# 8A is the corollary of a long road, full of achievements but also of obstacles. With 38 votes against, 31 in favor, 2 abstentions and 1 absence, the Chamber of Senators, reviewer of the bill of Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy, rejected the average sanction from Deputies after the marathon session of 13 and 14 of June.
More than 1 and a half million people populated the Plaza del Congreso in Buenos Aires and some 25,000 were in the vigil on the Yrigoyen diagonal of the city of Córdoba. The streets were filled with green once more: songs, hugs, emotions of a multitude of activists who waited expectantly for the result of the vote, but who were also there to give a message to the Senate: let it be law.
The project in question
Durante la última sesión del Plenario de las tres comisiones (Salud, Asuntos Constitucionales y Justicia y Asuntos Penales), los sectores a favor de la legalización buscaron que el proyecto modificado consiguiera la mayoría para obtener dictamen. Se trataba del proyecto que nació como “la opción Córdoba” propuesta por la senadora Laura Rodríguez Machado (PRO), y los senadores Ernesto Martínez (UCR) y Carlos Caserio (PJ). Esta propuesta luego fue respaldada por Miguel Pichetto y el Bloque del PJ, y se convirtió en la alternativa para juntar voluntades y evitar el rechazo total.
El proyecto con modificaciones proponía algunos cambios como bajar de 14 a 12 semanas, eliminar el delito que castigaba a médicos/as que se nieguen a practicar abortos, y dar lugar a la objeción de conciencia institucional para clínicas confesionales, entre otros. Este dictamen finalmente no logró la mayoría necesaria y la Cámara de Senadores/as trabajó con el proyecto de ley de IVE sin modificaciones, es decir, tal como había salido de la Cámara Baja.
En la previa a la votación, hubo varios indicios del resultado final por el rechazo total: al poroteo que ya sumaba 36 votos en contra se sumaron el cambio de voto de la senadora Larraburu días antes de la votación y la repentina definición por el rechazo del senador tucumano Alperovich. La Legislatura de Tucumán había decidido días antes declararse “Pro Vida”.
Las mujeres se siguen muriendo
On August 4, the death of Liliana Herrera was known in a hospital in Santiago del Estero, as a result of an intrauterine hemorrhage resulting from a clandestine abortion. He was 22 years old and had two daughters, 3 and 6 years old. However, this situation did not reverse the vote of the three senators from Santiago: the three votes were negative.
The day before the debate was announced another tragedy: a woman in Mendoza, mother of 5 children, is hospitalized with an induced coma after a 3-day haemorrhage for a clandestine abortion. Senator Pamela Verasay from Mendoza recalled them in her speech and said: “I ask all senators to open their hearts, women are dying. Do not speak for us, speak for future generations. ”
Even in a conjuncture that shows the public health problems that clandestine abortion represents, the rejection of the bill took precedence without proposing an alternative aimed at resolving the problem or the root causes of unwanted pregnancies.
A debate full of tensions
During the day several issues arose that attracted attention. On the one hand, alternative and self-managing means were not allowed to be present and to do journalistic coverage from the premises. Rejecting your accreditation in an arbitrary and clearly discriminatory manner is a serious act against freedom of expression. In the name of formal rigor, access was also denied to several deputies who, weeks before and as a result of their initiative, obtained the average sanction. The same happened with Nora Cortiñas, a reference for the struggle for Memory, Truth and Justice.
There were also moments of tension between the president of the Senate at the time of moderating the exhibitions. On the one hand, we tried to hurry the times of the discussion, arguing security issues that should be provided from the Ministry of Security. Being the responsibility of the Executive Branch to guarantee the conditions so that the debate can develop normally, the pressure for “hour” and “security” issues show the interference of this power in legislative matters. On the other hand, it was generally allowed to extend its expositions to people who spoke against the bill, while the opposite occurred with those who gave arguments in favor, emphasizing the rules of the debate, regardless of the party they belonged to. the exhibitors.
In the Middle Ages we do not return
Frente a exposiciones plagadas de argumentos falaces y vetustos que dejaron mucho que desear para un parlamento en el año 2018, la claridad y altura de los/as senadores/as comprometidos/as con los derechos de las mujeres fueron esperanzadoras, y sientan las bases para seguir argumentando a favor de la ampliación de derechos.
“With the law, abortions will be cared for, with pills and in health services. Without law, abortions will continue to be clandestine, surgical and risky “sentenced Chaqueña Senator María Inés Pilatti Vergara. And he closed with the reading of a letter from a Cordovan father to his feminist daughter: “I hope you are never at the crossroads of having to decide to have an abortion. I wish (you, all) never have to even think about it. But if by the vicissitudes or the damn turns of life you’re ever in that place and you decide to have an abortion, I’ll fight to have it in the hospital, taken care of, contained and embraced, with ultrasounds, controls and pills. ”
Senator Mirkin, the only legislator from Tucumán who voted in favor of the project, was also forceful in her presentation. “I was voted to legislate and the law is not stony, the law can be changed, it can be improved and thus improve the living conditions of the citizens,” he said.
