The ICIM, accountability mechanism of the IDB and IDB Invest, on the occasion of increased reprisals towards applicants, has worked to improve the capacity of its team in dealing with these situations. Consequently, it has developed a series of Guidelines to address the risk of reprisals in the management of applications that will take effect in 2020.

“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 IDB and the IDB Invest have an accountability mechanism (IAMs), the Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism, better known as ICIM.

The accountability mechanisms have been created by the IFIs so that communities can file claims against possible damages that have been caused by the investments that banks make and, therefore, that are not complying with environmental, social standards and transparency according to which the institutions carry out their work. The characteristics of this type of mechanisms are adapted to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, specifically its pillar 3 of access to reparation mechanisms by victims.

However, it has been frequently observed that applicants who file complaints in the ICIM suffer from reprisals, manifested in various ways. This does not cease to endanger the life of the applicants, who in most cases are environmental and / or human rights defenders. In 2018, the mechanism observed an increase in cases where confidentiality is requested for fear of reprisals or acts of intimidation towards the communities in which the Bank-financed project is being developed.

For this reason, the ICIM developed the toolkit ‘Guide for IAMs on measures to address the risk of retaliation in claims management’. This guide aims to assess the level of risk that would involve the intervention of a mechanism and what are the ways to prevent, mitigate, reduce or address it. In both sections, the document provides tools to guide the mechanisms and their respective institutions on what steps should be taken to address these situations.

In Latin America, environmental and human rights defenders suffer constant violations of their rights. For this reason, and in order for financial institutions to become more aware of this problem, the mechanism met with the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. The central conclusion of this meeting was to ratify the centrality that human rights should occupy in financing for sustainable development. As a result, the ICIM, starting in 2020, will have the ‘Guidelines to address the risk of retaliation in the management of applications’.

The Guidelines have been created so that applicants, given the risk of reprisals before or after making a complaint before the mechanism, can effectively apply the MICI-IDB and MICI-IIC Policies. They constitute a tool to implement in regions or areas where there is simply the risk of retaliation.

The Guidelines will be used according to factors that create, increase or aggravate the risk of retaliation by applicants before the Mechanism; It is also intended to work with applicants to reduce and address the risk factors that are identified.

The guidelines document addresses the principles for case management where retaliation risk is detected. Some of these principles are:

  • Zero tolerance for retaliation,
  • Participatory and continuous risk assessment;
  • Action without damage;
    Honesty and transparency about the ICIM mandate on reprisals.

The guidelines should serve as a guide to train the entire work team in Retaliation Risk Management, disseminate the guidelines and provide training to other IDB Group units. In addition, it makes the document available for any institution to use, provided they do not alter its content.

Finally, the guidelines will have to be shared with applicants at the registration stage to analyze the existence of retaliation risk. If so, an ICIM team must prepare a Retaliation Risk Analysis (ARR). According to the level of risk identified in the analysis, the Mechanism team will develop a Joint Plan to reduce retaliation risk (PCRR) that may establish prevention or mitigation measures.

If these guidelines are applied correctly, it would mean an advance in the protection of environmental and human rights defenders, as well as communities, who make claims due to the negative social and environmental impacts of projects financed by international financial institutions.

More information

Author

Sofia Brocanelli

Contact

Gonzalo Roza, gon.roza@fundeps.org

The Governor of Mendoza, Rodolfo Suárez, endorsed the reform of the law that protects the water of his province, to end the ban on the use of cyanide and other toxic substances and to remove the need for the Environmental Impact Statement (DIA) For metal mining projects, it must be ratified by the provincial legislative body. This modification implies a setback in the levels of environmental protection.

“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”.

