Professors Ángel Llanos Castro and Julio Rijo Muñoz, from the departments of Constitutional Law, Political Science and Philosophy of Law, on the one hand, and of Special Public and Private Law and Business Law, on the other, have published their study “Territorial protection in the outermost regions: The case of the Canary Islands Land Law”, in the latest issue of the Canary Islands Journal of Public Administration, published by Tirant lo Blanch under the coordination of the Government of the Canary Islands.
This work provides a view from Political Science and Administration, balanced with the legal perspective, on the weaknesses and strengths of Law 4/2017, of July 13, on Land and Protected Natural Spaces of the Canary Islands, both in its processing, as well as in the theoretical foundations on which it was based and the legislative structure of its content, which has already accumulated a dozen modifications.
The authors, who had the scientific collaboration of Professor of Administrative Law Francisco José Villar Rojas, Professor of Architectural Projects Juan Manuel Palerm Salazar and Professor of Constitutional Law Santiago Pérez García, contextualized the approval process of the Canary Islands Land Law, comparing previous studies and evaluating semi-structured interviews carried out in the first years of validity of the text with actors directly related to the Law itself, both in relation to its drafting and execution, as well as in terms of their critical vision.
The main conclusions of the investigation are that the Canary Islands Land Law was passed by two votes more than the required majority, and those who opposed it were responsible for implementing a text they did not believe in for four years. In territorial planning, the researchers emphasize, the lack of political consensus is especially critical, since land policies are long-term and, often, irreversible.
Furthermore, the Law has significantly streamlined the extensive existing legislation on land and protected natural areas after 35 years of excessive regulation. It has also simplified land-use plans and made actions on agricultural land more flexible; however, it effectively eliminated the 2003 Guidelines Law from the Canary Islands' reality, to the point that its explanatory memorandum was explicitly annulled, despite its limited legal validity and its considerable academic value.
Furthermore, the Law, despite its theoretical soundness, has weakened legality controls in the interest of hypothetically greater administrative efficiency, lacking the perspective of technical experience in public administration, since some of its provisions have proven difficult to implement. Local councils became both judge and jury in the processing of planning schemes, the authors argue, resulting in a loss of administrative oversight independence when assessing their legality prior to any intervention by the courts.
On the other hand, the study concludes that the Law touted the independence of municipalities to make their own decisions as an argument for their final approval of their general urban development plans. However, it established excessive discretionary power for the Government of the Canary Islands and the Island Councils regarding projects of special interest.
Finally, the authors concluded that it has been a necessary document, characterized by its ambition and theoretical rigor, and that it has generated significant advances in planning in the Canary Islands. However, it has proven insufficient for the archipelago's needs, as important elements remain to be addressed (especially those related to rural land and tourism), and it has not promoted participatory democracy.
Spanish 
English 
French