Spain's citizen patrols: the security business dividing public opinion

Patrullas de España: the citizen security business that challenges the State

Imagine Dani Palomo, known for his involvement in evicting squatters, now announcing a citizen patrol project for a 3,000 euro upfront fee. The flagship of this new initiative, called "Patrullas de España" (Patrols of Spain), aims to fill the security gap many residents feel in their neighbourhoods. But scepticism is spreading: is it a lobby in high-visibility vests or a real response to crime?

The project is being launched in a context of growing perceived insecurity and distrust of the police. Its promoters argue that the State does not protect citizens and that self-organisation is necessary. However, critics point to a business model that charges upfront —figures of 3,000 euros are mentioned— and that, according to some, takes advantage of property owners' desperation over squatting.

Business or necessity?

The heart of the debate is whether these patrols are a community security initiative or a new business niche. Defenders point out that groups of parents already organise to pick up children from after-school activities for antiestéticar of crime. The demand is there. But critics say Palomo's model is a racket that, as peine with Desokupa, promises what it cannot legally deliver. Dani Palomo is a divisive figure: for some he is an entrepreneur filling a gap, for others a conman charging 3,000 euros upfront knowing he cannot evict vulnerable squatters.

The spectre of paramilitary groups

The legality of the project is the cornerstone. Several analyses agree that self-defence groups like these border on the illegal, and that the State could deem them paramilitary. In fact, it is noted that Article 22 of the Constitution bans private militias. Yet the project is being loudly promoted on social media, leading some to suspect it is a setup orchestrated by the CNI (Spain's intelligence agency) to defuse real movements. The "controlled dissent" theory is gaining ground: the idea would be to sign up the disaffected and channel their frustration into a trial balloon that will never become effective.

The institutional response: infiltration or indifference

One of the most discussed points is the State's ability to neutralise such initiatives. The argument goes that if the patrols are visible, they will be infiltrated by the Mossos, the UDEF or the units against intolerance. Leaked recordings will be used to shut the operation down for inciting hatred. If they keep a low profile, they will not last long. Many conclude that any movement opposing the official line will be dismantled, and that the only viable option is "silent secession": building parallel communities without direct confrontation, even though that too has its legal pitfalls.

The private security dilemma

In short, "Patrullas de España" reflects a growing tension between the demand for security and the institutional supply. While some see a legitimate business in an underserved sector, others warn of the risk of paramilitary drift and fraud. What is clear is that the debate over who should protect the streets is far from settled. And in the meantime, one detail is unsettling: the project is being advertised at rates of 3,000 euros, but no one knows how many have paid. The question is whether the business will be profitable or whether, like other attempts, it will fizzle out.