Three administrative courts in Málaga have condemned the Alameda City Council for preventing socialist councillors from accessing invoices and contracts for the August Fair and other works.
The Alameda City Council has been condemned in three judicial rulings for violating the fundamental rights of councillors from the Socialist Municipal Group. The administrative courts in Málaga consider that the council harmed the right to access municipal information, which is essential for the opposition's oversight role.
Violated constitutional right
The rulings, dated July 1, fully uphold the appeals filed by the PSOE councillors, represented by lawyer Francisco Javier Conejo Rueda. They declare that the fundamental right to political participation, as enshrined in Article 23 of the Spanish Constitution, has been violated.
The judges conclude that the City Council failed to meet its legal obligation to provide the requested documentation within the stipulated timeframe. Positive administrative silence occurred, yet the council still did not deliver the documents on time.
Two of the rulings, issued by the Administrative Court number 3 of Málaga, reject the City Council's justification, which claimed a lack of staff and a high number of information requests. The judge reminds that these circumstances cannot restrict a fundamental right.
The third ruling, from Court number 5, states that the council failed to execute the firm act arising from positive administrative silence. It considers the violation of the political participation right of the appealing councillor to be established.
Invoices from the August Fair and works on Enmedio Street
The proceedings originated from various information requests by the Socialist Municipal Group. They requested, among other documents, the invoices and contracts for the 2025 Alameda August Fair, documentation for the public works on Enmedio Street, and other municipal files necessary to oversee the government's management.
The rulings emphasise that the right of councillors to access information cannot be conditioned by the internal organisation of the City Council or by a lack of resources. The late delivery of documentation does not eliminate the violation already committed, as the delay prevents public representatives from exercising their oversight role on equal terms.
Moreover, the three rulings impose legal costs on the Alameda City Council, as the appeals were fully upheld.
PSOE reaction: “Transparency is not a concession”
The spokesperson for the Socialist Municipal Group in Alameda, Antonio Montero Ávila, has commented on the rulings. “These three rulings demonstrate that the opposition was right and that the governing team has violated a fundamental right by preventing access to municipal information,” he stated.
“Transparency and access to information are not a concession from the mayor; they are a legal obligation that must always be respected,” Montero pointed out.
The spokesperson assured that the PSOE will continue to exercise “a firm, responsible, and constructive opposition, defending the interests of the residents of Alameda and using all legal instruments at our disposal to ensure transparency, accountability, and respect for legality in the City Council.”
For the residents of Alameda, these rulings serve as a reminder that opacity in municipal management has judicial consequences. The obligation to deliver information on time is not a mere formality but a pillar of local democracy. Now, the council must comply with the rulings and provide the requested documents, if it has not already done so, so that the opposition can carry out its oversight role over public spending and the management of works.
