New law to fight Against *Okupación*: Enhanced Protections and Expedited Recovery for Spanish Property Owners

Summary:

The illegal occupation of property, commonly known in Spain as okupación generated considerable concern among property owners. The law offers tangible benefits aimed at accelerating property recovery and strengthening their legal position.

The core advantages introduced by the reform include:

1. Access to the Juicio Rápido: Bringing these occupation offenses under the fast-track criminal trial procedure is intended to drastically reduce judicial processing times compared to previous ordinary criminal or civil routes.
2. Expedited Judicial Timeline: The legislative target aims for resolution of the judicial phase within a maximum of 15 days, a substantial acceleration compared to the months or years previously required.
3. Streamlined Eviction Post-Judgment: The removal of mandatory vulnerability assessments after a conviction in these specific criminal cases eliminates a major procedural delay, allowing for a potentially much faster physical recovery (lanzamiento) of the property once a court order is issued.
4. Increased Penalties as a Deterrent: The reform aims to create a stronger deterrent against illegal occupation by potentially increasing the severity of penalties. While specific sanctions depend on the circumstances of each case, they can range from fines to prison sentences, particularly if violence or intimidation was used during the occupation. Some sources mention potential prison terms of up to three years in aggravated situations. The intended effect is to make the legal consequences significant enough to discourage future occupations. While potentially deterring future acts, for owners already facing occupation, the primary focus often remains on the speed of recovery rather than the specific punishment meted out to the occupant, though the latter contributes to the overall strengthening of the legal framework protecting property rights.

Based on these new stipulations, a contract sign with a security company recommended by Directimo guarantees full protection of your property.

Intro

This report provides an expert analysis of the specific provisions within Ley Orgánica 1/2025 that are designed to benefit property owners confronted with illegal occupation. It will delve into the mechanisms for expedited property recovery, the enhanced legal protections afforded to owners, and the practical implications of these changes, contrasting them with the previous legal framework. The analysis will focus specifically on the criminal offenses of allanamiento de morada (trespass/home invasion) and usurpación (usurpation/squatting), which are the targets of this reform. The recurring emphasis in public discourse and legal commentary on the high incidence of okupación and the protracted nature of prior legal remedies underscores a perceived systemic inadequacy that LO 1/2025 attempts to rectify, aiming to shift the procedural burden away from owners enduring prolonged deprivation of their property.

2. Understanding the Core Change: Fast-Track Justice for Occupation Crimes

The cornerstone of the reform introduced by Ley Orgánica 1/2025 concerning okupación lies in modifying the criminal procedure for specific occupation-related offenses. It is crucial to distinguish between the two primary criminal acts targeted:

• Allanamiento de Morada: Defined under Article 202 of the Spanish Penal Code, this crime involves entering or remaining in another person's morada (habitual residence) without consent. Importantly, this concept can extend to second homes if they are actively used as such, signifying a violation of the sanctity and privacy of the home. It is considered a more serious offense due to the violation of personal space and privacy.
• Usurpación: Governed by Article 245 of the Penal Code, this refers to the occupation, without due authorization, of an uninhabited property, dwelling, or building belonging to another, or remaining there against the owner's will. This typically applies to properties that do not constitute a morada, such as vacant apartments, buildings awaiting renovation, or commercial premises. While still a criminal offense, it is generally considered less severe than allanamiento as it primarily affects property rights rather than the inviolability of the home.

The pivotal mechanism introduced by LO 1/2025 is the application of the juicio rápido (fast-track criminal trial) procedure to both allanamiento de morada (Art. 202 CP) and usurpación (Art. 245 CP). This is achieved through a modification of Article 795 of the Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal (LECrim), the law governing criminal procedure. The juicio rápido is designed for specific categories of crimes, generally those with clearer evidence and less complexity, aiming for a significantly swifter judicial resolution compared to ordinary procedures.

This marks a significant departure from the previous system, particularly for usurpación cases. Before this reform, owners facing usurpación often had to navigate lengthy and complex ordinary criminal proceedings or pursue civil eviction actions, both of which could take many months, frequently exceeding a year and sometimes extending to two years or more before recovery was achieved. Bringing these specific occupation offenses under the juicio rápido framework represents a notable legal shift. It procedurally treats these acts more akin to other flagrant, less complex crimes, thereby prioritizing the owner's right to prompt repossession, especially compared to the extensive procedural timelines previously associated with usurpación.

However, the legal distinction between allanamiento and usurpación remains highly relevant, particularly concerning the potential for immediate police intervention. While both offenses now fall under the expedited juicio rápido once they reach the courts, the police retain greater authority for immediate action in cases of allanamiento de morada. If allanamiento is detected as a flagrant crime (in progress or immediately after) and clear evidence exists, police forces may be able to evict the occupants within the first 48 hours without needing a prior judicial order. Conversely, for usurpación, even under the new law, police intervention generally requires a judicial order, although the process to obtain that order is now intended to be much faster via the juicio rápido. Owners must grasp this difference, as it impacts expectations regarding immediate police response versus the expedited judicial timeline.