The intervention of some men attracted attention. For his part, the senator from Chubut, Alfredo Luenzo, said that we are facing “a patriarchal society” and that “we are sexist in recovery.” “When a woman chooses not to be a mother in a difficult and very personal decision, there is no law, state, ethics, nothing to stop her, and we are witnessing that reality,” he concluded.
The Cordovan senator Ernesto Martinez was very clear about the separation that this debate should have of all religious dye. “This is the Argentine Criminal Code. It is neither the Bible, nor the Torah, nor the Koran, nor the Talmud … The fanatics confuse sin with crime “[…] The Penal Code that seeks to modify is the will of the secular legislator who watches over the common good that is not never owned by a single sector, “he said, after making an ironic reference to the words of Buenos Aires archbishop Mario Poli.
The last to speak was Senator Luis Naidenoff, from the province of Formosa, who presides over the Interbloque de Cambiemos. “Abortion is an unwanted situation. The punitive road failed miserably and deepened the underground. Every avoidable death, when the State can intervene, mobilizes us “established. And he concluded: “There is nothing more unworthy than to look to the side and do absolutely nothing […] Those we support know that the State must take charge. The rejection of the law is to look to the side.”
And now, how do we continue?
The rejection of the project is a parliamentary and political decision that does not delegitimize the gains of the feminist movement and especially that does not eliminate the 354,627 abortions that are performed per year, the 41 abortions per hour, nor the 43 women who died during 2017 product of clandestine abortions. By force of militancy, occupation of public space, legislative alliances, digital campaigns and committed journalism, the feminist movement managed to install itself in the national, regional and international agenda. The world echoed our demand and women from various countries, recorded accompaniment videos to the fight for abortion in Argentina, organized marches and rallies in parallel on Wednesday, August 8 in different parts of the world.
The debate about the legal interruption of pregnancy managed to cross the social fabric and break partisan, religious and interest barriers. The map of bridges between lawmakers of antagonistic party forces, meetings between deputies who had never spoken before, alliances and complicities between journalists, militants, employees of Congress, press advisors and each person involved , reevaluated the role of grassroots militancy and dialogue and consensus as useful tools for policy making. The micro-lobbying in each house, the chat with friends, the attempt to “convince” family members, the talks at the table, the circulation of messages in groups via WhatsApp show how the legislative architecture is being put together so that ” be law “be possible. And it is possible because we will continue fighting for it.
But yesterday this immense force failed to bring down one of the most installed powers in our country. One of the sectors that operated most forcefully in the final stretch, was (ron) the (s) Church (s). The conservative Catholic and evangelical sectors were those who put pressure on legislators, convened marches where the idea of God was central in their posters and invited speakers to talk to them who misinformed in the same line.
In this way, a theme that appeared as collateral and not planned, was the separation of the Church and the State. Parallel and in addition to the struggle for legal abortion, the struggle for a democratic debt was opening up: the true Lay State. The creation of a new handkerchief – this time in orange – as a symbol and the beginning of a new struggle that goes hand in hand with that of the freedom of our bodies, is taking shape.
Today and always, women will continue to abort because the separation of pleasure and reproduction is fundamental. Because motherhood is a choice and not an obligation or a state punishment made under threat of imprisonment or fear of death.
Today and always, women will continue to abort because we are owners of our future, our life plans and our bodies. Now, today, next year and always the women will continue fighting.
Clandestinas never again, the struggle continues.
Author:
Mayca Balaguer
Carolina Tamagnini
Emilia Pioletti
Contact:
Virginia Pedraza – vir.pedraza@fundeps.org
The fight continues: What # 8A left us
# 8A is the corollary of a long road, full of achievements but also of obstacles. With 38 votes against, 31 in favor, 2 abstentions and 1 absence, the Chamber of Senators, reviewer of the bill of Voluntary Interruption of Pregnancy, rejected the average sanction from Deputies after the marathon session of 13 and 14 of June.
More than 1 and a half million people populated the Plaza del Congreso in Buenos Aires and some 25,000 were in the vigil on the Yrigoyen diagonal of the city of Córdoba. The streets were filled with green once more: songs, hugs, emotions of a multitude of activists who waited expectantly for the result of the vote, but who were also there to give a message to the Senate: let it be law.