Law 7722 in force in the province of Mendoza began to take shape in 2005 when, in the face of the interest of mining companies to settle in the Uco Valley, residents began to inform themselves and mobilize in defense of water. The law was approved by the Mendoza legislature in 2007 and ratified by the Mendoza Supreme Court in 2015 before about ten requests for unconstitutionality filed by mining companies. This law does not prohibit mining, but prohibits in the territory of the province of Mendoza, the use of chemical substances such as cyanide, mercury, sulfuric acid, and other similar toxic substances in mining processes, in pursuit of water protection and of agriculture

The draft modification of the law of Governor Rodolfo Suárez, seeks to introduce changes in the essential articles of the law, proposes to eliminate the prohibition of the use of chemical substances –except for mercury- and toxic substances “in metal mining mining processes, prospecting, exploration, exploitation and / or industrialization of metal ores ”; on the other hand, it seeks to remove the need for the Declaration of Environmental Impact (DIA) for metal mining projects to have to be ratified by the provincial legislative body. It aims to promote large-scale metal mining activity in the province of Mendoza.

This modification not only violates the environment as an integral legal good, but also implies the violation of the principles that order the environmental microsystem, in particular the principles of irretroactivity and progressivity established in the General Environment Law (Law 25.675), meaning a setback in the levels of protection already existing in the province. To this must be added the lack of water suffered by the Mendoza area, attentive to the fact that it has a water emergency declaration for more than ten years. The right to water constitutes a basic human right, a fundamental public good for life and health insofar as it is a necessary condition for the enjoyment of other human rights. Thus, in protection of this human right, it is that law 7722 was enacted that today the Mendoza government intends to modify.

It is a primary duty of legislators to listen to citizens who have been mobilizing for years and expressing their rejection of this project during these days. As the Superior Court of Justice of Mendoza will express, the Mendoza decided by law 7722 the productive model they want to develop, it is the right of each society to decide, define and manage the way it adopts to progress. Given these circumstances, we express our concern and rejection of the attempt of the Government of the province to modify the current law.

Author

Maria Laura Carrizo

Contact

Juan Bautista Lopez, juanbautistalopez@fundeps.org

On a public consultation on the draft of the Profile of the Access to Information Policy of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), civil society organizations, including Fundeps, have made comments and recommendations to the Bank in order to generate one more policy effective and efficient.

With the assumption of the new president Alberto Fernández on December 10, and after recovering his category of Ministry the health area, the third update of the National Protocol for the comprehensive care of people entitled to health was published in the Official Gazette legal termination of pregnancy. Update that a little less than a month ago was vetoed by former President Mauricio Macri, after his own Secretary of Health Adolfo Rubinstein gave him momentum.

“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”.

After the comings and goings of the previous government regarding the publication and after the repeal of the update of said Protocol, the current Minister of Health Ginés González García, a day after taking office, held a press conference at Casa Rosada in which announced that the update of the Protocol would be published in the next few hours. So it was.

Through Resolution No. 1/2019 published on December 13, what González González García had already anticipated was reflected: this protocol is an imperative of the national health policy on sexual and reproductive health.

It is nothing more than a procedural guide to guarantee the rights already stipulated by law. It also provides support to professionals who must comply with it, due to the intimidation suffered in recent times by anti-rights groups.

The update of the Protocol has few variants with respect to the previous one, resolved by Secretary Adolfo Rubinstein. One of the most relevant is the flexibility regarding conscientious objection to ensure that it does not prevent the legal interruption of pregnancy. On this issue, González García said, “we are respectful of conscientious objection, but it cannot be an institutional cut so that the law is not fulfilled.”

It is important to highlight this issue, due to what happened this year in the Province of Tucumán with the Lucia case, in which health officials hindered the realization of the ILE, waiting at 7 months of gestation to perform a caesarean section against The will of the girl. All kinds of pressure was exerted against her and her family, in addition to the violation of her rights.

In this regard, the Minister also spoke, trusting the accession of the Provinces to the Protocol so that, in this way, the rights of those who can and wish to access an ILE, and professionals who have the duty to comply with the law.

It is important to highlight that the first Protocol was prepared in 2007 during the first administration of the current Minister, and then it was updated in 2010 and 2015, when the provisions made by the Supreme Court were incorporated in the FAL Judgment of 2012 .

On this occasion and in line with the recently repealed Protocol, the update was carried out in accordance with the new Civil and Commercial Code sanctioned in 2015, and with the latest recommendations made in this regard by the World Health Organization (WHO).

One of the relevant issues in this regard is that according to the Argentine Civil and Commercial Code, a pregnant person from 16 years of age is considered an adult. Therefore, your informed consent is sufficient when requesting the application of an ILE.

