Canary Islands Official Summoned in Cuna del Alma Environmental Probe
A judge has summoned the Canary Islands’ Director General of Coasts to testify as a person under investigation regarding alleged environmental crimes and permit irregularities at the Cuna del Alma development in Adeje.
The judicial investigation into the "Cuna del Alma" development in El Puertito de Adeje has reached a critical stage. Magistrate Sandra Peraza, of Arona’s Court of Instruction Number 1, has summoned Antonio Acosta, the Canary Islands’ Director General of Coasts, to testify as a person under investigation. This is the first time a high-ranking regional official has been called to answer for potential environmental crimes and administrative irregularities regarding permits for the project’s coastal zone.
Acosta is scheduled to appear on September 14. His summons follows a request from the Santa Cruz de Tenerife Prosecutor’s Office, which argues that the authorization for private facilities—such as a beach club, restaurant, and solarium—violates the 1988 Coastal Law, which strictly limits development in protected coastal areas. Other key figures, including the head of the Eastern Coastal Planning Service and representatives from the developer, Segunda Casa Adeje SL, are also set to testify in August.
The case, which was reopened earlier this year, centers on a massive project spanning 430,000 square meters, intended to house over 4,400 tourist and residential units. In April, Magistrate Peraza ordered a temporary halt to construction on a 2,394-square-meter section of the site, ruling that the developer had failed to justify the need to build within the protected coastal easement.
The Canary Islands’ Ministry of Public Works maintains that it followed all legal and technical procedures and is cooperating with the investigation. Meanwhile, the developer, Segunda Casa Adeje SL, has downplayed the suspension, calling it a minor administrative issue and expressing confidence that work will eventually resume.
The Cuna del Alma project has faced significant public opposition from the start due to concerns over its impact on archaeological sites and protected wildlife. While the current regional government has previously backed the development, this criminal investigation—which includes allegations of prevarication, influence peddling, and document forgery—has cast new legal uncertainty over the project’s future. The court is now focused on determining whether the government overstepped its authority by allowing private construction in a protected environmental zone.