The convoluted situation in which the Lanzarote en Pie - Sí Podemos group has been left in the Arrecife City Council has led the municipal secretary to request a consultation with the Central Electoral Board, to decide in what situation each of the three councilors should continue.
Specifically, the City Council will ask this body to clarify whether the electoral coalition with which they ran in the elections, formed by Podemos and Equo, is still registered in that registry or whether there has been "an alteration or dissolution", since this point is key to determining how the regulations should be applied and what rights each councilor continues to have.
Paradoxically, none of the two parties that sealed the alliance feel represented in that Arrecife group, and the one who has ended up outside is the only councilor who has maintained discipline. In the case of Podemos, the one who was its candidate and only elected councilor, Leticia Padilla, left the formation a year and a half ago, but kept the seat and continues to be released as spokesperson.
For its part, Equo announced a month ago its break with that group, precisely due to the lack of representation of Podemos, which was with whom it signed the agreement, and also because it considers that it was not having "its own voice", despite having two councilors.
Therefore, it ordered both of them to leave the group, although only Esther Gómez has complied with its mandate. To do this, she presented a letter to the City Council, which is what has led to the secretary's report and a subsequent decree from the mayor, requesting that "express pronouncement" from the Electoral Board.
The secretary affirms that there is no "documentary justification" for the rupture
The issues that the City Council must resolve are two. On the one hand, whether Lanzarote en Pie - Sí Podemos can continue to have its own group, given that it no longer has the required minimum of three councilors. On the other hand, whether Esther Gómez should move to the mixed group or the group of non-attached members.
The first is intended for councilors whose formation does not have enough councilors to form their own group; and the second is the one that houses the councilors who are not attached to any party, for having been expelled or for having abandoned their formation.
In the case of Esther Gómez, precisely what she has done is to comply with the mandate of her party. However, the secretary points out in her report that there is "no documentary justification" to prove that Equo "has decided to abandon the coalition". That is, the letter presented by the councilor, in which she asked to leave the group, is not enough to dissolve the coalition. And this is what further complicates the situation.
In its day, the alliance was sealed between Podemos and Equo, and these parties have not had discrepancies. The problem has arisen with the councilor who left the purple formation, and who shares a group with the two Equo councilors. Podemos already asked that Leticia Padilla be expelled from the group and move to the group of non-attached members, but then the secretary reported against it, arguing that although her departure from Podemos fits into the anti-defection pact, this document "lacks legal effectiveness" and has not been reflected in the Canary Islands law.
Now, faced with the new scenario opened by Equo, she has proposed raising the consultation to the Electoral Board (and not to the party, as also contemplated by the law), so that it clarifies whether the coalition has been dissolved. And pending that response, the secretary considers that there are currently no reasons to apply the specific regulation contemplated by the law for electoral coalitions.
Regarding Esther Gómez, the difference goes from being in the mixed group to being in the group of non-attached members. The latter implies limitations, such as not being able to be released and collect a salary, based on the agreements of the Anti-Defection Pact. However, the secretary also emphasizes that in her case it would have no consequences, since she does not charge the City Council, but rather the other two councilors of the group are the ones who are released part-time.
A decision with economic consequences
Regarding the Lanzarote en Pie - Sí Podemos group, the law establishes that if a group already constituted has less than three councilors during the term of office, it will lose this condition. However, the secretary has chosen to apply another legal article, which recognizes that it is "contradictory" with the above, but which she considers to be a more adequate "interpretation".
In that article, it is established that "when the majority of the members of a municipal political group abandon the political formation that presented the candidacy for which they ran in the elections or are expelled from it, the councilors who remain in the aforementioned political formation will be the legitimate members of said political group for all purposes, and it must subsist regardless of the number of members that comprise it".
"An interpretation to sensu contrario would lead to a completely absurd conclusion, since it would imply that the defection of some of the members of the group directly affects the core of the representative function of the rest of the members of the group, even reducing their rights of an economic nature, and also affecting the composition of the informative commissions", she adds in her report.
However, in this case Esther Gómez has not abandoned her party, but rather complied with her mandate. In fact, the one who has not complied with Equo's order until now has been her other councilor, Leandro Delgado, who remains in the group with Leticia Padilla.
For her part, Padilla defends that she continues in the group under the umbrella of Lanzarote en Pie, which was only the name given to the coalition between Podemos and Equo, and that a few months ago registered as a political party.
In her decree, dated August 31, the mayor also orders that the report be transferred to the three councilors, giving Esther Gómez a hearing period to present allegations if she deems it appropriate before taking it to the Plenary.
