedings - and the question is which one will be executed first, since that will be decisive in determining who bears the costs of that demolition.
