At least four arrest warrants have been issued against participants in protests regarding construction work at Playa Las Cocinas—in Punta de Mita, within the municipality of Bahía de Banderas, Nayarit—amidst an ongoing legal and environmental conflict over a real estate development in the coastal zone.
The alleged offenses attributed to the activists—who consist of local fishermen, residents, and service providers—include making threats, property damage, glorification of crime, and criminal association. These charges were brought by Jorge Alberto Coeto Hernández and Cantiles de Mita S.A. de C.V., representatives of a subsidiary of Grupo DINE, the developer behind the tourist complex situated within the federal zone.
Attorney Luis Daniel Juárez, counsel for four of the protesters, confirmed to Aristegui Noticias that federal judges have issued notifications regarding the existence of these judicial warrants within the context of the amparo (constitutional protection) proceedings filed following the demonstrations.
“We were just notified a couple of hours ago that at least four protesters from Punta de Mita are subject to arrest warrants, facing charges for at least four different crimes each.”
As he explained, three of the legal appeals were assigned to a federal judge who set bail at 3,500 pesos for each of the petitioners, while a fourth case was assigned a bail amount of 8,000 pesos.
“It is certainly a heavy burden for them—ordinary residents and fishermen.”
The attorney maintained that the suspensions granted within the amparo proceedings prevent the protesters’ detention while the judicial processes unfold, given that the alleged crimes are not classified as “serious offenses” under Article 19 of the Constitution.
“The amparo protects them; even if their arrest is ordered during the proceedings, they cannot be detained because the charges do not constitute serious crimes,” he noted.
Furthermore, he questioned the speed with which the arrest warrants were issued.
“On the very day the events took place, the Public Prosecutor’s Office gathered sufficient evidence for a judge to issue arrest warrants—whereas, typically, a Public Prosecutor requires weeks to compile sufficient evidence for a standard criminal complaint,” he stated. Furthermore, he mentioned that on April 28, three individuals were detained under the presumption of in flagrante delicto (being caught in the act) for alleged property damage and making threats during a protest at the construction site; however, he noted that, at that very same time, a judge was already processing the new arrest warrants.
In this regard, he pointed out that the current arrest warrants were issued irregularly, as they were formally filed on May 27—a day when only a minor protest took place—yet were not executed due to public pressure; in other words, they were issued “solely for the act of protesting.”
News of these judicial orders has surfaced amidst the ongoing dispute regarding coastal protection and tourism development works at Playa Las Cocinas, where local residents and organizations have been staging protests for weeks over alleged environmental damage and potential irregularities concerning permits and authorizations.
Against this backdrop, on May 14, Grupo DINE issued a public statement asserting that its activities at Playa Las Cocinas “possess all applicable permits and authorizations issued by SEMARNAT,” and maintained that the construction works were authorized via official letter No. 138.01.03/4439/2025.
The company further affirmed that “the beach belongs to everyone, and will continue to do so,” denied causing any environmental harm, and assured the public that the construction is being carried out strictly within the boundaries of the federal concession granted to Cantiles de Mita S.A. de C.V.
However, on May 18, the Punta de Mita Committee for the Defense of Playa Las Cocinas issued a response stating that doubts persist regarding the environmental and legal scope of the project, and accused the company and authorities of a lack of transparency during the dialogue sessions held between the parties.
“Claiming that ‘the beach is open and belongs to everyone’ is not enough to guarantee that it is so in reality.”
The collective maintained that the community has not received sufficient information regarding the full scope of the construction works, and reiterated its demand that the structures be “set back 20 meters” in order to fully respect the Federal Maritime-Terrestrial Zone.
Source: aristeguinoticias
