The Provincial Court has rejected the appeal of businessman Miguel Morales and has ratified the sentence imposed on him more than three years ago, for a crime against land management and another of serious disobedience to authority. The new ruling, dated February 26, confirms the first instance ruling, which sentenced Morales to a penalty of 1 year and 8 months in prison and to pay a fine of 67,500 euros.
The ruling also obliges the developer to demolish the three Hormiconsa warehouses, as well as a concrete plant and a crusher, which were built without even applying for a license and on protected land where construction was not allowed, even violating a sealing order from the Arrecife City Council. In addition, it imposes a one-year special disqualification from practicing the profession or trade related to construction.
The trial against Miguel Morales was held at the end of 2011 and the sentence was handed down in October of that year. However, the response to the appeal that the businessman then filed has now arrived, more than three years later, rejecting all the arguments of the defense. In its ruling, the First Section of the Provincial Court declares the case "definitively judged" and orders the "execution and fulfillment" of the sentence.
"Anyone" knows that you have to "obtain permits"
The events date back more than ten years when, according to the ruling, Miguel Morales built three warehouses "with their attached concrete manufacturing plants and crusher for construction materials", "without having obtained prior territorial qualification and municipal building permit". In addition, the work was carried out "on specially protected land", despite the fact that "the Lanzarote Island Territorial Planning Plan prohibits these buildings".
In his defense, Miguel Morales claimed that he was not "aware of the illegality of the works" and argued that he had a license by administrative silence, having requested it without obtaining a response from the administration. However, the Court responds that "it is not even proven that he requested a building permit", to which must be added that it also does not validate a hypothetical license by silence.
Regarding his alleged ignorance of the illegality of the works, the Provincial Court also agrees with the judge of first instance. "We do not find it a minimally convincing argument for discharge, because anyone is necessarily aware of the need to obtain the corresponding administrative permits that, in the case at hand, as stated, were not even requested," the ruling states.
In the same vein, it emphasizes that Miguel Morales "is not immersed in a situation of social marginalization or cultural exclusion that prevents him from understanding the scope and anti-legal significance of the norm", since "it cannot be ignored that he has a level of socialization that allows him to know the main lines of the normative order", given that he even dedicates himself to the construction and real estate sector. In addition to being the administrator of Hormiconsa, Morales appears as the administrator of Promotora Inmobiliaria Parque Islas Canarias, Arrecife Hoteles and Lavotel, among others, and is also the CEO of the Lancelot media group.
Morales' "advisors" and the lawyer who was "getting him into trouble"
During the trial held in 2011, Miguel Morales claimed that "his advisors" told him that he could carry out the works. However, despite the questions from prosecutor Ignacio Stampa, Morales avoided naming those "advisors". "Are they the same ones who defended him at the beginning of this process?" the prosecutor asked, referring to Juana Fernández de las Heras, who is the daughter and office partner of the former secretary of the Arrecife City Council, Felipe Fernández Camero. In this regard, Miguel Morales merely explained that at the time he decided to change lawyers in this case because she was "getting him into trouble".
"The defendant says that he has been gotten into trouble, he considered himself politically persecuted and I don't know if he aspired to an impunity that no longer exists. This is a mockery of the rule of law," the prosecutor said during the trial, stating that the businessman was "unmasked" during the hearing. "If a farmer is accused of a crime for building a 20 square meter tool shed in the Volcán de la Corona, the same must be done with a 2,000 square meter construction", Stampa added, emphasizing that the work was carried out on land with protection of ecological natural value, as it is in a jable passage area, which is one of the "most protected on the island".
Unfulfilled sealing order
On October 3, 2005, when the works were already advanced, the Arrecife City Council ordered their sealing, although Morales ignored this order. "Everything shows, without the slightest doubt, that he knew his obligation to immediately suspend the works and that, however, he continued with them", "disobeying the decree of the Mayor", the ruling states, which considers it proven that Morales "opted for a stubborn attitude and continued them until their completion, carrying out illegal works while ignoring the requirements of the authority to stop them".
For this reason, in addition to the conviction for a crime against land management, he was also sentenced for disobedience, considering it proven that he maintained a "behavior of repeated and clear opposition, serious attitude of rebellion and persistence in refusing to comply with the order or mandate" of the City Council.
Despite that sealing order, the City Council also did not adopt more measures to stop the works or to close the facilities afterwards, which to this day continue to operate, even after the first instance ruling of 2011.
The issue reached the courts at the hands of the then AC councilor in Arrecife, Andrés Barreto, and initially the then mayor of Arrecife, María Isabel Déniz, and the former Urban Planning councilor Nuria Cabrera were charged in this case. The councilor denounced that they had not requested the demolition nor had they adopted more measures to prevent the works from continuing. However, the proceedings against them were finally dismissed, understanding that they had at least taken some action to stop the works, with that sealing order.