The initiative, which received support from the Popular Party and Vox, emerges as a response to recent incidents, such as those recorded during a stage of the Vuelta Ciclista a España. This measure expands the circumstances under which the autonomous executive can exercise popular action, a legal figure already used in cases of terrorism or violence against women.

During the parliamentary debate, the Minister of Presidency, Justice and Local Administration, Miguel Ángel García Martín, defended the need for the Community to actively address these types of crimes. The regulation, processed under a single reading, modifies several autonomous laws concerning forestry, public spectacles, and cultural heritage, also allowing the Community to claim damages when directly affected.

For her part, Vox deputy Ana Velasco supported the proposal, although she criticized the failure to incorporate her group's amendments. She defended this tool as a “fundamental pillar of Justice” and considered the law to be contrary to reforms promoted by the central government, though she described its scope as limited.

Left-wing parties, however, strongly rejected the project. Socialist parliamentarian Tatiana Jiménez warned that the norm could affect the right to protest, understanding that it seeks to bring citizen protests to court. Furthermore, she questioned its legal fit, recalling that the Constitutional Court has already annulled similar initiatives and that a future state reform could render it ineffective.

Similarly, Alicia Torija, from Más Madrid, dismissed the proposal as a “band-aid law,” arguing that it does not solve concrete problems and could alter the purpose of popular action, transforming it into an institutional tool instead of a mechanism for citizen control. The delegate of the Government in Madrid, Francisco Martín, criticized the law, accusing the regional government of “instrumentalizing Justice” and “hindering the exercise of the right to assembly.”