Not long ago, I had the honor of participating in the first discussion on political violence against women based on gender (VPCMRG), organized within the framework of the 2021 Electoral Process by the National Electoral Institute (INE). In that election, it would be the first time that the INE would assume the constitutional responsibility of being the guarantor body of enforcing the principle of gender parity in the exercise of political and electoral rights, as well as respect for the human rights of women. Not without a certain blush, I confess that at that time I recognized myself as a non-feminist. Meaning by this that I am not an activist of the various current agendas of feminism, but I do assume feminism in its original sense, as a principle that seeks material and symbolic equality for women in opportunities and treatment.
In those months there was an atmosphere inside the INE, let me put it that way, festive and celebratory; this despite the fact that the high level of responsibility recently assumed meant a host of additional jobs for all staff and that there was not a single peso that had been budgeted for that purpose.
Pressured by the international progress of the gender equity agenda and with the determined push of the feminist groups in Mexico, our legislators had approved in May 2019 reforms to articles 2, 4, 35, 41, 52, 53, 56, 94 and 115 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, establishing the obligation to observe the principle of gender parity in the integration of the Powers of the Union. In the following 12 months, the federal Congress and those of the entities had to harmonize the secondary legislation. Thus, in November of that same year, the General Law on Electoral Crimes would be reformed, typifying, finally!, gender-based political violence as an electoral crime punishable by corporal punishment of up to seven years in prison. To operate this reform, known as a whole as #ParidadEnTodo, the General Law on Electoral Institutions and Procedures was reformed in April 2020, which assigned the INE the duty to ensure compliance with the principle of gender parity in political-electoral matters.
From April to the beginning of September of that year, a few frantic months were lived within the commissions of the General Council of the INE, since they had to analyze, discuss and approve in record time modifications to the internal regulations that would allow the reform to operate. The main changes implemented as a result were: 1) The creation of a special sanctioning procedure to deal expeditiously with VPCMRG cases, 2) The prohibition of political parties from nominating candidates with a history of gender-based political violence, in the immediate period above, and 3) The creation of the National Registry of Persons Sanctioned in Matters of VPCMRG.
But the claim of the feminist groups was not limited to inhibiting political violence, they demanded that, in general, the aggressors of women could not hold public office, much less one of popular election. To this end, the INE implemented the form three out of three against gender violence, by means of which those who aspire to compete for a candidacy must state that they have not been sentenced for family and/or domestic violence, sexual violence, or They are debtors of alimony.
It should be noted that during the 2020-2021 process, the Legislative Power, both at the federal and local levels, committed a legislative omission, since it did not enact the regulatory framework that would be applied to guarantee the principle of gender parity in the nomination of candidates for the governorships. The defense was put together through strategic litigation. If no one had denounced the offense caused by this legislative omission, we would now be telling a very different story. The complete chronicle of the litigation is told on his blog by the Magistrate of the Superior Chamber of the TEPJF, Felipe de la Mata Pizaña (case “Parity in governorships”), suffice now to point out that initially it was the INE who issued general criteria by which it was determined , among other things that, in relation to the 15 governorships to be renewed in 2021, each national political party should nominate at least seven women as candidates. The parties challenged the INE agreement before the Electoral Court alleging, rightly, that the INE exceeded its statutory powers and usurped functions that corresponded to the Legislative Power. For this reason, the Court revoked the INE agreement, but, making a guaranteeist and progressive interpretation of women’s political rights, “directly and obligatorily linked political parties so that in the 2021 electoral processes they establish mechanisms that allow women to nominate , according to a minimum standard in the application of candidacies”. He also linked the Legislative Power to do its task, but with the exception of the Congress of Hidalgo, nobody did it, and even in that entity the reform was published at the wrong time, so it is not in force. Given this scenario, the INE once again issued general criteria for the parties to nominate at least three women as candidates in the six entities that will renew their governorships in 2022. Given what happened last year, no party challenged and the agreement is subsisting. That yes, the Congresses, among them the one of Sinaloa, continue without legislating.
It was in this way that, after half a century of small conquests, equal treatment of women in the integration of all public powers and at all levels of government acquired constitutional status. The motto for the commemoration of March 8 established by the United Nations Organization for this 2022 takes on a specific value: “Gender equality today for a sustainable tomorrow”. But, it would be a mistake to think of feminism only as an anniversary, it is a moment for reflection on what has been achieved, but, above all, on what remains to be done.
ACHIEVEMENTS AND CHALLENGES on parity. Regarding access to positions, in 2021 women were elected in six of the 15 states where the governorship was in dispute. Regarding the composition of the LXV Legislature, for the first time in the political history of Mexico, the Chamber was integrated with 250 deputies and 250 deputies. While, of the 32 local Congresses, seven are integrated equally, in 14 legislatures there is a majority of women and in the remaining 11 the difference between men and women is one deputation (in 6 the majority are women and in 5, mens). The great challenge in terms of parity for women in access to positions is at the municipal level: although parity was achieved in the application for the equal integration of City Councils, currently only one in four municipalities in Mexico is headed by a woman. As it became clear, putting women on the ballot has not been enough to have more municipal presidents.
As regards the eradication of political violence against women based on gender, the challenge is still enormous. The fact that we have a robust regulatory framework in terms of combating the VPCMRG, what has been achieved in the first instance is that the violators refine their methods of aggression. In the first instance, the existence of the regulatory framework must be disseminated, which could be through the networks of women candidates and elected women who, as civil associations, are operating in almost the entire national territory. Regarding the delivery of justice, the great area of opportunity is in the 3 out of 3 format. The 2021 election showed that, although it was a good dissuasive intention of the administrative body to prevent aggressors from competing for public office, it is an instrument that is too weak in terms of its normative relevance and could easily be combated in the jurisdictional venue: in the face of a 3 out of 3 format falsified by the candidates, the INE/OPL does not have the power to assess the lack of compliance with the eligibility requirement “honest way of to live”. To date, it is only the jurisdictional authority in the sentence that can determine the loss of the honest way of living and the temporality of said sanction. It would be necessary to push for legislation on the matter and the INE/OPL to be empowered to assess this eligibility requirement both at the time of registration of the candidacy and at the end in the delivery of the proof of majority. Another edge of this same area of justice is that the women victims are denouncing the VPCMRG indistinctly through the trial for the protection of the political-electoral rights of the citizen (JDC) and the Special Sanctioning Procedure (PES) specifically designed in the law to combat the VPCMRG; If it is taken into account that the current regulations require that in order for a candidate to stop complying with the honest way of living, this must be assessed in the Court’s ruling that decides on the merits of the appeal, then the ideal means that women should be using to report should be the PES not the JDC.
On the other hand, the eligibility requirement of not having been sanctioned —in criminal proceedings— for gender violence only applies to candidates for senators and deputies, not for other popularly elected positions. It should be extended locally. Then, the procedural records that keep the data of the aggressors are not updated, so the INE/OPL has no way to systematically cross-check the names of the candidates with a database of these aggressors; the most the INE could do in 2021 was to verify a sample. It is urgent to establish agreements with the courts that provide truthful and timely information to the electoral body.
THE INVITATION It is so that on this day you can follow the National Forum with local jurisdictional and legislative electoral authorities on the INE’s social networks for the analysis of the results of the 2021 electoral process in terms of gender parity, VPCMRG and inclusion, from a prospective look towards the next local elections.
#Feminism #event