Skip to content

Where are you from?

Choose your province and we will tell you how the deputies and senators you elected vote, one by one.

 

We remember it in this browser. If you create an account, we keep it there.

Type a law, a topic, a person or a province.

What it is

Proposal to toughen penalties for occupying properties

Admitted step 2 of 7 · Rejected

It is a members’ bill. Introduced by parliamentary groups, the Senate, regional governments or citizens. It was introduced on 16 July 2020. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario VOX.

Official title: Organic Private member's bill regarding the amendment of Organic Act 10/1995, of 23 November, of the Penal Code, to amend Article 245, in order to aggravate the penalties for the crimes of usurpation of real estate, provide better tools to the Security Forces and Corps, and expand the protection of the legitimate holders of real rights.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000069· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would raise the prison sentence for occupying a property or seizing a real right with violence or intimidation: it would go from one or two years to four or six years.
  2. For anyone who occupies someone else's building, apartment or property without authorization, or stays there against the owner's will, when it is not anyone's home, the penalty would change from a fine to one to three years in prison. If it is someone's home, the sentence would be two to four years.
  3. If the occupation involves force on things, such as breaking locks, the penalties would be increased by one degree.
  4. Law enforcement could evict people inside a property preventively if there is a complaint and signs of illegal occupation, and the occupants cannot justify their presence.

Who it affects

  • Owners of homes and other properties: They would get stronger criminal protection, and law enforcement could evict occupants from their properties.
  • People who occupy someone else's property: They would face much harsher prison sentences than today.
  • Neighbors' communities: The explanatory statement says occupation disrupts neighborly coexistence, and the reform aims to stop it.
  • Law enforcement agencies: They would get a new legal tool to evict occupants preventively.

Words worth knowing

Usurpación
Taking over a property or a right over it that belongs to someone else.
Derecho real
A direct right over a thing, such as owning it or being entitled to use it.
Morada
A home where someone actually lives.
Fuerza en las cosas
Forcing locks, breaking padlocks or overcoming other protections to get into a property.
Proposición de ley
A bill introduced by members of Congress; in this case it has not been passed yet.

It summarizes the text as it was introduced. It is written by artificial intelligence and may contain mistakes: the official text is what counts. Read the official text · How we make summaries

Where it stands

How far did it get?

It took 2 of 7 steps. It reached Admitted, and today it is rejected.

  1. Introduced16 July 2020Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted2 September 2020The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
  3. Amendmentsnot reachedGroups propose changes.
  4. Committeenot reachedA committee goes through the text in detail.
  5. Plenarynot reachedAll 350 deputies vote.
  6. Senatenot reachedThe Senate can pass it, amend it or veto it.
  7. BOEnot reachedIt is published in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and comes into force.
See the 6 official steps on a timeline
Dec 2020Dec 202111. 16 July 2020: Presentación22. 2 September 2020: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 02/09/2020 hasta 07/09/202033. 2 September 2020: Calificación44. 7 September 2020: Gobierno Contestación desde 07/09/2020 hasta 14/10/202055. 14 October 2020: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 14/10/2020 hasta 28/04/202266. 28 April 2022: Concluido - (Rechazado) desde 28/04/2022 hasta 05/05/2022

28 April 2022

How did the plenary vote?

More votes against 153 yes · 194 no · 2 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill by the VOX Parliamentary Group, Organic bill regarding the amendment of Organic Law 10/1995, of November 23, on the Penal Code, to modify Article 245, in order to aggravate the penalties for crimes of usurpation of real estate, offer better tools to the Security Forces and Corps, and expand the protection of legitimate holders of real rights.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 19 of sitting 174· updated 10 Nov

Each dot is a seat. Tap one, or use the arrow keys, to see who it is.

Your province

How did the deputies from your province vote?

And your senators: the Senate does not link its votes to this law in its open data, so we cannot put them side by side here.

Or see how most of each province voted
More details: how each group and each province voted

The groups

Who voted in favour and who against?

In favour, most of Ciudadanos, Popular en el Congreso and VOX. Against, most of Euskal Herria Bildu, Republicano, Socialista, Vasco (EAJ-PNV), Mixto, Gcup-ec-gc and GPlu. 6 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 19 most voted in favour; in 20, against.

Coloured by how most of each province’s deputies voted.

  • In favour: 19
  • Against: 20
  • Tie: 13
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Euskal Herria Bildu5
5 against
Republicano13
13 against
Socialista120
120 against
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)6
6 against
Mixto11
4 in favour · 5 against · 2 abst.
Ciudadanos9
9 in favour
Gcup-ec-gc33
33 against
GPlu12
12 against
Popular en el Congreso88
88 in favour
VOX52
52 in favour

What happens next

What happens now?

It goes no further. A similar one could be introduced later.

Sources

Where does all this come from?

  • The data comes from the open files of the Congreso, the Senate and the BOE, unaltered.
  • Each deputy’s province is the one of their seat on the day of the vote.
  • We only say “passed” or “rejected” when the majority needed is certain; otherwise we say which side had more votes.