3. Benefit 1: Expedited Property Recovery

The most heralded benefit for property owners under Ley Orgánica 1/2025 is the potential for significantly faster property recovery through the juicio rápido. The legislation sets an ambitious target: for the judicial phase of these cases – encompassing the hearing, trial, and potentially the issuance of a sentence – to be resolved within a maximum timeframe of 15 days. This 15-day period typically counts from when the case is formally brought before the competent court (puesta a disposición judicial) or potentially from the date of judgment. It is crucial, however, to recognize this as a legislative target. Legal experts and commentators have raised valid concerns about whether the existing judicial infrastructure, often burdened by heavy caseloads, can consistently meet this deadline in practice.

A further acceleration occurs after a conviction and eviction order are obtained through the juicio rápido. The law stipulates that the physical eviction (lanzamiento) should proceed without the significant delays previously caused by mandatory assessments of the occupants' socio-economic vulnerability. This removal of post-judgment procedural hurdles is a key advantage for owners seeking the swift physical return of their property. Some analyses suggest this eviction should occur "immediately" or "without further delay" following the sentence.

In cases specifically involving allanamiento de morada (Art. 202 CP), the potential for recovery can be even faster. As mentioned, if the crime is flagrant and detected within the initial 48 hours with clear evidence, police forces may intervene directly and carry out an eviction without any judicial order. This represents the quickest possible route to recovery for owners of primary or secondary residences under the current legal framework. This highlights the critical importance for owners of occupied moradas to act with extreme rapidity – ideally within 48 hours – reporting the incident and gathering compelling evidence to enable this immediate police response, thereby bypassing the judicial system entirely in favorable circumstances.

It is important to contextualize these timelines. While LO 1/2025 aims for a 15-day judicial resolution target, other legislative proposals discussed in the political arena have suggested even faster, potentially guaranteed, eviction timelines, such as court-ordered evictions within 48 hours (proposed by Junts ) or 24 hours (proposed by the PP ). These proposals, however, are distinct initiatives and are not part of the currently enacted Ley Orgánica 1/2025.

The following table summarizes the intended procedural changes and target timelines for different occupation scenarios, illustrating the potential benefits for owners under LO 1/2025:

Table 1: Comparison of Eviction Procedures and Target Timelines

Exportă în Foi de calcul

Source: Analysis based on.

This table clearly demonstrates the potential time savings for owners in cases of allanamiento (when not resolved immediately by police) and usurpación, while also highlighting that the process for dealing with non-paying tenants (inquiokupación) remains unchanged by this specific criminal procedure reform. Owners should understand that the 15-day target applies primarily to the judicial process leading to a sentence; the overall time from filing the initial complaint to achieving physical repossession might still be longer due to pre-trial steps and potential court backlogs, although it is intended to be substantially shorter than before the reform.

4. Benefit 2: Streamlined Process & Enhanced Owner Rights

Beyond the acceleration of timelines, Ley Orgánica 1/2025 introduces procedural changes and reinforces owner rights in several ways:

• Elimination of Post-Judgment Vulnerability Checks: Perhaps the most impactful procedural change for owners seeking finality is the removal of mandatory vulnerability assessments after a conviction is secured through the juicio rápido for allanamiento or usurpación. Previously, under frameworks like the Ley de Vivienda 12/2023 or pandemic-related decrees, demonstrating the occupants' vulnerability could lead to significant delays or suspensions of the physical eviction, even after a court had ordered it. The justification for removing this step in the context of LO 1/2025 is that allanamiento and usurpación are being treated as flagrant criminal acts. This signifies a notable policy adjustment within this specific criminal pathway, prioritizing the swift restoration of the owner's property rights over these particular post-judgment social protection mechanisms. This targeted removal effectively eliminates what was often a major bottleneck in achieving the final eviction after a successful judgment in these criminal cases.
• Simplified Proof of Ownership (Potential Benefit): Some commentary suggests the new law simplifies the requirements for owners to prove their property title. However, the core requirement remains: the owner must adequately demonstrate their legitimate ownership or right to possess the property when filing the complaint. While LO 1/2025 doesn't appear to fundamentally alter the standard of proof required in criminal proceedings, the streamlining benefit likely stems more from the inherent speed of the juicio rápido process itself and the elimination of post-judgment delays, rather than a lowering of evidentiary thresholds. Owners must still be prepared to present clear and convincing documentation (e.g., title deeds) promptly.
• Increased Penalties as a Deterrent: The reform aims to create a stronger deterrent against illegal occupation by potentially increasing the severity of penalties. While specific sanctions depend on the circumstances of each case, they can range from fines to prison sentences, particularly if violence or intimidation was used during the occupation. Some sources mention potential prison terms of up to three years in aggravated situations. The intended effect is to make the legal consequences significant enough to discourage future occupations. While potentially deterring future acts, for owners already facing occupation, the primary focus often remains on the speed of recovery rather than the specific punishment meted out to the occupant, though the latter contributes to the overall strengthening of the legal framework protecting property rights.
• Strengthened Legal Standing: By channeling these occupation offenses into the faster and more decisive juicio rápido criminal procedure, the law inherently strengthens the owner's legal position. It provides a more immediate and potent legal recourse compared to the often protracted civil actions or slower ordinary criminal tracks that were previously the main options, especially in cases of usurpación.