The project in question
Durante la última sesión del Plenario de las tres comisiones (Salud, Asuntos Constitucionales y Justicia y Asuntos Penales), los sectores a favor de la legalización buscaron que el proyecto modificado consiguiera la mayoría para obtener dictamen. Se trataba del proyecto que nació como “la opción Córdoba” propuesta por la senadora Laura Rodríguez Machado (PRO), y los senadores Ernesto Martínez (UCR) y Carlos Caserio (PJ). Esta propuesta luego fue respaldada por Miguel Pichetto y el Bloque del PJ, y se convirtió en la alternativa para juntar voluntades y evitar el rechazo total.
El proyecto con modificaciones proponía algunos cambios como bajar de 14 a 12 semanas, eliminar el delito que castigaba a médicos/as que se nieguen a practicar abortos, y dar lugar a la objeción de conciencia institucional para clínicas confesionales, entre otros. Este dictamen finalmente no logró la mayoría necesaria y la Cámara de Senadores/as trabajó con el proyecto de ley de IVE sin modificaciones, es decir, tal como había salido de la Cámara Baja.
En la previa a la votación, hubo varios indicios del resultado final por el rechazo total: al poroteo que ya sumaba 36 votos en contra se sumaron el cambio de voto de la senadora Larraburu días antes de la votación y la repentina definición por el rechazo del senador tucumano Alperovich. La Legislatura de Tucumán había decidido días antes declararse “Pro Vida”.
Las mujeres se siguen muriendo
On August 4, the death of Liliana Herrera was known in a hospital in Santiago del Estero, as a result of an intrauterine hemorrhage resulting from a clandestine abortion. He was 22 years old and had two daughters, 3 and 6 years old. However, this situation did not reverse the vote of the three senators from Santiago: the three votes were negative.
The day before the debate was announced another tragedy: a woman in Mendoza, mother of 5 children, is hospitalized with an induced coma after a 3-day haemorrhage for a clandestine abortion. Senator Pamela Verasay from Mendoza recalled them in her speech and said: “I ask all senators to open their hearts, women are dying. Do not speak for us, speak for future generations. ”
Even in a conjuncture that shows the public health problems that clandestine abortion represents, the rejection of the bill took precedence without proposing an alternative aimed at resolving the problem or the root causes of unwanted pregnancies.
A debate full of tensions
During the day several issues arose that attracted attention. On the one hand, alternative and self-managing means were not allowed to be present and to do journalistic coverage from the premises. Rejecting your accreditation in an arbitrary and clearly discriminatory manner is a serious act against freedom of expression. In the name of formal rigor, access was also denied to several deputies who, weeks before and as a result of their initiative, obtained the average sanction. The same happened with Nora Cortiñas, a reference for the struggle for Memory, Truth and Justice.
There were also moments of tension between the president of the Senate at the time of moderating the exhibitions. On the one hand, we tried to hurry the times of the discussion, arguing security issues that should be provided from the Ministry of Security. Being the responsibility of the Executive Branch to guarantee the conditions so that the debate can develop normally, the pressure for “hour” and “security” issues show the interference of this power in legislative matters. On the other hand, it was generally allowed to extend its expositions to people who spoke against the bill, while the opposite occurred with those who gave arguments in favor, emphasizing the rules of the debate, regardless of the party they belonged to. the exhibitors.
In the Middle Ages we do not return
Frente a exposiciones plagadas de argumentos falaces y vetustos que dejaron mucho que desear para un parlamento en el año 2018, la claridad y altura de los/as senadores/as comprometidos/as con los derechos de las mujeres fueron esperanzadoras, y sientan las bases para seguir argumentando a favor de la ampliación de derechos.
“With the law, abortions will be cared for, with pills and in health services. Without law, abortions will continue to be clandestine, surgical and risky “sentenced Chaqueña Senator María Inés Pilatti Vergara. And he closed with the reading of a letter from a Cordovan father to his feminist daughter: “I hope you are never at the crossroads of having to decide to have an abortion. I wish (you, all) never have to even think about it. But if by the vicissitudes or the damn turns of life you’re ever in that place and you decide to have an abortion, I’ll fight to have it in the hospital, taken care of, contained and embraced, with ultrasounds, controls and pills. ”
Senator Mirkin, the only legislator from Tucumán who voted in favor of the project, was also forceful in her presentation. “I was voted to legislate and the law is not stony, the law can be changed, it can be improved and thus improve the living conditions of the citizens,” he said.
The intervention of some men attracted attention. For his part, the senator from Chubut, Alfredo Luenzo, said that we are facing “a patriarchal society” and that “we are sexist in recovery.” “When a woman chooses not to be a mother in a difficult and very personal decision, there is no law, state, ethics, nothing to stop her, and we are witnessing that reality,” he concluded.
