The Constitutional Court has accepted to process an appeal of unconstitutionality, submitted by more than 50 representatives of United v Cain and representatives of the ERC, Mas Pas, Compromis and Nueva Canarias, against the new Andalusian land law, approved last November 25 was given. The regional parliament, with votes in favor of the PP, CS and Vox, boycotted the PSOE and opposed the United We Can Andalusia, which has fueled the appeal. The decision of the Plenary Session of the High Court, which does not suspend the validity of the norm, poses a new hurdle in the way of its effectiveness, after it was learned this Monday that the central government and the board have made a working group to resolve discrepancies 42 of the Executive on the Articles, one additional provision and one final.
Law of 1 December 7/2021, to promote the stability of the territory of AndalusiaThe A, known as the Lista, is one of the major projects of the Andalusian government of the PP&CS, and came to meet the demands of mayors, real estate developers and unregulated landlords who demanded administrative simplification. that would speed up the processes, but it has been counted as regressive by eliminating all limits to urban development, promoting speculation and limiting access to housing, with protests from environmentalists and United We Can Andalusia from the beginning. assuming. In this line, moreover, they were two amendments to the totality that the Left Alliance introduced during its processing.
Appeals to unconstitutionality are based on arguments that appeal to form and essence. On the one hand, the immediate process chosen to process the law is questioned, which, by reducing the time for making amendments and contributing to the bill, “degrades the quality of the text resulting from parliamentary debates that have not been enriched.” plural contribution”, according to the text of the brief submitted to the Constitutional Court. The signatories hold that its processing by the immediate route is not recognized because “powerful reasons and reasons which justify it” are not involved.
On merit, the appeal argues that LISTA “violates the principle of local autonomy, as it interferes with the interests of municipalities that are their own, directly affecting the environment and the pursuit of sustainable development.” ” durable”. The appeal of unconstitutionality presented by United We Can conclude by asking the Constitutional Court to “issue a sentence declaring the unconstitutionality and consequential voidness” of the land law, and in the event that the court does not accept that petition. , at least “to declare” the unconstitutionality and voidness of a series of articles and an additional provision and another repeal”.
General Secretary of Podemos Andalucía and UP deputy for Córdoba in Congress, Marina Velarde, expressed her wish this morning that the Constitutional Court “order and protect Andalusians from the speculative business of the Board”. The High Court will now transfer the claim to Parliament and the Andalusian Executive so that they can level the charges.
The new Andalusian land law integrates the urban planning law and the area planning law, revising 44 rules and repealing three laws and three decrees. With this, according to the Andalusian government, it aims to achieve agility and reduce the approval process of a plan, which the average board estimates at around 10 years, to a maximum of two years. LISTA was based on a reform of the LOUA, which the previous socialist government began processing as a preliminary bill in 2017, understanding that the applicable law was out of date, but it could not approve it after it lost the government of the board. December 2018, which explained the absence of PSOE in its vote.
The one who impresses the most is the closest. In order not to miss anything, subscribe.
In LISTA’s new urban planning model, the land classification has been reduced to two, urban and rural, eliminating the developable category – which was considered in the initial draft of the PSOE, and eliminated in the case of urban. Gives the categories of consolidated and unorganized. The preamble states that the new catalog is “in conformity with the original state law.” The regulation of rural land was the main point of friction between the government and the socialists. Construction on this type of surface is prohibited only if it is “specially protected”. LISTA allows for the construction of detached houses on rural land, without any link to the economic or agricultural interest of the land, a link that PSOE had sought. The Minister of Public Works, Marifran Carazzo, defended during his parliamentary process that such remote buildings encourage the determination of population in the region of rural Andalusia.
“From the point of view of principles, which includes environmental protection or the inclusion of renewable energy, which were not included in the previous one, this is a common criterion, but it has points like exceptional use of rural land, which if not controlled, they can change. can remain so And suppose there is a setback in environmental matters”, explains Roberto Gallen, professor of administrative law at the University of Seville. “LISTA establishes a new regime for pastoral lands that differs from the traditional one established in Andalusia,” explains Galán. “If exploitation is being allowed for tourism megaprojects or non-agricultural uses, with exceptional use of rural land, it may eventually involve all protections on the environment which may assume a setback”, he says. . The professor recalls that 75% of Andalusian soils are protected natural space, something that environmentalists take into account and have already warned that they will resort to any action in that area.
The central government also places discrepancies on the constitutionality of parts of the new Andalusian land law. This Monday, both in the Official State Gazette and in Andalusia, the formation of a working group between the central and regional administrations was announced to resolve differences in criteria on 42 articles, one additional provision and one final provision. Following a meeting of the Subcommittee for Regulatory Monitoring, Prevention and Dispute Resolution of the Bilateral Cooperation Commission, the two officials agreed to “communicate this agreement to the Constitutional Court”.