Uncertain Execution of Judgment Hurts Civil Society Activist
Persistent rumors from the ECAL No. 2 state that the entity surrendered to the police a letter dated September 7 this year which states that … “as outlined in file No. 174 of 2010, regular process established by Dora Leanor Mesa Crespo and provision made by the Municipal People’s Court of Diez de Octubre, ordering ‘the demolition of the wall’ that affects the applicant, we have to inform you that in a visit to the former premises occupied by the Negotiating Group of the Extinction Movement of State Microbrigades, located in Calzada de Luyanó No. 557 between Manuel Pruna and Juan Alonso, Diez de Octubre municipality, to date we have been unable to access this location to determine the scope of work to be executed, because the compañero residing there, named Adolfo Perez Zenea is serving a sentence of imprisonment in Penitentiary 1580.”
Based on information obtained from sources that refused to be identified, the director of the ECAL Pita No.2 Nelson Córdova Pita his Legal Advisor Yaquelín Rodríguez allege they are seeking the key from the defendant’s wife, also a local resident, worker at the Municipal Plaza Microbrigade, part of the construction company that is located at 23rd and 2nd street, in the Vedado neighborhood.
A confirmation of the existence of the letter of ECAL No. 2 was delivered to the Police, the justifications are related to the complaint of weeks ago — property infringement — by the civil society activist Ms. Dora L. Mesa.
First some clarification would be good. The above residence of the worker and his wife is absolutely illegal, as is confirmed by documents held by all parties. The place is not even legally registered as state property, it was part of the house of the complainant. Furthermore, the ECAL # 2 tries to ignore the judgment of the Municipal Court No. 17 of Diez de Octubre dated April 29, 2011 which appears verbatim:
Fail: We must declare and we do declare in favor of the complainant, and in consequence affirm this statement condemning the defendant to respect the required separation between the two properties adjoining the site, and the defendant must demolish and create a corridor of approximately one meter and fifty centimeters between the two properties. Without Costs.
It should be clear that the complainant does not have to demolish a wall, because the sentence is explicit by clarifying that they have to demolish the adjacent locale, always taking appropriate action because the ceiling of the room is used a wall of the house of the applicant. Lest by chance the property of the activist might also be demolished.
This legal battle has been going on for 45 years. The request for enforcement of judgment is dated June 30, 2011. From that moment 3 trials have been suspended by the absence of the directors of the ECAL and other unknown causes. The next citation is Sept. 27 at 10 a. m. and probably will be suspended by the most unlikely reason: Protection of breeding animals for profit, slippery keys, busy magistrates…
They are wasting their time if they believe that Ms. Dora Mesa will not go every day to the Municipal Court of Diez de Octubre to know how to start the execution of the judgment. They don’t know the power of filial love and the brave old man’s voice clamoring for justice.
Regardless of the excitement or otherwise of the case, the applicant can legally establish another lawsuit but cannot demolish the premises and request the restitution of his backyard. In short, if your family spends nearly half a century in these legal chores, should be awarded the missing part. As the Cuban sociologist Calviño would say: It’s worth the pain.
September 20 2011