The Cordovan senator Ernesto Martinez was very clear about the separation that this debate should have of all religious dye. “This is the Argentine Criminal Code. It is neither the Bible, nor the Torah, nor the Koran, nor the Talmud … The fanatics confuse sin with crime “[…] The Penal Code that seeks to modify is the will of the secular legislator who watches over the common good that is not never owned by a single sector, “he said, after making an ironic reference to the words of Buenos Aires archbishop Mario Poli.
The last to speak was Senator Luis Naidenoff, from the province of Formosa, who presides over the Interbloque de Cambiemos. “Abortion is an unwanted situation. The punitive road failed miserably and deepened the underground. Every avoidable death, when the State can intervene, mobilizes us “established. And he concluded: “There is nothing more unworthy than to look to the side and do absolutely nothing […] Those we support know that the State must take charge. The rejection of the law is to look to the side.”
And now, how do we continue?
The rejection of the project is a parliamentary and political decision that does not delegitimize the gains of the feminist movement and especially that does not eliminate the 354,627 abortions that are performed per year, the 41 abortions per hour, nor the 43 women who died during 2017 product of clandestine abortions. By force of militancy, occupation of public space, legislative alliances, digital campaigns and committed journalism, the feminist movement managed to install itself in the national, regional and international agenda. The world echoed our demand and women from various countries, recorded accompaniment videos to the fight for abortion in Argentina, organized marches and rallies in parallel on Wednesday, August 8 in different parts of the world.
The debate about the legal interruption of pregnancy managed to cross the social fabric and break partisan, religious and interest barriers. The map of bridges between lawmakers of antagonistic party forces, meetings between deputies who had never spoken before, alliances and complicities between journalists, militants, employees of Congress, press advisors and each person involved , reevaluated the role of grassroots militancy and dialogue and consensus as useful tools for policy making. The micro-lobbying in each house, the chat with friends, the attempt to “convince” family members, the talks at the table, the circulation of messages in groups via WhatsApp show how the legislative architecture is being put together so that ” be law “be possible. And it is possible because we will continue fighting for it.
But yesterday this immense force failed to bring down one of the most installed powers in our country. One of the sectors that operated most forcefully in the final stretch, was (ron) the (s) Church (s). The conservative Catholic and evangelical sectors were those who put pressure on legislators, convened marches where the idea of God was central in their posters and invited speakers to talk to them who misinformed in the same line.
In this way, a theme that appeared as collateral and not planned, was the separation of the Church and the State. Parallel and in addition to the struggle for legal abortion, the struggle for a democratic debt was opening up: the true Lay State. The creation of a new handkerchief – this time in orange – as a symbol and the beginning of a new struggle that goes hand in hand with that of the freedom of our bodies, is taking shape.
Today and always, women will continue to abort because the separation of pleasure and reproduction is fundamental. Because motherhood is a choice and not an obligation or a state punishment made under threat of imprisonment or fear of death.
Today and always, women will continue to abort because we are owners of our future, our life plans and our bodies. Now, today, next year and always the women will continue fighting.
Clandestinas never again, the struggle continues.
Author:
Mayca Balaguer
Carolina Tamagnini
Emilia Pioletti
Contact:
Virginia Pedraza – vir.pedraza@fundeps.org
Comparative analysis of the regulations of IFIs present in Latin America
As a result of several investigations carried out by the Regional Group on Financing and Infrastructure (GREFI), the need to have a better understanding of the regulatory frameworks of the main International Financial Institutions (IFIs) present in Latin America has been detected, from a financial perspective. human rights.
Third parties interested: judicial presentation in defense of the public domain of Los Paredones stream
FUNDEPS together with a group of neighbors and members of the collective “Todos por Nuestros Arroyos” from the town of Alta Gracia, requested participation as third parties interested in the case “El Potrerillo de Larreta Country Club S.A. c. Province of Córdoba – Ordinary “.
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
The cause, begun in 2013, discusses the legitimacy of the placement of fences to a public stream, for the exclusive benefit of the country Potrerillo de Larreta, restricting free transit to third parties and the use of it by the entire community . Likewise, the true scope and meaning of the public domain character of the Los Paredones stream is in question.
In the ruling of first instance of November 2017, the judge of Alta Gracia Graciela Cerini had resolved “to dismiss the lawsuit filed by THE POTRERILLO DE LARRETA COUNTRY CLUB S.A. against the PROVINCE OF CÓRDOBA as soon as it intends to install wire fences over the Arroyo Los Paredones in the entrance and exit of its property, having to demarcate the limit along the shore line “.
However, it then determines that it does not matter to simply authorize the free entry to the watercourse, and orders a series of questions to the Province of Córdoba and the Municipality of Alta Gracia. First, to determine how the public use of the stream will be in the affected area. Secondly, to take the necessary control, security and protection measures to achieve the harmonization of the interests at stake, while maintaining the existing fences.
