In an unappealable sentence, the Administrative Litigation Court number 4 of Santa Cruz de Tenerife considers the appeal of a neighbor of the capital of Santa Cruz against the resolution that on April 2, 2020 sanctioned him with 300.50 euros (fine reduced to 50 % for immediate payment) for circulating on public roads at around 1:20 p.m. in breach of the mobility restrictions determined in Royal Decree 463/20, without being included in any situation of exceptionality of those provided by law.
As detailed in the ruling, the sanctioned man told the agents that he came from the vet “because the dog is under stress and her hair is falling out.” The magistrate Jorge Riestra clarifies in the sentence that reading the facts shows that it is not that the neighbor disobeyed the agents, but that he was detected in the street without his presence in it being covered by any of the assumptions of those allowed by the Royal Decree that declared the state of alarm.
However, it sets out the ruling, the ruling of the plenary session of the Constitutional Court 148/2021, of July 14, in the second pronouncement of its ruling, partially upheld the appeal for unconstitutionality filed against the aforementioned Royal Decree and declared the aforementioned aspects unconstitutional and null. to the limitation of mobility of the population. The magistrate affirms that the present case is fully affected by the declaration of unconstitutionality: “The maintenance of the penal or administrative sanction that brings cause of a disposition declared null would violate the right to criminal legality” enshrined in the Constitution, he states.
