SPECIAL DOSSIER: NUEVO SAN JUAN 535 Acres Under Dispute: Fifteen Years of Litigation, Court Rulings, and Administrative Actions in Los Cabos

SPECIAL DOSSIER: NUEVO SAN JUAN 535 Acres Under Dispute: Fifteen Years of Litigation, Court Rulings, and Administrative Actions in Los Cabos We thank bcscontralacorrupcion for the Videos : https://www.facebook.com/reel/1928019581169222 for their investigation. https://www.instagram.com/reels/DVHnq1xEs4u/ Introduction Just a few miles from Cabo Pulmo National Park—one of Mexico's most important marine ecosystems and a UNESCO World Heritage Site—a land dispute has remained unresolved for nearly two decades. What began as a private ownership controversy involving approximately 535 acres of rural land known as Nuevo San Juan, located within the Santiago Delegation of the Municipality of Los Cabos, eventually expanded to include criminal proceedings, civil litigation, judicial rulings, cadastral mapping, administrative subdivisions, and decisions issued by multiple departments of the Los Cabos Municipal Government. This report brings together public records, court decisions, newspaper publications, and administrative documents that make it possible to reconstruct the chronological development of the case. Its purpose is not to replace the role of the courts or to reach conclusions regarding individual liability, but rather to present the documented facts and the questions that remain unanswered. I. The Origin of the Dispute The dispute centers on approximately 535 acres of land known as Nuevo San Juan, located within the Santiago Delegation of the Municipality of Los Cabos. According to various documents, the controversy originated through a series of transactions in which Jesús Castro Fiol allegedly transferred rights to Max Gotting, who subsequently entered into a transaction with Juan Manuel López Portillo Figueroa and/or Juan Manuel López Portillo. From that point forward, disputes arose regarding the validity of the documents relied upon to establish ownership. II. The Criminal Complaint During 2009, the dispute expanded into the criminal arena. https://cabopulmoreef.blogspot.com/2011/02/detienen-por-presunto-despojo.html Several news outlets reported that Juan Manuel López Portillo Figueroa and/or Juan Manuel López Portillo was accused of the alleged crime of unlawful dispossession (despojo) in connection with land located in Nuevo San Juan. Official information released at that time indicated that the Criminal Court of First Instance issued an arrest warrant after determining that sufficient evidence existed within the criminal proceeding.

According to that investigation, the complainants argued that the land already belonged to owners who had established their rights through legal title and possession. It is important to note that the issuance of an arrest warrant and the existence of criminal proceedings do not, by themselves, constitute a criminal conviction. These events are referenced solely for historical and documentary purposes. III. What This Blog Published in 2011 This blog began publicly documenting this dispute fifteen years ago. On February 16, 2011, it published the article: "Businessman from the State of Mexico Arrested for Alleged Unlawful Dispossession." https://cabopulmoreef.blogspot.com/2011/02/detienen-por-presunto-despojo.html The article reproduced information originally published by Tribuna de Los Cabos, based on official statements issued by the then Office of the Attorney General of the State. The report stated that an arrest warrant had been executed against: Juan Manuel López Portillo Figueroa and/or Juan Manuel López Portillo for his alleged responsibility in the crime of unlawful dispossession. By that time, the dispute had already become a matter of public interest. Fifteen years later, the controversy continues.

IV. The Civil Judgment One of the central documents in the case file is Ordinary Civil Proceeding No. 744/2008. The final judgment was issued on October 5, 2012. According to that ruling, the deeds relied upon by Juan Manuel López Portillo were insufficient to establish ownership because they originated from voluntary jurisdiction proceedings that did not produce legal effects against third parties and lacked continuity in their chain of title. This constitutes one of the most significant legal precedents in the case. A subsequent installment of this investigation will examine the complete legal reasoning contained in that decision. V. Subsequent Administrative Actions Despite the existing judicial history, between 2021 and 2023 several departments of the Los Cabos Municipal Government approved administrative actions involving the same land area. These included: • Land subdivisions; • Creation of new cadastral parcel numbers; • Modifications to official cadastral maps; • Administrative registrations. These actions relied upon deeds connected to the same dispute that had previously been litigated before the courts. VI. The Overlapping Parcels The administrative documentation reviewed by https://www.facebook.com/reel/1928019581169222 reveals a particularly sensitive issue. Several official memoranda issued by municipal agencies expressly acknowledge the existence of: • overlapping parcels; • mapping conflicts; • cadastral inconsistencies; • coexistence of multiple cadastral parcel numbers. Some documents even conditioned their approvals upon respect for third-party property rights. Nevertheless, the existence of these conflicts did not prevent the continuation of various administrative proceedings.

VII. Urban Planning Another aspect deserving particular attention involves actions taken by the Municipal Department of Urban Planning. According to documentation publicly released by https://www.facebook.com/reel/1928019581169222, the department itself stated that notifications concerning approval of the subdivision were not provided to several neighboring property owners. If confirmed by the documentary record, this circumstance could be relevant in evaluating whether affected parties were afforded due process during the administrative proceedings. VIII. The Mapping Comparative maps presented by https://www.facebook.com/reel/1928019581169222 reveal significant differences between: • the historical cadastral maps; • the mapping used in recent administrative proceedings; • the parcel configurations resulting from the approved subdivisions. Several maps also depict overlaps between newly created parcels and previously existing properties. This report will include comparative images and official documents to facilitate understanding of these issues.

IX. Cabo Pulmo This case assumes greater significance because of its location. Nuevo San Juan lies near Cabo Pulmo National Park, one of the most important marine ecosystems in the Gulf of California. Accordingly, any dispute involving land ownership in this area may carry not only property-related consequences but also environmental and land-use planning implications. X. The Outstanding Questions The documentation reviewed by https://www.facebook.com/reel/1928019581169222 raises several questions that remain unanswered: • What legal basis supported the acceptance of certain deeds during subsequent administrative proceedings? • How were the previously existing judicial decisions taken into account? • Why were new cadastral parcel numbers created when multiple official documents acknowledged overlapping properties? • Were all potentially affected property owners properly notified? • What mechanisms did the Municipal Government employ to safeguard the rights of third parties? These are matters of public interest whose answers properly fall within the responsibility of the relevant public authorities.

XI. A Continuing Story Far from being resolved, the dispute involving the approximately 535 acres of Nuevo San Juan continues to generate new questions. Decisions made in recent years demonstrate that the case remains active and continues to evolve. This report represents the first installment of an ongoing documentary investigation that will continue incorporating court decisions, official records, maps, historical background, and institutional responses as additional information becomes available. Editorial Transparency This blog has publicly documented this dispute since 2011. The present investigation compiles information obtained from: • court case files; • civil judgments; • administrative records; • official cadastral mapping; • newspaper publications; • the blog's own historical archives. Whenever criminal proceedings, arrest warrants, or judicial decisions are referenced, they are discussed exclusively for journalistic and historical purposes, while fully respecting the presumption of innocence and clearly distinguishing between documented facts, procedural actions, and final judicial determinations.