• Search
• Subscribe
• RSS

The owner of DC10 is in court facing a year in prison as the running battle over DC10 turns several shades nastier. Identified in the Diario de Ibiza only as D.L.M., the owner is in the dock for failing to obey a council order prohibiting him putting on music at the club (in the wake of alleged opening-hours infractions). In his defence, the owner claims he received notice of the municipal action but - according to standard practice - paid the maximum fine of €1500.00 and proceeded with two scheduled parties assuming he had "satisfied his responsibilities" and the complaint was closed.

Nothing, it seems, is ever quite closed in Ibiza. The events in contention date from a full year ago. The municipality of Sant Josep opened its file on DC10 on 28 September 2006 and is alleging the subsequent 2 October 2006 closing party and 1 January 2007's New Year's Day fiesta violated its ban.

It is the latest donnybrook in what's been a tough year for DC10. But even by island standards this is playing hardball. The penalty seems disproportionate to the crime. Even if D.L.M. knowingly and deliberately violated a council injunction (which seems doubtful) it is a harsh punishment for throwing two parties. It is hard to believe the threat of prison is serious - it looks more like another attention-grabbing move designed to paint DC10 in a bad light. Inside sources have said that one of Sant Josep mayor Josep Mari Ribas' campaign promises was to shut down DC10 - and the longer this saga rolls on more plausible that sounds. Certainly, the club has faced one legal battle after another and the negative publicity it has received boosts the government's efforts.

The breaking news that has tongues wagging is the simultaneous confirmation of the new "no after-hours" law banning all club openings between 6am and noon, and the news that there might be "minor adjustments" which would allow "an exception" to the rule. Of course the name being bandied about by some, as a possible exception, is Space. Among the unanswered questions fuelling this speculation is the issue of who exactly will decide what the "exceptions" are - and on what basis? Will it be open to a vote of local residents (on whose behalf this legislation was supposedly enacted)? Or will it be at the whim of the local councillors? Given the circumstances surrounding the DC10 case - where the owner is basically in court because the municipality has made an "exception" in not accepting that the fines he paid covered the infractions - it seems that this new law, like the old ones, may have plenty of space for interpretation. Which means room to manoeuvre for the right people.

For the moment, all is mere idle speculation. We can only watch and wait: but if the last nine months are anything to go by there will be a few more plot twists before this one plays out...