RIGHTS:
Spain Has New Law on Domestic Violence
Alicia Fraerman
MADRID, Dec 22 (IPS) - Europe's first law specifically cracking down on
gender-based violence was unanimously passed Wednesday in Spain, and
received a hearty welcome from activists, although it did not escape
criticism from the right.
The new law provides for the creation of special courts and integral
rehabilitation centres, improved assistance to victims, and a series of
procedures aimed at protecting women under threat.
Representatives of women's associations, whose work was praised by the
lawmakers, had a special place reserved for them in Congress Wednesday.
Enriqueta Chicano, president of the Federation of Progressive Women and one
of the activists who has fought the hardest against gender violence, told
IPS that the new law is "definitely positive."
But she warned that patience would be needed until the law could be fully
put into effect, because "this is not a miracle, but an instrument that we
have to know how to use, and want to use, in order for it to be effective."
The law is the final result of the first bill sent to parliament by the
government of socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero after he
took office on Apr. 17. By presenting the bill, he lived up to his campaign
pledge of making the fight against domestic violence a top priority.
After the vote in Congress, Zapatero said the law would be "a powerful
instrument to eradicate, once and for all, the domination that so many women
suffer." This is "a law of the women who have fought so hard and have
defended so many women," he added.
So far this year, 72 women have been killed in Spain, 69 of them at the
hands of their partners or ex-partners.
The latest available figures indicate that in the first half of 2004, 47,000
complaints were filed for domestic abuse, only two percent of which were
brought by men, according to the Observatory Against Domestic and Gender
Violence.
The bill, which was approved by the lower house in October, was then amended
by the Senate, and the final version was ratified by the lower house on
Wednesday.
Among the reforms included in the new law are guarantees of equal rights for
all victims, including economic aid regardless of the victim's age, and the
creation of a fund to help cover alimony and child support in the case of
separations and divorces.
The legislators of the right-wing Popular Party (PP), the main opposition
force, voted in favour of the new law, although the party argued that
protection from domestic violence should be made available to all victims,
not only women.
That stance has generated debate since the draft law was first introduced in
May, because both the PP and the General Council of the judicial branch are
opposed to legislation involving affirmative action, or positive
discrimination, in favour of women.
The law should not have focused specifically on violence against women, and
should not have taken into consideration the gender of the victims, they
argued.
However, that position was rejected in both houses of Congress.
Gregorio Peces-Barba, one of the seven drafters of Spain's constitution and
the president of the legislature that approved it, criticised the position
taken by the General Council, saying positive discrimination is necessary
because it guarantees that "the social vulnerability of the victims will be
addressed."
But sociology Professor Amando de Miguel came out against the new law,
saying it would aggravate the violence, and give rise to false charges of
abuse. "Denunciations of mistreatment will be used to obtain advantages in
cases of divorce or separation," he argued.
In one of the speeches given before Wednesday's final vote, Mercé Pigem, the
parliamentary spokeswoman for the Catalan national coalition Convergencia i
Unió, said she was voting for the new law.
She added, however, that domestic violence cannot be overcome by passing a
law, but only "when equality becomes a reality that is internalised by
everyone, and not, as is the case now, merely an ideal."
Chicano said that two recent examples show that social awareness on the
problem is not what it should be: the reduction of the sentence handed down
to a man who molested a disabled girl, and the release from prison of a
Muslim cleric who wrote a book that stated that men had a right to beat
their wives.
The imam of the mosque in the city of Fuengirola in southern Spain, Mohammed
Kamal Mostafa, was serving a prison sentence for providing advice for men on
how to beat their wives without leaving marks, in his book "Women in Islam".
The imam wrote that the blows should be concentrated on the hands and feet,
and should not be administered with "too thick a rod so as not to leave
scars", and "shouldn't be too strong or too hard, because the aim is to
cause psychological suffering."
Furthermore, sensitive parts of the body, such as the face, head, breasts or
stomach, should not be hit, Mostafa added.
But the sentence was overturned on appeal on Tuesday in Barcelona, and the
imam was freed on the condition that he attend a course on constitutional
freedoms and human rights.
Chicano described the ruling as "an extremely serious step backwards,
because (Mostafa's) attitude is taken as normal, and because the decision
indicates that a crime can be paid for by taking a course."
Criticism of the ruling also came from the ranks of the government.
Vice-President María Teresa Fernández de la Vega said Mostafa's release
"sets a bad example, and is an absurd" move that "does not contribute in the
least to reinforcing the idea of zero tolerance that has been adopted by
Spanish society."
The government's secretary of equality, María Isabel Montaño, stressed that
the legal decision "left the perception that crimes against women can go
unpunished."
The Supreme Court, meanwhile, slashed the prison sentence handed down to a
man who pressed a 13-year-old disabled girl against a wall, "kissing her on
the mouth, introducing his tongue, and fondling her breasts and vagina
through her clothes," according to the original ruling.
During the 10-minute attack, he tried to rape her, until the girl, who was
screaming, "was able to escape and run off, crying," the decision adds.
But the Supreme Court cut the sentence from seven to two years and nine
months on the argument that the case was one of "abuse" rather than "sexual
aggression", because neither violence nor intimidation was supposedly
involved.
(END/2004)
Send your comments to the editor
|