Main topics

Due to the short time elapsed between the update of the Protocol by Secretary Rubinstein and the current one, the central points continue to be basically the same, as explained by Fundeps before.

It is important to continue emphasizing that the Protocol aims to “guarantee the dignity and rights of every person capable of gestating and, therefore, potential subject to the right to ILE, when their life or health is in danger, or they are taking a pregnancy product of a violation, regardless of whether it is a person with or without a disability ”.

Therefore, its main points are:

  • Reaffirms the ILE as the right of women and pregnant people.
  • The consent is adapted to the new Civil and Commercial Code, respecting the progressive autonomy of children and adolescents and people with disabilities and capacity constraints.
  • According to the CCyC of the Nation, from the age of 16 the pregnant person is considered adult.
  • Between 13 and 16, you can autonomously request an ILE when it does not involve a serious risk to your health or life.
  • It recognizes the possibility of conscientious objection, but states that it cannot be an obstacle to access to the ILE.
  • It guarantees the speed. The deadline between the request of the ILE and its completion must not exceed 10 calendar days. If a doctor is a conscientious objector, he must refer one who is in less than 24 hours.
  • It gives security to health workers to carry out the practice.

The situation in the provinces

On this issue, the new Minister was also issued by saying that “in a federal country, much depends on the adhesion of the provinces. There are already many that are attached, but unfortunately some large provinces, such as Buenos Aires for example, did not approve the protocol. ”

Recall that in 2012, the FAL ruling urged the national State and the provinces to provide the necessary conditions to carry out legal interruptions of pregnancies quickly, easily and safely.

Until today, still 7 provinces unfortunately did not have their own regulations or adhere to the protocol of the Nation. Santiago del Estero, Tucumán, Corrientes, Mendoza, San Juan, Catamarca and Formosa, were part of this number.

The good news is that after the announcement of the Ministry of Health of the Nation, the Undersecretariat of Human Development of the province of Formosa, declared in a local environment that the province adheres to the Protocol since 2015 “always preserving the victim, point by which the adhesion in the province was not announced ”.

Beyond the reading that can be made of this statement, the important thing is that finally one more province pronounced itself publicly regarding its adherence.

The words of the Minister stating that “we do not believe that it is easy or that the protocol itself changes history, but we are willing to change history far beyond the protocol”, is a halo of hope that brings this new government, in The fact that the advancement of recognition of rights, the decriminalization of abortion and the legalization of voluntary termination of pregnancy no longer seem as distant or difficult to achieve, and we hope that they will soon be a reality.

Author

Valentina Montero

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

This Monday we present ourselves as “Friends of the court” in the case before the Court No. 7 of the province of Córdoba, by Dr. Susana Ottogalli de Aicardi, following the complaint of women victims and professionals in the area of primary health against the service of the Provincial Maternal and Neonatal Hospital Dr. Ramón Carrillo.

“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 Córdoba Public Interest Law Clinic (CLIP), with the support of the Catholic Civil Association for the Right to Decide and the Latin American Justice and Gender Team (ELA), denounced in early October the breach of Provincial Law No. 9344 of Surgical Contraception at the Maternal and Neonatal Hospital of Córdoba, for the systematic violation of the reproductive freedom of women users of the health system.

The presentation details the historical and systematic obstruction of access to tubal ligation, through institutional violence and different attacks on the dignity of women seeking access to the surgical contraception service.

In our brief, we bring to the Court relevant factual and legal grounds for the defense of the right to health and a life free of violence. Specifically, we prepare a brief updated summary of the recommendations, observations and pronouncements of international organizations that oversee the application of human rights treaties, which have constitutional hierarchy in our country.

The denial or obstruction of access to sexual and reproductive rights that involve life free of violence, non-discrimination of any kind, family planning, as well as access to health services and the information necessary to fully exercise them , constitute acts of violence, especially if they are exercised on women.

It is the duty of the State to guarantee women the full enjoyment of their rights and to prevent and punish those who do not facilitate or guarantee access to essential services to women, in conditions of security and accessibility.

