A narrow win and a near-unanimous land chapter
Argentina's Chamber of Deputies approved the Inviolability of Private Property bill on Wednesday by 124 votes in favor, 119 against and six abstentions. Within the same initiative, the chapter that restores Law 26.737, sanctioned in 2011, drew near-unanimous support: 239 lawmakers backed it, four rejected it and six abstained. The government's retreat on foreign ownership of land was laid bare in the voting.[S1][S3][S5][S7]
Because the lower house altered the text the Senate had already approved, the initiative must go back to the upper chamber for review and final approval. The bill had stalled since August before the land chapter was folded into it.[S1][S2][S4][S6]
Who voted against and who abstained
Two Tucumán deputies aligned with Governor Osvaldo Jaldo, the Neuquén lawmaker Karina Maureira and the Salta deputy Pablo Outes voted against restoring the Land Law. The left-wing deputies, Mónica Frade of the Civic Coalition and Marcela Pagano, abstained. The ruling bloc secured only slim backing for the initiative promoted by Federico Sturzenegger.[S1]
Some deputies noted that had the six abstentions — five from Córdoba lawmakers and one from Álvaro González, aligned with Horacio Rodríguez Larreta — been cast as negative votes, the government could have been defeated.[S1]
How the debate shifted after two Supreme Court rulings
Opposition blocs traced the norm's recent path: the attempt to repeal it through Decree 70/23, its later judicial suspension, and the government's insistence on removing restrictions on rural land sales to foreigners through Sturzenegger's original bill. A large popular mobilization then forced Patricia Bullrich to withdraw that chapter during Senate consideration.[S1]
The discussion changed course again when the Supreme Court issued two rulings in the same week with opposing decisions on whether the Land Law remained in force. The first, which allowed land sales to foreigners, pushed the opposition to seek rejection of the mega-decree. In that context, the ruling bloc added the restoration of the norm to the private-property bill.[S1]
Understand this article deeper
Diego Giuliano of Unión por la Patria criticized the move as a return to the previous administration's law, referring to a norm sanctioned under Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. Paula Penacca attacked La Libertad Avanza's change of position, saying the bloc would now vote for a law that Javier Milei had tried to dismantle twice. Santiago Santurio, the report's presenting member, made no mention of the land chapter in his exposition.[S1]
Maximiliano Ferraro of the Civic Coalition said the original bill had sought to sweep away the land law, the socio-urban integration law for popular neighborhoods and the fire-management law, and argued that little remained of Sturzenegger's original proposal.[S1]
Expedited evictions and tighter expropriation rules
Among the provisions that survived are expedited evictions and changes to the expropriation regime. The text seeks to strengthen owners' guarantees and narrow the conditions under which the State may take private property.[S1]
On expropriations, it sets a more restrictive reading of public utility and requires the State to show that the measure is necessary, proportionate and the only suitable tool for the aim pursued. Property may not be taken until the full compensation, adjusted for inflation, has been paid, and lost profits are recognized when they can be proven.[S1]
On evictions, the bill aims to speed procedures so owners recover their properties. A judge may order restitution before the trial ends in cases of illegitimate occupation and, at the owner's request, may demand return within 72 hours if title is documented. For non-payment evictions, the demand must grant at least ten days. Notifications are streamlined and powers to execute removals widened.[S1]
The text keeps some safeguards for vulnerable people: the judge must involve the competent agencies and may allow up to ten days to find a temporary housing solution. Before filing a rent-arrears suit, an owner must first formally demand payment from the tenant.[S1]
