Senate Set to Vote on Inviolability of Private Property, but Questions Arise on Fire Management

Without the chapter that modified the Land Law, Patricia Bullrich achieved her goal: to resume the session in the Senate to continue the debate on the Inviolability of Private Property project, with the group of "the 44" seated in their benches. The ruling party aims to give preliminary approval to the project that includes changes to the civil and commercial code regarding evictions, the Fire Management Law (in doubt), and expropriations. As soon as the debate began, it was ruled out that Anabel Fernández Sagasti and Flavio Fama would participate in the session remotely, and the case of Benegas Lynch slipped in.

"I start by telling you who I am," said libertarian senator Joaquín Benegas Lynch, who found himself at the center of attention before the session, due to the revelation that he has a company that sells land to foreigners. For this reason, PJ senator Juliana Di Tullio had requested, prior to the session, that he be "disqualified" from voting on the project that included changes to the Land Law. Specifically, the modification involved an expansion of the limits on the sale of rural land in the hands of foreigners. The Buenos Aires senator argued that a conflict of interest arises since, clearly, the change would benefit his company.

Benegas Lynch pointed at Juliana Di Tullio.

As soon as the session began, the senator from Entre Ríos requested the floor to respond to the Peronist. He asserted that the changes to the Land Law are not the only regulations promoted by the ruling party that benefit the private sector, which he considers he represents. He cited Labor Modernization or RIGI as examples. "Does my bench have a conflict of interest or a very high level of representativeness? I stick with the latter," said the libertarian. He defended his right to vote.

Furthermore, he criticized the senator for making the request for him to abstain when it was already public that Chapter 3, which modifies the Land Law, would be withdrawn from the project due to lack of agreement. Before the debate, the senator, very close to President Javier Milei, had made his statement via Twitter.

I respond to some journalistic notes, which at the very least, have bad faith regarding my company and the land law. But this is part of coming from the private sector and getting into this political swamp.

On one hand, yes, I have an agricultural company. It is not any...
--- Joaquin Benegas Lynch (@joacobl75) August 5, 2026

Minutes earlier, in a conversation with this media outlet, the head of the bench, Patricia Bullrich, ruled out that the libertarian would abstain at the time of the vote, as Di Tullio requested. She asserted that he has been a businessman "for many years," as the senator himself stated. And she considered that a senator can only be disqualified when they do not meet the requirements to be a senator.

Senate: Internal Strife with Villarruel Slips In

Without the presence of Victoria Villarruel in the chamber, as she is at the head of the Executive, due to a move by Javier Milei to prevent the vice president from deciding in the event of a tie, the internal strife with Milei's faction slipped into the session. It was libertarian senator Emilia Orozco who requested a matter of privilege and that "Pato" Russo be removed from his position.

This concerns, no less, one of the main advisors to the vice president. The senator from Salta argued the request by accusing him of having threatened the pro-secretary of the LLA bloc, Cristian Larsen, who had to request security after receiving intimidating messages from Russo. In this way, the senator revived the internal conflict between Milei and Villarruel.{#p-1786038246646-76735}

Furthermore, before proceeding with the debate on the law, the request from senators Fernández Sagasti and Fama to hold remote sessions for health reasons was put to a vote. It was Bullrich who brought the issue to the table: she requested a vote to send it to the Constitutional Affairs Committee, and in a hand vote that passed without much fanfare, it was approved. Thus, neither the camporista nor the radical could participate in the debate.{#p-1786038389103-26124}

As a precaution, the Senate authorities had arranged the technical means so that, in case the senators' requests were granted, the conditions would be in place to speak and vote.{#p-1786042023730-75554}

This issue generated a new friction between Bullrich and Villarruel after the latter allowed the senators (ad referendum of the body) to participate virtually. For the libertarian, the vice president's move was "a mess" as she considered it a change in the regulations that should be addressed in committee.{#p-1786041194226-3027}

No Land Law {#p-1786037213292-37203}

After all the clashes, the debate on the law promoted by "the Colossus" was set in motion. This came after La Libertad Avanza suffered a serious setback in the legislative arena on Wednesday. On Wednesday afternoon, less than 24 hours before the session, and after a month of ups and downs, the head of the senator bloc agreed with allies to withdraw the chapter that modifies the Land Law.{#p-1785968389491-10153}

That chapter was, by all accounts, the most important part of the project promoted by the Minister of Deregulation. But, with that decision, the former minister avoided a defeat in the chamber that seemed irreversible. The reform to the Land Law has been suspended until further notice.{#p-1786038724027-33231}

Moreover, by withdrawing the chapter, Bullrich managed to maintain the "unity" of "the 44". Thus, the former minister refers to the group of her own and allied senators who usually support the government in votes. In fact, as soon as the debate began, all allied blocs were seen in the chamber.{#p-1786038833770-18796}

In addition to the UCR and the PRO, they said "present" even though a quorum was not required to resume the debate, including senators responding to the governments of Misiones, Tucumán, Neuquén, Chubut, and Salta. As well as the Santa Cruz senators from Movere, Cordoba's Alejandra Vigo, and Corrientes' Carlos Espínola.{#p-1786041600963-23422}

For all these reasons, as soon as the debate on the law began, the informing member, Agustín Coto, not only provided details of the project but also had to clarify that Chapter 3 of the law was being withdrawn. "In committees, officials were received and speakers participated, and there was a majority participation of people who disagreed. Therefore, there have been more than one modification and the withdrawal of the third chapter will be proposed," explained the Fuegino.{#p-1786044066749-42555}

Later, Coto explained that the spirit of the project "is to simplify and expedite processes, so that property owners are not punished for it, and to follow the spirit of Article 17 of the National Constitution: that private property is not violated".{#p-1786044209094-35319}

Changes to the Fire Management Law {#p-1785970940876-66848}

In the session, the ruling party will seek to approve what remains of the project on the Inviolability of Private Property. Changes to the Fire Management Law will be discussed, which specifically repeal the protection period (set at 60 years) in the event of fires in native or planted forests and natural areas, during which the modification of land use was prohibited, although restoration tasks on those lands are established.{#p-1785970524385-5176}

Additionally, the suppression of a section of Article 22 of Law 26.815 is proposed, which establishes that in burned lands in agricultural or pasture areas, real estate developments, agricultural activities, or modifications of land use are prohibited for 30 years. Thus, the goal is to reverse the reforms approved during Alberto Fernández's government to address intentional fires.{#p-1785959021940-46009}

Evictions {#p-1785970949579-24610}

Another point that will also have its moment will be the change to the civil and commercial code to expand the figure of evictions. The ruling party proposes that the possibility be enabled for "any party invoking a right or legitimate interest affected." "The judge may order the immediate delivery of the property if the invoked right is plausible," the text states.{#p-1785959070818-32034}

Bartolomé Abdala chaired the session.{#p-1786041818499-43815}

At the same time, up to 10 days are guaranteed to offer housing solutions in cases where the eviction involves "the presence of minors, persons with disabilities, or elderly adults in a state of helplessness."{#p-1785959088771-14686}

Expropriations {#p-1785970956688-78517}

In the chapter on expropriations, it is established that "public utility will be interpreted restrictively." Furthermore, compensation for lost profits is considered when it is "a direct and immediate consequence of the expropriation." Among other items, it sets the deadline for "abnormal temporary occupation" at a maximum of 90 days.{#p-1785959155271-50510}

Additionally, the Federal Council of Property Registries will be created to manage a Federal Real Estate Single Window to pay fees and receive reports, certificates, and copies issued by any property registry in the country.