The Public Prosecutor's Office believes that the mayor of Santa Lucía de Tirajana, Francisco García, violated the fundamental right of political participation by preventing the council from being aware of a municipal secretary's report. This report classified the mayor and five other councilors as 'tránsfugas' (defectors) after they left Nueva Canarias (NC) to join Municipalistas Primero Canarias (1ºCAN).
In a filing presented to the Contentious-Administrative Court of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, prosecutor José Antonio Blanco Alonso considers that the mayor's actions during the extraordinary plenary session on May 5th infringed Article 23 of the Constitution, which protects the right of public officials to fully exercise their functions, including oversight and control of government actions.
PP/AV councilor Eva Lucía Araña took legal action following the plenary session, where the mayor prevented the council from reviewing the report issued by the City Council's General Secretariat on March 18, 2026. This report concluded that the mayor and five other councilors should be considered non-affiliated members or defectors.
The mayor based his blockade on a document from the Vice-Ministry of Administrations and Transparency of the Government of the Canary Islands, which interpreted that councilors from an electoral coalition could move between parties without losing their group status. However, the Public Prosecutor's Office believes this action prevented the council from exercising its oversight functions by denying them access to the City Council's legal report.
The prosecutor recalls that the agenda for plenary sessions is essential for guaranteeing councilors' right to information and defining the scope of debates. Preventing the effective treatment of an item expressly included on the agenda constitutes, in his view, a disregard for the legally established procedure, which could lead to the nullity of administrative acts.
The Public Prosecutor's Office emphasizes that the right recognized in Article 23 of the Constitution encompasses the effective exercise of representative functions, including the control of municipal government, a power it considers was restricted during that plenary session.
The opposition maintains that councilors who switched parties should be considered non-affiliated or defectors, while the governing group relies on the regional report. The Public Prosecutor's Office's support strengthens the opposition's stance, pending the decision of the contentious-administrative court.
