Who Are Okupas and What Can You Do About Them?

11 Dec 2025

Pavel Tarasenko

If you’re a fortunate owner of property in Spain, we have bad news: in practice, your rights may be less protected than those of strangers who, on a not-so-lovely day, might break into your flat and… decide to stay. These people are known as okupas, and dealing with them in Spain is difficult, slow and costly.

La Cotorra explains why okupas have become a particularly serious problem in Spain, what victims can do, and what they should — and should not — expect from the system in their fight with uninvited guests.

When you can’t enter your own home

Spain faces profound problems with the protection of private property — considerably worse than the EU average. Every day, the media report cases that illustrate the depth of the issue.

A Galician woman, Pilar, and her husband went on hunger strike to protest government inaction: they had offered temporary shelter to acquaintances going through a difficult time, who are now refusing to leave and have even filed a complaint against the homeowners for “violating their rights”.

A Catalan man, Jordi, is denied access to his own flat by uninvited tenants of Moroccan origin; the police not only refuse to intervene but warn him that if he attempts to act on his own, he will be arrested.

Josep and Ester rented out their flat when they moved from Tarragona to the Canary Islands. Now they’ve returned — and because the tenants refuse to leave, they are forced to live in a 25-square-metre garage. A van, a portable toilet, a basic camping stove, and mattresses on the floor — these are the comforts they have while waiting for the court hearing.

A Madrid resident, Carlos, discovered that his mortgaged flat, rented out through an estate agency, is occupied not by the official tenants — three men and one woman — but only by the woman. Alongside her are her three children, whom no one mentioned when signing the contract. Carlos no longer receives rent. The court has said that tenants in “vulnerable circumstances” cannot be evicted until social services find them alternative accommodation. But the woman has already rejected one such offer. Carlos is desperate and fears he may soon be sleeping under a bridge.

Manoli and Antonio lent their house to a family who needed temporary accommodation during renovations. They now cannot remove the occupants by any legal means: the tenants have a “winning argument” for the court and the police — a child with a disability. The family receives €3,000 in benefits and owns a Porsche and a Mercedes, but refuses even to pay utility bills.

Who are okupas?

All these people have been affected by okupas — individuals who occupy property without the owner’s consent. Worldwide they are known as squatters. There are several types:

Ideological okupas

Anarchists and far-left activists who see squatting as resistance against capitalism. Examples include the “Free City of Christiania” in Copenhagen, La Kasa de la Muntanya in Barcelona (1989–2016), La Meduza in Barcelona (2020–2025), Madrid’s La Ingobernable (2017–2019), and many others.

Economic okupas

These are usually meant when people say “okupas”. They are not anarchists but vulnerable individuals exploiting gaps in the law. Two legal scenarios exist:

Allanamiento de morada (violation of the sanctity of the home, Criminal Code art. 202): the classic case — owners go on holiday, return to find strangers inside. Penalties: up to 4 years in prison (if violence or threats were used), up to 2 years if not.
Usurpación (usurpation, Criminal Code art. 245): breaking into an empty home or non-residential property. With violence — up to 2 years in prison; without violence — a fine.

Inquiokupas

A third category — inquiokupas (from inquilino, tenant, + okupas). These are tenants who initially move in legally, then simply stop paying rent. The phenomenon surged during the 2008–2014 economic crisis and again during COVID-19.

Evicting them is extremely difficult, especially if any of them are considered “socially vulnerable”: benefit recipients, families with income below €537.84 per person, single mothers, large families, people with disabilities, and the elderly (65+).

Mafia okupas

Organised criminal groups. They don’t occupy flats to live in them but to run illicit activities or extort owners — demanding thousands, even tens of thousands of euros to “free the property”.

How serious is the problem?

According to the Ministry of the Interior, in 2024 Spain recorded 16,426 cases of usurpación and allanamiento de morada. That’s 7.4% more than in 2023 (15,289 cases). Actual numbers are much higher: many victims do not report incidents, and inquiokupas are not included in the statistics.

Top regions by number of cases:

Catalonia — 7,009 (40% of all cases)
Andalusia — 2,207
Valencia Region — 1,767
Madrid Region — 1,451

71% of all occupied properties are concentrated in eight cities: Barcelona, Madrid, Murcia, Málaga, Seville, Valencia, Palma and Alicante.

A 2024 survey by the Consumers and Users Organisation (OCU) found:

34% consider the issue “very serious”
20% believe it exists but is “not critical”
38% see no problem at all

There is a stark political divide:

Right-wing parties (PP, Vox) call for zero tolerance and tougher laws.

