murcia

Portal de Santomera

www.portaldesantomera.com

Santomera - SpanishSantomera - English
detail of Santomera

 

The hearing also dismisses the complaint for prevarication against the mayor (26/01/2019)

The ruling does not offer any recourse and condemns the company to the payment of procedural costs

The Provincial Court of Murcia has issued judgment.

And it is very clear: the mayor, Inmaculada Sánchez Roca, the councilor for Urbanism, Joaquín Rubio, and the municipal architect, Tomás Franco, did not prevaricate to prevent Arimesa from continuing its activity.

His performance has been, therefore, subject to law.

Last July was the Court of Instruction number 8 of Murcia who decided to file the case filed by the merchant, without even taking statements as investigators, and now it is the second section of the Hearing who has shelved in a sentence against which, in addition, there is no recourse whatsoever.

Subject settled, then.

In June of last year, Arimesa sued the two politicians and the municipal technician, whom he accused of a crime of prevarication by omission.

According to the complaint, again discredited, the City Council deliberately obstructed the concession of the urban compatibility certificate that the merchant needs to obtain the unique environmental authorization and, with it, a new activity license.

According to the judgment, this was not the case, and for this reason it obliges the complainant company to assume full procedural costs.

The arguments of the merchant have been dismantled at the root, since the judicial order does not consider valid the Order of June 2, 2015, by which the Ministry of Development, Public Works and Planning of the Territory obliged the City of Santomera to issue a Urban compatibility certificate without conditions.

In its argumentation, the court notes that the order "was issued without the City having participation in the procedure of its dictation", which forced the municipal technical services to request information and documentation on numerous occasions;

This would explain the dilatation of the administrative deadlines by itself, without the need to infer any intention to obstruct the procedure.

On the other hand, the order recalls that this order is being studied by the contentious-administrative jurisdiction, on the understanding that the Council lacked the necessary studies and reports and that it took over improper powers.

As if that were not enough, it also points out the existence of a previous final judgment, dated January 2015, by which the Superior Court of Justice demanded the closure of the quarry facilities for lacking a valid activity license, since the one issued in 1974 by the Santomera Civil Government was then a hamlet of Murcia only allowed the crushing and classification of aggregates, but not the extractive activities of a quarry.

Changes after the elections

In what is perhaps the harshest paragraph of the judgment, the second section of the Provincial Court calls attention to a succession of facts, although it clarifies that "the interpretation of the administrative acts in question corresponds to the specialized jurisdiction."

According to the text, "emphasis should be placed on the extensive time that has elapsed since 2008 (when the General Plan of Ordination was approved partially) and on June 2, 2015 (when the PGO defects were rectified). in this matter, without the intervention of the City Council), and precisely after having held an election that made foresee the change of political color in the Consistory.From this point, the performance of the General Directorate of Environmental Quality and the own complainant was directed to obtain a new urban compatibility certificate due to the change in town planning regime produced as a consequence of said order ".

They will denounce Balibrea

"We said it a few months ago, when the case was filed by the Court of Instruction, and we repeat it now: these attacks respond to a strategy of harassment and blackmail driven by this company." It also shows that this City Council respects the law, that nobody We will move from that strict compliance and we will never participate in office arrangements, "said the mayor and his first lieutenant.

"We will report by false accusation the owner of Arimesa, José García-Balibrea, whom we also demand a public apology to the people of Santomera, whose name has dragged in defense of particular interests that have damaged our heritage for more than forty years in a situation of illegality about which there is no doubt, "the aediles added.

Source: Ayuntamiento de Santomera

Notice
UNE-EN ISO 9001:2000 - ER-0131/2006 © 2019 Alamo Networks S.L. - C/Alamo 8, 30850 Totana (Murcia) Privacy policy - Legal notice Región de Murcia
Este sitio web utiliza cookies para facilitar y mejorar la navegación. Si continúas navegando, consideramos que aceptas su uso. Más información