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 against illegal occupation of homes

Amendments step 3 of 7 · Unfinished

It is a members’ bill. Introduced by parliamentary groups, the Senate, regional governments or citizens. It was introduced on 6 February 2026. Introduced by: Grupo Parlamentario Popular en el Congreso.

Official title: Private member's bill for an Organic Law against the illegal occupation of real estate and for neighborhood coexistence and the protection of the safety of persons and property in owners' associations.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, file 122/000254· updated 11 Nov

Automatic summary, not yet reviewed

  1. The bill would define illegal occupation as holding someone else's property without title or payment, and would state that illegal occupants cannot claim the protection of home or dwelling against public authorities.
  2. It would raise Criminal Code penalties for those who occupy a property with violence or intimidation (one to three years in prison) or without authorization (six to eighteen months). It would also punish those who promote or mark properties for occupation, and clarify that cutting utilities to an occupied property is not a crime of coercion.
  3. A judge could order Judicial Police to require occupants to leave within 24 hours or prove a legitimate title. If they do not, the judge would order immediate eviction, with notice to social services if minors or vulnerable people are involved.
  4. It would extend to all legal entities the ability to request immediate recovery of possession of a home through a fast-track verbal trial, which is currently limited to certain entities.
  5. Homeowners' communities would get tools against occupants who carry out banned activities, with immediate eviction and compensation, and the community president could alert owners to preventive measures such as boarding up doors or installing anti-occupation systems. Illegal occupation would also not allow municipal registration.
  6. The Government would have to refund owners the property tax (IBI) and wealth tax paid during the occupation once there is a final court ruling, and would update the municipal registration rules within twelve months. The law would take effect twenty days after publication.

Who it affects

  • Owners of homes or properties that are illegally occupied: Could recover their homes faster, with tougher penalties for occupants, and get back property and wealth taxes paid during the occupation.
  • Homeowners' communities and their presidents: Could go directly to public authorities against banned activities by an illegal occupant and request immediate eviction and compensation.
  • People who occupy properties without title: Would face higher prison terms, and those who promote or mark properties for occupation would be punished as accomplices or instigators.
  • Judges, Judicial Police and city councils: Would have to carry out evictions within 24 hours when ordered by a judge and remove illegal occupants from the municipal register.

Words worth knowing

Usurpación (usurpation)
The crime of occupying someone else's property or a real estate right without being entitled to it.
Allanamiento de morada (breaking into a dwelling)
The crime of entering another person's home against their will or staying there.
Juicio verbal (verbal trial)
A fast, simple court procedure for certain claims, such as recovering possession of a home.
Lanzamiento (eviction)
The court-ordered physical removal of a person from a property.
Medidas cautelares (interim measures)
Early court decisions meant to stop the harm while the case is being resolved.

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 3 of 7 steps. It reached Amendments, and today it is unfinished.

  1. Introduced6 February 2026Someone registers the text in the Congreso.
  2. Admitted10 February 2026The Bureau of the Congreso accepts it and, for a members’ bill, the plenary decides whether to consider it.
  3. Amendments29 May 2026Groups 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 9 official steps on a timeline
Feb 2026Mar 2026Apr 2026May 2026Jun 2026Jul 2026Aug 2026Sept 202611. 6 February 2026: Presentación22. 10 February 2026: Boletín Oficial de las Cortes Generales Publicación desde 10/02/2026 hasta 13/02/202633. 10 February 2026: Calificación44. 13 February 2026: Gobierno Contestación desde 13/02/2026 hasta 21/03/202655. 21 March 2026: Pleno Toma en consideración desde 21/03/2026 hasta 19/05/202666. 19 May 2026: Mesa del Congreso Acuerdo subsiguiente a la toma en consideración desde 19/05/2026 hasta 26/05/202677. 26 May 2026: Comisión de Interior Publicación desde 26/05/2026 hasta 29/05/202688. 29 May 2026: Comisión de Interior Enmiendas desde 29/05/2026 hasta 06/10/202699. 6 October 2026: Concluido - (Caducado) desde 06/10/2026 hasta 04/11/2026

19 May 2026

How did the plenary vote?

More votes in favour 171 yes · 164 no · 11 abst.

Voted on: Private member's bill by the Popular Group in the Congress, Organic bill against illegal occupation of properties and for neighborhood coexistence and the protection of the safety of persons and things in property communities.

Source: Congreso de los Diputados, vote 1 of sitting 179· 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 Popular en el Congreso and VOX. Against, most of Euskal Herria Bildu, Plurinacional SUMAR, Republicano, Socialista and Mixto. 2 deputies voted differently from their group.

By province: in 31 most voted in favour; in 10, against.

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

  • In favour: 31
  • Against: 10
  • Tie: 11
Result by parliamentary group
GroupSeatsHow it voted
Euskal Herria Bildu6
6 against
Plurinacional SUMAR26
26 against
Republicano7
7 against
Socialista121
119 against · 2 did not vote
Vasco (EAJ-PNV)5
5 abst.
Junts per Catalunya7
6 abst. · 1 did not vote
Mixto8
2 in favour · 6 against
Popular en el Congreso137
136 in favour · 1 did not vote
VOX33
33 in favour

What happens next

What happens now?

The legislature ended before it finished. To go on, someone would have to introduce it again in the new Cortes.

It has not been presented again yet.

Presented before in:

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.