Left-wing parties, led by Socialist PM Pedro Sánchez, argue that fears are exaggerated and the problem affects less than 0.06% of homes.

Anthropologists agree: fears in Spanish society are magnified, and “the figure of the okupa and inquiokupa functions as an ideological tool”.

Why has the problem arisen?

Historical reasons

1960s: mass migration from rural areas to cities → empty flats being occupied. After Franco’s regime fell, many such okupas later legalised the properties.

1980s: social housing construction collapsed, prices soared, unemployment increased → squatting became widespread.

Legal reasons

Spain’s main problem today lies in laws with strong social orientation.

Spanish Constitution:

Art. 47: “All Spaniards have the right to adequate housing.”

Art. 33: property is inviolable, but may be limited for reasons of “public use or social interest” (with compensation).

Civil Code: protects those who exercise factual control over property.

In 1995, art. 245 of the Criminal Code introduced the concept of “usurpation”. But it is punishable only if long-term intent and the aim of depriving the owner of their rights are proven. Okupas must also have acted intentionally — knowing the property had an owner who had not authorised entry.

This is a major loophole: offenders often tell courts, “We didn’t know the flat had an owner.” Judges sometimes accept it.

And even when they don’t, the process is painfully slow. As of spring 2025, the average time between filing a case and a decision was 20.5 months. During that time, squatters live rent-free.

Have there been attempts to fix this?

2018 reform — “express procedure”

Owners gained the right to file a civil claim even without identifying the squatters. If okupas cannot produce documents proving lawful residence, eviction should be immediate.

In practice, cases still dragged on for months; judges continued considering “social vulnerability”.

2024–2025 reform — new art. 795 CPC

Came into force on 3 April 2025.

If an occupation is discovered within the first 48 hours, police can intervene without a court order. Ideally, offenders must be caught breaking in. Otherwise, strong evidence is required. Okupas can attempt to convince police they “have been living there for a long time”. A common trick: ordering a pizza to the address days before breaking in, accepting it and keeping the receipt.

If the 48 hours have passed, the owner must go to court. Under new rules:

a hearing must take place within 15 days,
a ruling issued within 3 days after the hearing,
eviction immediately thereafter,
socio-economic status of okupas is no longer assessed.

Reality turned out different.

Unless you catch the squatter red-handed, forget about a fast trial. Everything goes back to how it was

lawyers note

Courts remain overwhelmed, and inquiokupas are excluded from the fast-track procedure entirely.

Will there be more reforms?

Almost certainly yes. Politicians and legal experts are calling for further changes.

Vox wants to ban squatters from registering their residency (empadronamiento) in occupied flats, depriving them of access to services.

Lawyers argue that the most effective solution is a mandatory public registry of rental contracts, which would prevent occupiers from using forged agreements or receipts.

A Supreme Court judge, Vicente Magro, proposes:

a comprehensive law on loss of tenancy rights in cases of breach or illegal occupation, to speed up property recovery;
mandatory interim measures — eviction — if occupants cannot provide clear, credible proof of a rental contract;
“social vulnerability” should be the responsibility of the state, not of property owners.

Regional courts are also experimenting.

In 2025, the Barcelona Court of Appeal ruled that cutting off utilities in occupied property can be lawful — if done formally through utility companies and under certain conditions.

It also ruled that cases involving occupation of empty dwellings cannot be dismissed before identifying the intruders — meaning police must conduct an investigation. Many hope these decisions will become nationwide practice.

So what can property owners do now?

Some choose to fight in court and wait months for unwelcome guests to be legally removed. Others give up and sell. Property portals feature numerous ads marked “Occupied” — often up to 60% below market value. This attracts professional investors willing to gamble in hopes of future profit.

Another group of owners resorts to semi-legal solutions: hiring anti-okupa squads, who, using intimidating presence and verbal pressure (but no violence), persuade squatters to leave. These services cost several thousand euros and are extremely popular. One such company in Alicante reportedly has a 20-month waiting list.

But this business may soon face legal challenges: the Sumar alliance in the governing coalition seeks a ban on such operations. If their proposal passes, both providers and clients may face fines from €30,000 to €600,000.

For now, the best hope for Spanish homeowners is prevention:

installing high-quality locks and alarm systems,
obtaining specialist insurance against okupas,
building good relationships with neighbors who can alert the owner or even deter intruders.