Okupas: What Can Be Done?

My last article explored the two opposing sides of the okupa (squatter) debate in Spain: the roots of the movement, the passionately opposing views, and the messy role the law and the courts play in making the situation worse. While I hope you found it to be an interesting read, it may have raised more questions in your mind than it answered.

Untangling the situation and even the laws that are supposed to protect both okupas and property owners is not an easy task. This is due in large part to three factors: the lack of consistency in enforcing the law, the immense amount of misinformation floating around, and the unwillingness of many people to go on the record. Those who have real-world experience in the world of okupas (on both sides) are often skittish about putting their stories in writing for fear of legal reprisals, as both okupas and some property owners operate in a legal grey area that has nothing to do with the letter of the law. Experts in the legal world know this, but they are usually reluctant to go on the record stating that the law may say one thing, but reality is something entirely different.

How things are supposed to work and how they actually work don’t always match up in Spain. If you’ve lived here long enough, you know that this can be—but isn’t always—a bad thing.

Breaking (Down) the Law

Why is the law regarding squatters in Spain so confusing?

The root of the problem seems to come from a strangely myopic interpretation of the law, an almost too-literal reading of Article 18 of the Spanish Constitution, which guarantees the fundamental right of the inviolability of the home: "No entry or search may be made without the consent of the owner or a judicial resolution, except in the case of the commission of a flagrant crime."

The same law that is supposed to protect private property protects the inviolability of the squatters’ “home” as well. The police can’t enter a property to remove squatters if there is even the slightest doubt as to whether or not that person has a right to be on the property. Doing so would risk their jobs, as well as exposure to possible additional legal repercussions for trespassing.

If a squatter presents a verbal claim or a false written contract stating ownership and the actual owner has no physical evidence on hand to prove who the property really belongs to, the police may believe the owner’s claims, but they don’t have enough hard proof to legally justify removing the squatters. Unless you can prove then and there that a crime was committed, you have to wait for the court-ordered eviction.

This same interpretation is the reason that you could face legal consequences if you try to force squatters off a property where they claim to have established residence. According to the letter of the law, you’re violating their fundamental right to housing.

Okupas Know the Law Better than You Do

Some of you unfamiliar with the world of okupas may not find the idea that it’s a “movement” very credible. Living in abandoned spaces sounds more like a few outsiders choosing to live an alternate lifestyle—and the okupying of inhabited residences sounds like little more than criminals abusing the system. How is that a movement?

Okupas don’t promote a lack of any kind of order or rules at all, they believe in operating outside of the current system. There is a surprising amount of organization in the okupa culture—especially in Barcelona and Catalunya, which has a long history of anarchist political tradition. (Read Orwell if you don’t believe me.)

There are lawyers who specialize in helping okupas, most famously Laia Serra, but many okupas—both the “good” kind and the “bad”—know the law extremely well without legal assistance. There is even an Oficina d’Okupacion (squatters’ advice office) in Barcelona, with office hours on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Sundays. The very first thing they spell out on their homepage is a brief guide to how to okupy, including tips on which entities to consult in order to choose your property (the Department of Urban Planning and the Property Register, for example). It also includes a quick practical guide, including tips on how to avoid being served papers, the difference between civil and criminal charges, and what to do if you are detained and taken to a police station.

Read our first article Okupas: The Multifaceted Problem of Spain's Squatters.

There is an infinitely more detailed okupas manual that has circulated online in PDF form for years. The document states that the okupas movement negates the concept of property, that private property is a tool of a repressive system. It spells out what steps to take in order to plan and execute the okupation of a property, how to take advantage of legal loopholes, even instructions on the most effective methods of creating physical barricades to delay police from entering the okupied property. One detail that jumped out at me was the manual’s recommendation that the squatters create a written inventory of all valuables found in a home and store them properly: that way, they can’t be accused of theft of the owner’s valuables.

In case you thought this was a “local” problem, there is an extensive version of the okupas manual in English designed. It has diagrams to teach first-time okupas how to break locks using simple tools, a list of phone numbers to call if you get into trouble with the authorities, and tips on what to say or not to say to police. (For example: “Make sure to emphasize that no one told you that you couldn’t be on the property, that you were cleaning up the property because it was abandoned.”

Even though the manual’s tactics could easily be used to break into someone’s home, the social and political views expressed within the document are pretty much in line with the views expressed by pro-okupa advocate Joni D. in my previous article. It emphasizes taking over empty buildings rather than primary or secondary residences, and encourages okupas not to condone drug trafficking, discrimination, violence or sexual abuse within their community.

What Can You Do if Your Property is Okupied?

As frustrating and illogical as it may be, there could be serious legal consequences for taking matters into your own hands—and while you may be a novice at dealing with squatters, the okupas often know what they’re doing. Luckily, there are many places to go for advice.

You’ll find all kinds of anecdotal advice on the internet, advising everything from breaking into your own home to sending other “friendly” okupas to re-okupy your property. This kind of advice is dangerous in the extreme: it doesn’t take into account the possibility of a violent physical confrontation, or the possible serious legal consequences for the owner.

Talking to someone with a legitimate legal background and real-world experience is a must if you find yourself dealing with an unwanted guest on your property. There are established companies that offer specialized legal services and advice to try to help property owners, but nearly all of them explicitly reserve the right to accept or reject each case based on the probability of success, and stress repeatedly that they work only within the law. These companies will always advise you to file a legal complaint against the people okupying your property.

Need a legal perspective on the okupas issue? Read our article What to Do If You Have an Okupa in Your House?

