Breathe
By Soledad Durazo
In an ideal world, laws would reflect society's most pressing needs and their implementation would be a testament to the government's commitment to fairness and equity. However, the reality is often bleaker, especially when it comes to legislation designed to protect women. The recent approvals -what we could call advances- of regulations such as the Vicaria Law, the Sabina Law and the Malena Law, are clear advances on paper, but their real impact is still questionable and overshadowed by apathy and politicization of their applications.
The Malena Law, named after María Elena Ríos Ortíz, a survivor of a brutal acid attack, typifies aggressions with chemical agents as a distinct type of violence, recognizing the devastating physical and psychological impact they have on victims. Meanwhile, the Vicaria Law seeks to protect the children of separated couples from being used as weapons in personal vendettas, usually by child support debtors. And the Sabina Law focuses on severely punishing acid attacks, a violence that leaves indelible scars not only on the skin, but also on the souls of survivors. These laws are steps towards justice in a society that is still dragging its feet in the fight against gender-based violence.
However, disinterest and lack of political will have slowed down the effectiveness of some laws. The National Registry of Alimony Debtors, approved last year, is a tangible example. Despite the fact that the legislation clearly establishes the creation of a public and accessible registry, the reality is that as of April 2024, this has not yet materialized. The promise of transparency remains just that, a promise, allowing debtors and violators to evade justice and, in many cases, even aspire to public office.
The recent statement of Bruno Taveira, alternate of Mario Riestra - PAN candidate for mayor of Puebla - illustrates this problem. By stating that the Vicaria Law "is unconstitutional because it is discriminatory, and I want to share something with you, the Chamber of Deputies developed an unconstitutional norm due to lack of knowledge, that is why it is very important to know how to elect our deputies", reveals a myopic vision that ignores the statistics and testimonies of thousands of women and children affected by vicarious violence. This type of rhetoric is not only dangerous, but underscores an alarming disconnect with the realities faced daily by women in Mexico.
Moreover, we cannot overlook the impact of these statements in the context of the upcoming elections. How could Riestra govern in Puebla in a fair and equitable manner when her campaign and political allies show such a blatant rejection of legislation critical to women's equality and safety? These questions are crucial as we approach the June 2 elections, in which Riestra will face Morena's Pepe Chedraui.
Electoral counselor Carla Humphrey has expressed significant concerns regarding the effectiveness of current legislation in protecting women from aggressors seeking public office. In a revealing interview with my fellow Opinion 51 columnist Nurit Martinez in El Sol de Mexico, Humphrey detailed how the constitutional reform known as the 3 of 3 law, published on May 29, 2023 in the Official Journal of the Federation, still allows alimony debtors, sexual aggressors or those who have committed domestic violence to appear on the ballot if the judgments against them predate the law's entry into force.
"We are not giving guarantees to any woman that her rapists will not be barred from running for elected office," Humphrey admitted, underscoring a legal vacuum that leaves victims vulnerable. She also criticized the approach taken by the National Electoral Institute (INE) in background checks of candidates. He recalled that in 2021, when INE first verified the presence of gender violence sentences among candidates, no specific period was established for this review, contravening the current rule that aims to be retroactive.
"It seems ridiculous to me that we are reviewing less than one year (...). I do not find where they establish a basis to review from May (2023) onwards. They talk about retroactivity, but we are talking about women's rights, that it has already been constitutionalized. There were already advances, this Institute last time it reviewed, we did not even set a date," Humphrey pointed out. This criticism points to a significant lack of coordination between legislative intent and practical implementation, leaving fertile ground for aggressors to evade justice and continue in the pursuit of unrestricted political influence.
It is imperative that these laws are not only enacted but also effectively implemented. Each state must adapt and implement these regulations in its regulations, institutions and, most importantly, in discourse and culture. Words carry weight, and it is time for legislative promises to be translated into concrete actions that reflect a genuine commitment to justice and equality.
We cannot allow political indifference to undermine the progress made in the fight against gender-based violence. Legislation must be a tool for change, not a palliative used to appease consciences. The time to take these laws seriously is now; not as a distant echo of justice, but as a clamor that resonates in every corner of the country, demanding respect, protection and equity.
The opinions expressed are the responsibility of the authors and are absolutely independent of the position and editorial line of the company. Opinion 51.
Comments ()