In December of last year, Potrerillo de Larreta appealed the decision, referring the case to the 9th Nomination Chamber of the city of Córdoba, where the parties must express the grievances caused by the first instance decision.
In the city of Alta Gracia, the neighbors have been defending and claiming their fundamental rights in different instances and since 2011 the collective “Todos por Nuestros Arroyos” has taken the post. Thus, it has developed numerous activities in favor of the recovery of the public spaces of the streams of Alta Gracia, including Chicamtoltina and its tributaries, Estancia Vieja, Los Paredones and Coacamilin, in this struggle in which owners and real estate ventures began. to wire the margins of different stretches of the streams.
Faced with the ambiguity of the ruling, the continuity of the fences over the stream and the passivity of the provincial and municipal authorities, the neighbors of Alta Gracia together with FUNDEPS decided to intervene in the trial in order to guarantee the respect of the rights of collective incidence over the individual rights wielded by the country and reject the legitimacy of the fences while violating, among others, the right to free transit and the use, enjoyment and use of public domain waters.
More information:
Vecinxs firmaron por el espacio público
Vecinos firmaron para que se quiten los alambre en el arroyo
Contact:
maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org
Media and gender organizations
We present the full report of the research “Media and gender organizations. Equal opportunities for women and LGTTBIQ + people in companies, unions and universities”, carried out by FUNDEPS and Comunicar Igualdad, with the support of the Heinrich Böll Foundation.
Senators: let it be law
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Given some expressions of the senators and the senator in front of this debate, in which they stated that they would adopt a different position, presenting their own project, many civil society organizations consider it important to present arguments to highlight the reasons why we understand that their vote should be in support of a bill, as approved by the lower house.
In the first place, this project is constitutional and respects the provisions of the International Treaties on Human Rights to which the Argentine State is bound. Neither the National Constitution nor the human rights treaties ratified by the Argentine State are an obstacle to the decriminalization and legalization of abortion, so it is possible to uphold the constitutionality and conventionality of the bill. In fact, these norms impose on the State obligations of respect, protection and guarantee of rights that are guaranteed in this project.
In addition, we argue that conscientious objection can not be institutional. The objection of individual conscience, as it is raised in the bill, is a reasonable solution based on freedom of conscience and religion. However, recognizing the claim of private institutions to exempt themselves from the provision of services for the interruption of pregnancy is unthinkable, taking into account the restrictions that the freedom of individual conscience of the professionals working in these establishments generates, the affectation of freedom and right to the health of the patients, and the costs and problems for the health system.
On the other hand, we present arguments to argue that the 14-week term is a reasonable term. Allowing the voluntary interruption of pregnancy up to this time does not imply risks and is in line with what is regulated by other countries that have been improving their regulatory frameworks.
It is also important to mention that the legalization of abortion does not matter a budgetary problem. The costs of a legal practice are much lower than the costs implied by complications from unsafe abortions that range from surgical interventions with hospitalization and anesthesia to several days in intensive care.
Finally, we consider that this bill of voluntary interruption of pregnancy is consistent with the totality of the current regulatory system and is the missing law in a remarkable list of regulations on human rights in our country.
But fundamentally, we highlight the broad support that this bill has in the province of Córdoba. A million people gather in front of Congress and thousands in the streets throughout the country. In Córdoba, capital and in numerous provincial towns, we find ourselves in a massive way in each pañuelazo, expressing our position.
It can not be denied that the sanction of this law is expected by the Cordoba’s people, the Argentine citizenship and the Latin American community.
The senators have the opportunity to turn this project into law, consolidate long-postponed human rights, meet the international standards in this matter to which the Argentine State is obliged and mark an advance in the protection of women’s rights. and pregnant people in our country.
The bill will allow us to advance in the construction of a more just, egalitarian and respectful society of human rights.
Senators: let it be law
More information
Publication: Senators: let it be law
Contact
Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org
Senators: let it be law
More than 30 organizations supported this document directed to the senators from the province of Córdoba, Laura Rodríguez Machado, Carlos Caserio and Ernesto Martínez. The document highlights the importance of their vote in favor of the abortion bill under discussion and that has already been approved by the Chamber of Deputies.
HLAC presented a report to the IACHR on HR and companies
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
The growing number of cases of human rights abuses and violations committed by companies has led to the treatment of the problem by the international community for some years now. In this context and within the framework of the inter-American system, the IACHR considered gathering information from different interested parties for the purpose of preparing a report that considers the regional reality, and that analyzes and systematizes the inter-American obligations and standards, in order to finally make recommendations on the matter.