5. Navigating the New Law: Requirements and Limitations for Owners

To effectively utilize the benefits provided by Ley Orgánica 1/2025, property owners must understand the necessary steps and the law's inherent limitations:

• Initiating the Process: The process begins when the property owner (or another legitimate possessor, such as a tenant whose home is invaded) files a formal criminal complaint (denuncia). This complaint should be lodged either with the National Police, Guardia Civil, or regional police force, or directly at the local duty court (juzgado de guardia). Prompt reporting is crucial, especially in potential allanamiento cases where the 48-hour window for immediate police action might apply.
• Proof of Ownership/Possession: The complainant must provide clear documentation verifying their legal right to the property. Standard proof includes title deeds (escrituras), entries from the Property Registry (Nota Simple), or other legally valid documents demonstrating ownership or legitimate possession. Failure to provide adequate proof can hinder the process.
• Identifying Occupants: While civil procedures sometimes allow action against "unknown occupants" (ignorados ocupantes) , providing any available information about the individuals occupying the property can assist the criminal investigation and judicial process. Notably, the broader reforms associated with LO 1/2025 also include measures ordering police forces to undertake efforts to identify occupants in cases of usurpación where their identities are initially unknown.

• Crucial Limitation: Inquiokupación is Excluded: It cannot be overstated that the expedited procedures and benefits of LO 1/2025 do not apply to situations termed inquiokupación. This refers to tenants who initially entered the property legally under a lease agreement but subsequently stopped paying rent or refused to vacate after the contract terminated. These cases are considered breaches of civil contract, not criminal allanamiento or usurpación. Landlords facing inquiokupación must still resort to standard civil eviction proceedings (procedimiento de desahucio por falta de pago or por expiración de plazo), which typically take considerably longer and may involve vulnerability assessments under the Ley de Vivienda. This distinction is fundamental and represents a significant limitation of the current reform's scope from the perspective of landlords dealing with defaulting tenants. The legislative choice maintains a clear separation between criminal acts of taking possession and civil disputes arising from contractual relationships, applying distinct legal frameworks despite potentially similar practical outcomes for the owner.
• Exclusion of MASC Requirement for Criminal Complaints: Ley Orgánica 1/2025 introduces a requirement to attempt "Medios Adecuados de Solución de Controversias" (MASC), such as mediation or conciliation, before filing many types of civil lawsuits. However, this pre-litigation negotiation requirement does not apply to initiating criminal complaints for allanamiento or usurpación. Property owners facing these criminal acts can file a denuncia directly without needing to first attempt mediation or conciliation. Some initial confusion or concern expressed about MASC potentially slowing down okupación cases appears to stem from conflating the new requirements for civil procedures with the distinct criminal pathway established by this reform.

Therefore, the owner's promptness in filing the criminal complaint and the clarity of the evidence provided, particularly proof of ownership, are critical factors in successfully leveraging the expedited juicio rápido process introduced by LO 1/2025. Any delay or ambiguity initiated by the owner could impede the swift application of this new legal tool.

The property owners must remain cognizant of the law's specific scope and limitations. Crucially, this reform does not apply to civil disputes involving tenants who default on rent or overstay their leases (inquiokupación). These situations continue to be governed by standard, often lengthy, civil eviction procedures. Furthermore, the practical realization of the 15-day judicial target depends heavily on the capacity and resources of the Spanish court system, an area where concerns persist.

In conclusion, Ley Orgánica 1/2025 provides property owners with a more potent and timely legal instrument to combat criminal occupation defined as allanamiento de morada or usurpación. It represents a clear legislative effort to bolster the protection of private property rights by facilitating quicker repossession in these specific circumstances. Nonetheless, its ultimate success will be measured not only by the letter of the law but also by its effective implementation on the ground, the allocation of necessary judicial resources, and potentially, future legislative actions to address the broader spectrum of occupation-related challenges, including inquiokupación.