Córdoba: They propose restricting freedom of movement in response to the increase in insecurity

Provincial legislator Rodrigo Agrelo has introduced a bill that would allow streets to be closed in neighborhoods of Córdoba. The measure seeks to improve security through temporary closures, coordinated with the provincial police. The proposal is inspired by what was approved by the City Council of Villa Allende, where there were protests and strong resistance.

According to Agrelo, insecurity has turned neighborhood life into a nightmare, with criminals controlling streets and squares. He proposes temporary closures, authorized at specific times, to make crimes such as motorcycle snatching more difficult. "Drug trafficking is advancing in Córdoba, this is a palliative tool," argued the legislator.

Is closing streets the solution to insecurity?

The project stipulates that if 10% of residents request it, a registry will be enabled; if 40% oppose, the measure will be halted. Agrelo believes this safeguards dissent, and that the closures optimize the security that residents already pay for. However, it is warned that this undermines essential rights such as the free movement guaranteed by the Constitution.

A solution that solves nothing

The experience in Villa Allende showed that these blockades are neither easy to implement nor sustainable over time. There was significant resistance, and the mayor had to face complaints about poorly agreed-upon decisions. Agrelo himself admitted that a lasting solution requires criminal intelligence, not fences or padlocks.

The measure ends up affecting ordinary citizens more than criminals, who adapt their methods. The project shifts the burden of fighting crime to the people, while the provincial and municipal administrations continue spending funds on their massive bureaucratic structures. This is more of a desperate and disproportionate response to a real problem.

The next steps

Once the project is submitted to the legislature, its consideration will depend on the legislative agenda and the political interests of the groups that comprise it. The provincial ruling party, which holds a majority, will be key in determining whether the initiative moves forward or is shelved without debate. Leaders linked to Radicalism, PRO, Civic Coalition, or Civic Front have not commented on the matter so far.