Report presented by CLAS, a network that groups around 300 organizations in Latin America of which FUNDEPS is a part, focuses specifically on analyzing the link between companies and chronic noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).
Thus, first, the report provides information on the impact of these diseases in the region, with special mention to the involvement of vulnerable groups. Secondly, the power of influence of companies in the process of formulation of norms and public policies is analyzed, as an obstacle when adopting, executing and advancing in health policies to prevent and reduce the impact of chronic noncommunicable diseases. . In this regard, the cases of the tobacco industry, the food industry and the alcoholic beverage industry are cited as examples.
The document also warns that the current regulations and action plans sanctioned by governments focus on the prevention of the risk factors of these diseases, without including a more general perspective on human rights and companies. It observes that only some countries have made slight progress in this regard, despite the fact that international evidence shows that the most effective measures to reduce the consumption of unhealthy products are those that control the actions of the companies that manufacture and promote these products; especially in relation to marketing and promotion strategies.
Beyond the efforts of Latin American governments to move forward with legislation for the prevention of NCDs, the intervention of companies in the design and implementation of public policies, as well as the lobby of the industry, constitute a great obstacle to effective implementation of norms that prevent the population from the health consequences of consuming unhealthy products.
Currently, at the international level, there are non-binding instruments and mechanisms that aim to protect human rights from the irresponsible actions of companies. These include: the United Nations (UN) Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the OECD guidelines and the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights. Similarly, the work of the IACHR has focused on the search for the prevalence of fundamental rights against the power of corporations; and that is why this thematic report takes on a fundamental character. In this context, also, in the last three years, at the initiative of some States, it has begun to debate the possibility of having an international treaty that effectively forces companies to comply with and guarantee respect for human rights. We believe that an instrument with these characteristics would reinforce the existing regulations, while at the same time ending the abuses perpetrated.
More information
Report presented by CLAS
Contact
Agustina Mozzoni, <agustinamozzoni@fundeps.org>
Situation status of the “Villa Carlos Paz Environmental Center”
This publication presents an analysis of the Urban Solid Waste Management project implemented for the town of Villa Carlos Paz.
Bajo Grande and Jerónimo de la Gente: A prize that seeks to cover a problem of years?
On April 6, the award ‘Jerónimo de la Gente’ was presented in the city of Córdoba and it was the Civil Association ‘Las Omas’, who won the first place after the vote. The recognition seeks to distinguish a citizen, citizen, or grouping of citizenship; whose work in Córdoba seeks in some way to address social problems.
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
Las Omas, an organization established in the Chacras de la Merced neighborhood, since 2011 has been dedicated to the assistance of neighbors living in poverty and violence. At the same time, its president, Alida Weht, has been the one who has taken the bastion of the fight against pollution caused by the malfunction of the Sewage Treatment Plant of Córdoba.
The prize that Las Omas received is a distinction for their tireless work to improve the situation of women in the neighborhood, but little has been mentioned in the media about their immense work, to improve and protect the environment that surrounds them. Mayor Mestre has recognized Las Omas on the one hand, but on the other, he has not done anything to help them end the problems derived from pollution.
A few weeks ago, it became known that the Municipality of Córdoba admitted that the plant is not in perfect condition and that it is operating at 60%. Likewise, Daniel Bardagi, Director of Sanitary and Gas Networks, promised that in the next few days the plant would be fully operational.
This position of the Municipality collides directly with what is expressed by the employees who are working in the WWTP, and who have declared that the plant under no circumstances is able to operate at 100%. In addition, they have declared that the liquid that enters the station is not treated in any way and the conditions in which it enters are the same that it has when it is dumped into the Suquía River.
These comings and goings between the Municipality and employees of the plant, are not new and do nothing but dilate a situation that has long been unsustainable. The lack of responsibility of the municipal government and the desire to hide a reality that is visible so many years ago, has become a community of people who today are in a situation of extreme vulnerability.
Similarly, the problem of pollution is not only limited to the area of the city of Córdoba. It has been verified that the unloadings in crude have arrived at least and safely to Capilla de los Remedios. Moreover, the samples taken and evaluated by the National University of Córdoba (UNC) show that the bacteria and coliforms present in the water 36 km from Bajo Grande, are in practically the same amounts and concentration as when they leave plant. Also, there may be evidence that contamination has reached the mouth of the Primero River in the Laguna de Mar Chiquita.
Derived from this contamination, neighbors of Chacras must face every day a myriad of problems, most of which are related to health (skin, respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases). Similarly, the environment vitiated by the smell of cloacal water overturned raw, makes life more difficult in that place.
