The head of the Contentious-Administrative Court of the Court of First Instance of Teruel has decided to dismiss the appeal filed by the Vox deputy in the Cortes of Aragon, Alejandro Nolasco, the Vox Parliamentary Group in the autonomous Chamber, the political party Vox itself and José Ignacio R. M. against the agreement adopted by the Neighborhood Assembly of the Open Council of the Bezas City Council, approved on March 11, 2025.
In that session, the Open Council of Bezas backed by absolute majority, with 33 favorable votes and a single abstention, the report from the Provincial Environmental Service of the Government of Aragon which endorsed the demolition of the concrete cross and its pedestal, erected in 1939 by Francoism in memory of the defense of a fortified position during the Civil War, located in Peña La Cruz, upon observing in the area a security problem linked to the prevention of lightning strikes.
After analyzing the arguments of the appellants, the magistrate concludes that they lack active standing, based on several considerations. In the case of José Ignacio R., he emphasizes that "he was not registered in the municipality of Bezas" nor did he appear as a resident of the town when he filed the appeal and that it is not proven that he is "directly affected by the issue of the cross's status to a greater extent than the general public". He adds that "the mere fact of birth in the locality, (with a subsequent change of residence), is entirely insufficient to maintain a legitimate interest".
In relation to Deputy Alejandro Nolasco, the judge indicates that "his character as "native" nor special current roots with the locality are not recorded". Regarding the legitimacy he intends to derive from his status as a parliamentarian, the magistrate relies on abundant jurisprudence "that rejects that the status of a parliamentarian entails, by itself and without any added element, the possibility of exercising actions in the contentious-administrative sphere". He considers that the procedural position of this plaintiff is "diffuse and that it does not contain the direct and sufficient connection that would be necessary with the administrative act subject to litigation".
Thus, it concludes that "the status of parliamentarian does not confer the representation of society nor of the general interest nor of collective legal assets in the contentious-administrative jurisdiction".
Regarding the Vox Parliamentary Group in the Cortes of Aragon, the judge notes that "no type of closeness or direct connection is observed between the function of a parliamentary group, primarily oriented towards the internal scope of the functioning of the Cortes, with the subject matter of the appeal".
For these reasons, the judicial resolution holds that none of the plaintiffs meet "the existence of a direct connection, of a qualified affectation, or a sufficient legitimate interest as to consider their position of active standing enabled to exercise the claim of nullity of the specific appealed municipal resolution".
As a consequence of the declaration of inadmissibility, the magistrate rules out entering to assess the merits of the issues raised by the plaintiffs. In the procedure opened against the demolition of the Cross of Bezas, two separate pieces of precautionary measures were processed. The first, piece no. 1, was initiated after, on March 26, 2025, José Ignacio R. M., acting individually and as the sole plaintiff, requested the court to adopt very urgent precautionary measures to prevent the demolition of the cross, a request that was granted that same day, estimating the measure without previously hearing the other parties.
Later, once the allegations of the appearing parties were received, the Bezas City Council opposed the measure. After weighing everyone's arguments, the magistrate issued on April 11, 2025, an order by which he agreed to maintain the already agreed upon very urgent precautionary measure.
The second separate piece of precautionary measures, no. 4, refers to those requested by the Vox Parliamentary Group and deputy Alejandro Nolasco on April 24, 2025. In this case, they requested the adoption of precautionary measures which the court ended up rejecting, considering that said measures had already been agreed upon in the procedure promoted by José Ignacio R. M.
The judgment now issued by the magistrate definitively closes the two lawsuits filed by all the previous appellants in relation to the municipal agreement on the Cross of Bezas.