Spain's anti-squat law: 15-day promise falls short

New anti-squat law: protects homes, ignores vacant properties

The Spanish Congress approved a reform promising faster evictions for squatting, but the final text only covers primary residences. The PNV amendment passed with support from PP, Junts, UPN, Coalición Canaria, ERC and Bildu. Bildu acknowledged an "unjustifiable error" and apologized to voters. Vox abstained. PSOE, Sumar, Podemos and BNG voted against. The result is a rule that, according to participants, fails to address the core problem.

The key lies in one word: dwelling. The text distinguishes between trespassing into a dwelling and unlawful occupation of real estate. The former protects where someone resides, even sporadically. The latter covers empty or rental apartments. Only the former qualifies for expedited proceedings. In short: if your second home is occupied, the law helps; if your rented flat is taken, you remain in legal limbo.

What actually changes with the new anti-squat law

The main change is the timeline. Evictions for dwelling occupation will use expedited procedures, with a judicial ruling within 15 days. On paper, it sounds revolutionary. In practice, sector analyses call it cosmetic. Expedited procedure is standard for crimes carrying sentences under nine years, not a fast track. Given current court workloads, those 15 days could stretch into months or years.

Some argue the law is flawed because it excludes vacant flats, which account for most occupations. Others say the issue isn't the law but its application: police don't act without a court order, and courts process what should be burglary as simple trespass. The outcome is the same: owners pay taxes, mortgages and community fees while the property deteriorates.

The expedited procedure trap: 15 days that never arrive

Article 245.2 of the Penal Code punishes unlawful occupation with fines equivalent to three to six months' imprisonment. Squatting for years costs less than renting. The reform doesn't increase penalties. It only speeds up processing for dwellings. Optimistic estimates suggest two-week evictions; realistic ones predict one to four years, depending on the court.

Debate focused on the concept of dwelling. A flat rented to a tenant who stops paying isn't a dwelling for incivil purposes: there's a contract, a title, and it's a civil dispute. Occupying a closed, untitled flat also isn't a dwelling. Only the owner's residence, even if used two weeks a year, triggers expedited proceedings. Everything else remains unchanged.

The judicial maze: why police won't evict without orders

Police practice is another bottleneck. Without a court order, officers don't intervene in peaceful occupations. Doing so exposes them to lawsuits. To avoid jury trials, courts process what the law defines as burglary as mere trespass. Thus, squatters gain time, owners lose money, and neighborhoods suffer.

The reform doesn't untie this knot. It only adds a theoretical deadline for specific cases. Those with occupied second homes can use expedited procedures. Those with empty or rented flats must keep waiting. The lingering question is whether lawmakers truly wanted to solve anything or just appear to.

Who voted how and why Vox abstained

The PNV amendment received backing from PP, Junts, UPN, Coalición Canaria, ERC and Bildu. Bildu admitted the mistake, issuing a statement apologizing to voters and promising to seek corrections for what they called an "unjustifiable error." Vox abstained. PSOE, Sumar, Podemos and BNG opposed. The reform passed.

Vox's abstention caused confusion. Some analysts see it as rejecting insufficient measures; others view it as political calculation. The fact is, the law satisfies no one: not owners lacking quick tools; not tenants seeing squatting incivil without distinction; nor judges still lacking resources.

---

The final text leaves the impression that the problem persists. Dwellings are protected. The rest aren't. Meanwhile, courts accumulate cases nobody knows when they'll resolve. For now, the anti-squat law remains just a headline.