From the Municipality of Córdoba has been announced that in the coming days and weeks will be bidding three refurbishment works in the plant for almost 300 million pesos. These spare parts correspond to the failure of the mitigation plans assumed each year by the successive municipal administrations. According to Federico Kopta, of the Córdoba Environmental Forum, these spare parts and the expansion of the plant that is in progress will not be able to reverse or mitigate the current contamination situation, as long as the necessary controls on the sewage network are not carried out.
After years of claims, we have again asked the authorities to recognize the problem and take action on the matter. The situation of vulnerability that lives in the community located next to the purification station is, today, unsustainable and degrading. The Jerónimo de la Gente award, has managed to recognize the tireless work of Las Omas, but has not been able to cover a problem that they must face each and every one of their days. After this award, there should be a commitment of officials to families in that area and the environment of all inhabitants of the province of Cordoba.
Sources
Contact
María Pérez Alsina – mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org
Agustina Palencia – agustinapalencia@fundeps.org
We participate in the First Latin American Workshop on Litigation Strategies on Climate Change and Human Rights
From July 11 to 13, the First Latin American Workshop on Litigation Strategies on Climate Change and Human Rights was held in Bogotá, Colombia. The workshop was jointly organized by the Law, Justice and Society Studies Center (Dejusticia) and the Sabin Center on Climate Change Law at Columbia University.
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
The event brought together 21 activists and lawyers from Latin America who work on environmental issues and human rights with the purpose of training them on the new and innovative strategies of climate litigation in the world.
In this sense, the three main objectives of the workshop were:
– Analyze the theoretical and legal bases that have been used in different types of climate litigation in different parts of the world.
– Develop specific strategies that the participants can adapt to their own countries and organizations.
– Establish a collaborative network between activists and organizations interested in studying and promoting strategic litigation on climate change in the region.
During the workshop, various presentations were presented on the importance of climate justice, the types of existing climate litigation, legal principles and doctrines, legal precedents, climate litigation strategies, as well as the climate litigation challenges related to jurisdiction, attribution factor, causality, quantification of damages, among others.
Likewise, the new tendencies in the matter of climate litigation were presented, taking as initial kick-off the first guardianship on climate change and future generations of Latin America granted by the Supreme Court of Justice of Colombia to 25 boys, girls
and young people, supported by Dejusticia.
More information:
https://www.dejusticia.org/tutela-cambio-climatico-colombia/
http://climatecasechart.com/
Contacto:
María Pérez Alsina –mariaperezalsina@fundeps.org
Rejection of the Draft Law on Collective Proceedings
In 2016, “Justice 2020” program was created within the scope of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, by Germán Garavano. It is a space for institutional and citizen dialogue that seeks to build a close, modern, transparent and independent justice.
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
A commission formed by different experts within the framework of this program (within the civil axis and the team “Procedural changes for a better justice service”) worked on the drafting of a preliminary draft that regulates the process of the actions that are aimed at issues of collective affectation.
And is that our constitutional order provides for the existence of a collective procedural protection of rights of collective incidence since the 1994 reform, but no specific law was developed so far. So far, the provisions of the jurisprudence have been applied, fundamentally for what the Supreme Court established in the Halabi ruling of 2009, where it created a new procedural path for the protection of this type of rights, by accepting the figure for the first time of the “class action”.
In this ruling, the Court referred to the lack of regulation in the area of collective actions, characterizing it as a default of the legislator. However, this lack was replaced in practice by the Courts of the country, which have long been admitting the origin of these actions, and in respect of which it has been litigated (and is still litigated) without uniform and clear rules.
The preliminary draft that was presented in mid-May on the portal of the Justice 2020 Program arises, then, with the aim of giving uniformity and clarity to collective processes.
However, together with numerous social organizations, we express our concern for the content of this draft and we ask Minister Garavano to refrain from pushing the bill before the National Congress.
If successful, this project would limit collective actions and affect its operation. Collective actions are indispensable for the recognition and protection of fundamental human rights of a collective nature. A restrictive and delaying regulation of collective actions, such as the one that emerges from the draft, could hinder the advance of this type of claims, and would imply a serious setback in relation to the current situation.
Among the aspects that concern the preliminary draft, we highlight the following:
Interference in procedural matters: the regulation of local procedural matter is exclusively provincial competence.
Excessive rigor for the determination of “adequate representation”: the requirements are excessive, because they impose on the affected parties, organizations and their lawyers a series of extremely strict requirements that will mean a limit for the presentation of collective actions .
Limitation of precautionary measures: the draft regulates the issuance of precautionary measures in such a way that it frustrates its operation, since it foresees that the recipient will be transferred, detailed substantiation is required and the resolutions that deny them can not be appealed.