Other “desokupa” companies offer similar selection of legal services, including anti-okupa insurance, mediation and private security, but they also just happen to mention on their website that that members of their team are MMA fighters trained in Jiu-jitsu, boxing and grappling—complete with photos of the guys and their massive arms. Potential clients can draw their own conclusions as to the implications of the photos, but their websites also specifically say that they won’t take any action that is outside of the law. Some of these companies, like Desokupa, won’t get involved if there are children on the premises, and only will agree to work for private individuals, not for banks that have okupas inhabiting properties the bank has repossessed.

There are also informal platforms like the Facebook group Stop Okupas. While they are not an organization that can offer legal advice, members of these kinds of groups can often recommend lawyers or advocates they have worked with who may be able to help.

There are also private associations that have sprung up to offer both advice and moral support, such as the Association of People Affected by Okupation (Asociación de Afectados por la Okupación, AAO), whose director Toni Miranda said in an interview with Libre Mercado that the okupa phenomenon is increasingly violent because a culture of impunity has been generated due to neglect by the administration.

The main goal of the AAO is to reform legislation by lobbying government officials and making its voice heard in the press. The organization’s mission statement calls for an end to “rudeness, annoyances, threats, hostility, antisocial behavior and the fear that squatters will okupy your home.”

But it is not ostensibly against okupas who are truly in need. The AAO website frames it this way: “Have you been left homeless and lacking in resources? You are also a victim of squatting. Administrations cannot shirk their responsibility to provide social housing by offering squatting as an alternative. If we put an end to squatting, the Administration will only have one option, which is to offer legal social housing to those who need it. Don't squat. Join us. Tell us about your case. We will help you. If you have squatted out of need but want to live legally, we will listen and we will help you.” They see a difference between someone who deprives other citizens of their rights and their legal property, and the families that have been abandoned by the system and are looking for a way to survive.

In September 2020, a similar organization called the Spanish Association for People Affected by Okupas was born. It also lays much of the blame for the broken system at the feet of politicians but focuses its attention on helping property owners with an okupa problem, and doesn't take into special consideration okupas who act out of need in the scope of its arguments. Just like there is more than one kind of okupa, there is also more than one kind of anti-okupa.

Looking for Answers: Changes to The Law

Catalunya issued a decree in 2020 requiring property owners to offer a “socially adjusted” rental price to okupas who have been living on their property for six months or more. The decree only applies to a company or individual that owns at least fifteen real estate assets and was designed to answer critics of the rampant property speculation that has occurred in Barcelona and other Catalan cities in over the past twenty years.

Spain’s Ministry of the Interior also introduced a new protocol on September 17, 2020 meant to eliminate the 48-hour standard time limit after which an okupa has a “right” to remain on the property being okupied. The protocol allows police to enter a property more than 48 hours after the squatters have installed themselves on the premises without a court order, as long as the act of entering the property by the okupas can be proved to be a “flagrant” crime. The measure is supposed to facilitate the expulsion of squatters by the legal owners and takes into account factors such as evidence of forced entry, threats made to the property owner or neighbors and elevation consumption of electricity and water.

The protocol specifies that the police must make a visual inspection of the property and file an in-depth report including all of the aforementioned elements, as well as any proof the claimant (the property owner) can provide. According to the Ministry of the Interior, these detailed reports are meant to speed up the judicial and possible eviction process; however, just as before, if it is not possible to prove a “flagrant” crime at the time, the police may not remove the squatters from the property without judicial authorization.

For an act to be considered “flagrant” it must comply with the three following requirements: the intrusion had to have happened recently, there must be evidence of the presence of the offender and there must be an urgent need for police intervention. 

Of course, the terms “recently” and “urgent need” are subjective, and the burden of proof to show a crime was flagrant still rests with the owners. In addition, the Ministry of the Interior does not establish any legal deadline for the police or civil guards to return the home to the rightful owner, regardless of when the okupas are forced to leave.

The problem with the new protocol is the same issue that comes up whenever a protocol or a new interpretation of the law is issued by the government: it is essentially a set of instructional guidelines, not legislation. It doesn’t change the situation on the ground. In tandem with its announcement, the Ministry has also promised to improve its coordination with local police, including a new application called Alertcops.

Yes, there’s an app for that. Alertcops can be downloaded on Google Play or via the Apple AppStore and contains general information on what steps to take if you are the victim of a crime. It allows you to send alerts to the nearest emergency center via the app—but again, it doesn’t alter the burden of proof on the part of the claimant to prove that a crime has been committed.

At the same time that the Catalan and Spanish governments seem to be cracking down on okupas—or at least they are trying to give that impression—Barcelona’s city hall under current mayoress Ada Colau is known to be sympathetic to the movement. It has condoned the okupations of unused buildings, and even paid for their renovation, though it doesn’t condone taking over a person’s primary or secondary residence.

What Does the Future Hold for Both Sides?

Okupas are a hot-button issue, one in which pressure is mounting on both sides. Political conservatives, banks and property investment groups traditionally argue that Spain’s lax property protections are hurting the country’s economy and deterring foreign investors. Liberals will usually say that abuse by a corrupt system makes okupying an abandoned space a legitimate response to an impossible situation, and that housing is a fundamental right that trumps other considerations. (Okupying someone’s home, however, seems to be frowned upon by both sides.)

Spanish and Catalan politicians may continue to issue decrees and protocols to make it appear as if they’re dealing with the issue of squatters, housing rights and private property protections in order to appease their constituents, but unless the law makes substantive changes addressing the roots of the problem—speculation by banks and private individuals, homelessness, an improved system of public housing, significantly clearer private property protections—it is unlikely that the parties on either side will feel like any real progress has been made.