Argentina Senate: Controversial land ownership chapter withdrawn amid allied pressure

In a dramatic turn of events, the ruling party in Argentina's Senate has withdrawn a controversial chapter on foreign land ownership from a bill concerning the inviolability of private property. The decision came after significant pressure from allied blocs within the Senate, who were reportedly uncomfortable with the social and political criticism surrounding the clause.

Senator Patricia Bullrich, the head of the ruling party's bloc in the Senate, agreed to remove the chapter, which would have modified the existing land law from 2011. This move aims to prevent a total defeat for the government on the broader bill. Bullrich reportedly secured a commitment from allies to proceed with the session to discuss the executive branch's project, albeit without the contentious Chapter III.

“

The decision was adopted unanimously among the members of the space (the ruling party and its allies) with the aim of continuing to work on this chapter and achieving a greater level of consensus.

The government's insistence on pushing the bill, even without the land ownership chapter, is to highlight other proposed changes. These include modifications to eviction procedures, new requirements for state expropriation, and amendments to the Fire Management Law. The session, initially adjourned on July 19, is scheduled to resume on Thursday.

Despite the withdrawal of the land ownership clause, opposition groups that had organized a protest march to Congress have stated their intention to proceed with their demonstration. They plan to protest near the Senate building against the project's provisions concerning foreign land purchases. The official statement from Bullrich's office indicated the postponement was to "continue working on this chapter and achieve a greater level of consensus," suggesting it might be reintroduced later, though this seems unlikely if the main bill is approved and sent to the Chamber of Deputies.

“

The postponement does not imply its elimination from the project, but rather responds to the political will to continue working on the text and enrich it with new contributions.