In Spain, the debate over illegal squatting (‘okupación’) has ignited fierce public and political discourse. Desokupa, a private company led by Daniel Esteve, has become synonymous with the issue, marketing itself as a saviour for property owners while expanding into contentious new ventures.
Desokupa was initially established to facilitate evictions of illegal squatters. For example, Desokupa offers a quick eviction service within 24 hours for approximately €1,800. However, Desokupa has evolved beyond its original remit. The company now runs a self-styled ‘Club Desokupa’, offering personal defence training against perceived threats such as knife attacks. These courses are marketed to civilians, including minors as young as 14, and have recently been extended to police and military personnel through formal agreements. According to Esteve, the training aims to “empower individuals to defend themselves in dangerous street situations,” tapping into widespread concerns about public safety.
However, according to Eldiario.es, critics argue that the company’s portrayal of Spain as a lawless and unsafe society is exaggerated. They suspect the company of leveraging fear to promote its services. Judicial data indicates that illegal squatting is not as pervasive as media coverage suggests, undermining Desokupa’s central narrative.
Controversial alliances with security forces
Desokupa’s partnerships with police and military associations have raised alarms. Agreements with groups such as the Unified Police Union (SUP) and the Spanish Troop and Navy Association (ATME) have allowed Desokupa to offer self-defence training to thousands of officers. These collaborations blur the lines between public security institutions and private enterprises, with potential conflicts of interest emerging.
The Spanish Ministry of Defence recently demanded the annulment of Desokupa’s agreement with ATME, citing legal and ethical concerns. Similarly, Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska criticised the company’s tactics. He labelled them “brash and thuggish.” Despite these rebukes, Desokupa’s influence within security circles continues to grow, supported by political factions on the right and far-right.
A political agenda underpinning business
Desokupa’s activities are not confined to business. The company has openly aligned itself with far-right ideologies. The company stages protests against left-leaning politicians such as Pedro Sánchez and Ada Colau. Its rhetoric often mirrors that of populist parties, emphasising themes of governmental failure, insecurity, and the need for individual empowerment. These messages resonate with certain segments of the population but further polarise Spain’s political landscape.
Critics accuse Desokupa of exploiting societal fears for profit while fostering mistrust in public institutions. The narrative of an “ineffective State” unable to protect its citizens serves as a cornerstone of the company’s marketing strategy, which in turn is bolstered by sensationalist media coverage and political endorsements.
Implications for public trust and governance
The growing intersection between Desokupa and Spain’s security forces poses significant questions. By offering training to police and military personnel, the company risks undermining the neutrality and professionalism of these institutions. Furthermore, the normalisation of private companies stepping into roles traditionally reserved for the State raises concerns about accountability and the erosion of public trust.
Spain tightens laws on squatters with swift eviction policy
The Spanish Government is conscious about the okupa-problem too. Over a month ago, the Congress has approved a reform that accelerates the eviction of squatters, with cases expected to be resolved in just days. The amendment signals a seismic shift in handling illegal occupancy, a long-standing social issue in Spain. The new law streamlines the judicial process by categorising squatting cases under expedited criminal proceedings, alongside crimes like theft and assault. Squatters could face legal action within 15 days, drastically cutting the months-long delays of the current system. Critics warn that the law could disproportionately affect vulnerable families, including those with children, but proponents argue it’s a necessary response to a national crisis, with over 15,000 properties illegally occupied as of late 2023.
Critics of legal experts
The newly approved legislation aims to accelerate legal proceedings against squatters, but according to legal experts it falls short of guaranteeing immediate evictions. Supreme Court magistrate Vicente Magro has criticised in Libremercado.es the reform. He argues that the real solution lies in amending Article 544 of the Penal Code to enforce expulsions within 72 hours of a complaint being filed, regardless of the squatter’s vulnerability. Magro points out that such measures are standard practice in countries like Denmark, Germany, and the UK. There, squatting issues are far less pronounced.
Under the current amendment, the Government only reformed the process for initiating rapid trials, within 15 days. However, critics argue that a fast trial does not equate to swift resolution. Verdicts can still be delayed by appeals and further legal procedures.
Magro draws a stark analogy, suggesting that allowing squatters to remain in properties until trial is akin to permitting car thieves to keep stolen vehicles until sentencing.
Also read: Spain extends ban on evictions that unintentionally also protects squatters