Key Facts
- ✓ A report by the Defensor del Pueblo alleged 'mala praxis' and 'vulneración de derechos' at La Robleda.
- ✓ The facility is located 15 kilometers from Santiago de Compostela and has public healthcare contracts.
- ✓ The Fiscalía closed its investigation without finding evidence of a crime.
- ✓ La Xunta's inspection found no irregularities at the center.
- ✓ The National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture stands by its original critical findings.
Quick Summary
The Defensor del Pueblo (Ombudsman) issued a report one year ago detailing serious allegations against the private psychiatric facility La Robleda. The report highlighted mala praxis and violations of patient rights. Following these allegations, both La Xunta and the Fiscalía launched investigations into the facility's operations.
Both institutions have now concluded that the facility is operating correctly. The public prosecutor found no evidence of criminal activity, and the regional government's inspection confirmed no irregularities. Despite this, the National Mechanism for Prevention of Torture maintains its original critical stance. The facility, owned by Hestia Alliance, continues to hold public healthcare contracts.
Report Details Allegations 📋
A report prepared by experts for the Defensor del Pueblo exposed numerous issues at the psychiatric center La Robleda. The facility is located approximately 15 kilometers from Santiago de Compostela and operates with public healthcare agreements.
The investigation identified specific practices that raised concerns regarding patient welfare and legal compliance. The findings suggested a pattern of treatment that potentially compromised patient dignity and autonomy.
The specific allegations included:
- Contenciones que se mantienen durante semanas (Restraints maintained for weeks)
- Fármacos con dosis fuera de ficha técnica (Drugs with doses outside the technical file)
- Aislamiento habitacional (Habitational isolation)
- Régimen disciplinario con castigos (Disciplinary regime with punishments)
The report characterized these actions as vulneración de derechos (violation of rights) and mala praxis (bad practice).
"se ratifica en las conclusiones de la visita"
— Mecanismo Nacional de Prevención de la Tortura
Institutional Responses and Validation
Following the release of the Defensor del Pueblo's report, La Xunta and the Fiscalía announced they would investigate the claims. The Fiscalía (public prosecutor) has since closed its proceedings, stating it did not appreciate any indicators of a crime.
Simultaneously, the Gobierno gallego (Galician Government) conducted its own inspection of the facility. The government asserts that its inspection did not find any irregularities. Consequently, both bodies have effectively validated the current functioning of the center.
The facility is owned by the Catalan company Hestia Alliance. Despite the initial controversy, the center maintains its status and contracts with the public health system.
Persistent Concerns
While official investigations have cleared La Robleda, the Mecanismo Nacional de Prevención de la Tortura (National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture) has reiterated its concerns. This unit, part of the Defensor del Pueblo responsible for ensuring that citizens deprived of liberty are not subjected to cruel or degrading treatment, has responded to inquiries regarding the case.
The Mechanism stated that it "se ratifica en las conclusiones de la visita" (ratifies the conclusions of the visit). This indicates a firm adherence to the initial findings of bad practice and rights violations, standing in opposition to the conclusions reached by the Fiscalía and La Xunta.
Conclusion
The situation surrounding La Robleda highlights a divergence between regional oversight bodies and the national prevention mechanism. While La Xunta and the Fiscalía have validated the facility's operations, the Defensor del Pueblo maintains its critical stance on the treatment protocols observed.
The facility, owned by Hestia Alliance, continues to operate with public healthcare agreements. The conflicting reports underscore the complexity of oversight in private healthcare facilities contracted by the state.