Ordinarization of collective processes
Establishment of long and cumbersome procedures for registration and consolidation of the class, including various secondary processes within the main process,
Restriction on the participation of third parties
Regulation of competition
Lack of gratuity
Express exemptions of procedural rules of a collective nature that have a higher level of protection of collective rights. Art. 54 of Law 24,240 (Consumer Defense Law); and the first paragraph of art. 32 of Law 26,675 (General Environmental Law), replacing them by more restrictive regulations.
We consider that this proposal for the regulation of collective actions implies a setback in relation to current regulations and practices to ensure access to justice for individuals and groups in vulnerable situations.
A process must be initiated to discuss the difficulties for access to justice faced by organizations and users of collective actions, so that future proposals for regulation effectively allow for greater use and effectiveness of these actions.
Complete communication of Civil Society Organizations
Contact
Mayca Balaguer, <maycabalaguer@fundeps.org>
Open Government: Argentina seeking to advance firmly
During the month of April, the Minister of Modernization, Andrés Ibarra, spoke at the Palacio San Martín on open government, ratifying the commitment of the Argentine State to policies that promote easy access to public management information for citizens. He did so to present the launch of the “OECD Study on Open Government in Argentina”, accompanied by the Deputy Secretary General of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Finnish Meri Kiviniemi, and the chief of advisers of the Ministry of Treasury, Guido Sandleris.
“Below, we offer a google translate version of the original article in Spanish. This translation may not be accurate but serves as a general presentation of the article. For more accurate information, please switch to the Spanish version of the website. In addition, feel free to directly contact in English the person mentioned at the bottom of this article with regards to this topic”.
The OECD study will be carried out throughout this year 2018 and is expected to be presented to the OECD Public Governance Committee in April 2019. This report will present two main objectives: first, to support the implementation of open government strategies and initiatives through an in-depth analysis of the current state of the national government’s reforms focused on promoting the application of these principles, both in the national and provincial public administration. As a second objective, it will try to accompany the Argentine provinces in the process of improving their open government strategies and initiatives, through a data-based approach and peer review. This review process will include visits to three provinces of the country, selected jointly by the OECD and the Argentine government.
The Open Government is a way to develop public policies in an open manner, with the objective of facilitating access to information, encouraging citizen participation and intensifying the system of accountability. It implies a modality of public management that is more transparent, participatory and that improves collaboration between the State, the Government and Civil Society. This movement had its origins in the Great Britain of the ’70s, as a movement that sought to dismantle the secrecy and bureaucratic obscurity that governed British politics. It is currently promoted at the international level by the so-called Open Government Alliance, a multilateral initiative that seeks to ensure specific commitments of governments to advance in the promotion of Open Government.
Argentina has a long history of relations with the OECD, adhering to multiple declarations and conventions of the Organization, as well as participating in official bodies and the Development Center of the OECD. However, it is not yet a Member and it is well known that the national government would like to be able to obtain the formal invitation of the Organization to become one, or at least maintain the best possible relations with its members, since it deals with the countries where a large part of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) comes from. Therefore, it is of great importance for the Government to undergo a study by the OECD and, above all, to produce good results that can improve its international image.
However, and beyond what the importance of this OECD study for the national government and the results it yields, it should be clarified that there is still much to be done in the path of open government in Argentina. Its effective application must be based on open and easy access to public information by civil society, but it must also contain adequate mechanisms to ensure that this civil society can participate and interact with decision-making based on this information. Last but not least, among the measures should be included those relevant to debureaucratization, which facilitate the exercise of the previous two.
Based on the provisions of the Third National Action Plan for the period 2017-2019 launched by the Ministry of Modernization and the commitments it proposes, it can be observed that from the Argentine State only progress has been made regarding the first characteristic of an open government, accessibility to information by the general public and not without problems, as detailed in the Open Government Partership portal in its section dedicated to Argentina.
It is also worth mentioning that the movements related to making effective and real the participation of civil society for the time being seem to have been limited to activities of the National Open Government Roundtable and other days and survey of demands: far from the effective establishment of institutional mechanisms that integrate to decision making. In terms of debureaucratization, progress has been made in the use of new technological tools and communication linked to the Internet to streamline procedures and consultations from society to the State, such as the implementation in 2016 of the Platform for Public Consultation. However, there are still several areas where the reduction of bureaucracy has not arrived, not to mention that it remains to be seen to what extent these tools are effective on the path to open government.
Clearly, considering all of the above, it can be affirmed that, in order to achieve transparent public policy decision-making, with citizen participation and accountability, many more advances must be made than before. Perhaps the announced OECD study opens a window for organizations, experts and society in general to make their voices heard and promote the necessary measures.
Author:
Agustín Fernandez Righi
Contact:
Agustina Palencia – agustinapalencia@fundeps.org