It is essential that Justice be issued in favor of the effective realization of human rights, especially of the groups most historically violated and on issues of essential importance such as the right to health. The denial or obstruction of access to these rights constitutes a serious act of violence against women, which must cease immediately, by virtue of the international commitments assumed by our country, and in respect to human rights and our current legal system.

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

Within the framework of our work for access to sexual and reproductive rights from a public health perspective and respect for human rights, we request the National Administration of Medicines, Food and Medical Technology (ANMAT) to update its list of authorized medications in the country, according to the medicines that appear in the Model List of Essential Medicines of the World Health Organization. In addition, we ask that you create a national list of essential drugs for primary care.

“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 World Health Organization has a Model List of Essential Medicines (LMME), which consists of those medications that cover the population’s priority health care needs. Their selection is made according to the prevalence of diseases and their safety, efficacy and comparative cost-effectiveness.

Within the LMME of 2019 are certain medications, which are used for treatments in sexual and reproductive health, which are not in the National Vademecum of Medicines of Argentina. However, its incorporation is essential to guarantee the right to enjoy the highest possible level of physical and mental health, and the right to enjoy and benefit from scientific and technological advances.

Based on all the norms that protect these rights, locally and internationally, fundamentally the National Program of Sexual Health and Responsible Procreation, created by National Law No. 25.673, Law No. 26529 on Patient Rights, Law No. 26.743 of Gender Identity and the National Law No. 23.798 of AIDS, among others, we ask the Administration to incorporate, and guarantee the availability and access, of medicines for the treatment of the Legal Interruption of Pregnancy, treatments for HIV, medication for treatments of hormonal replacement, contraceptive methods and medications for the treatment of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs).

We also request that a national list of essential medicines for primary care be created, to follow, as far as possible, the guidelines established by the World Health Organization. The Special Rapporteur on the right of every person to enjoy the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, in his 2006 report, indicated that “every State has to prepare a national list of essential medicines using a participatory process. […] A State has the basic obligation of immediate effect to make essential medicines available and accessible throughout its jurisdiction”

We believe that it is necessary to have medications that, in their necessary and appropriate doses, are in accordance with our national and international regulatory framework, while being essential to guarantee the health of people who require these practices and services, in a safe and accessible to the entire population, without discrimination.

Contact

Mayca Balaguer, maycabalaguer@fundeps.org

On October 28, the Supreme Court of Justice of Entre Ríos, in the framework of an endless dispute between environmental groups, rural teachers and the Entre Rican government, issued a ruling validating provincial decree 2239/19, which establishes infamous distances of fumigation of the rural schools of said province.

“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 judicial dispute began when the Ecological Forum of Paraná (FEP) and the Entrepreneurship Association of Entre Ríos (AGMER) promoted an environmental protection action against the Superior Government of the Province of Entre Ríos and the General Council of Education ( in the cause called the Ecologist Forum “1”). Faced with this action, Chamber II, room II of Paraná, issued a ruling admitting amparo and forbidding ground spraying with pesticides within a radius of one thousand meters (1,000 meters) around all rural schools in the Province of Entre Ríos, and the aerial spraying with the same pesticides within a radius of three thousand meters (3,000 meters) around these educational establishments; all this, until it is determined by the specific state areas that identical preventive effects will be obtained for the health of students and staff who attend them with different distances ”. That ruling was then confirmed by the Superior Court of Justice.

Following this judicial record in the month of January of this year, the Entre Rican governor through a decree (No. 4407/2018), established an “exclusion zone” of pesticide application of one hundred (100) meters radius for the case of land applications and five hundred (500) meters for aerial applications, measured from the center of the hull of the rural school. This new decree, which markedly diminished the protective distances around rural schools, was again challenged by the Ecological Forum of Paraná and Agmer through judicial proceedings, requesting the annulment of the decree.

Such request is based on the fact that the State of Entre Ríos was obliged (by the previous sentence) to carry out necessary studies prior to establishing smaller distances, to guarantee the health of the students and the staff of the rural schools. From this action, the Third Chamber of the Second Chamber in Civil and Commercial, on March 28, 2019, resolved to annul the aforementioned decree, because the Province had not carried out the necessary studies, a resolution that it adopted in a similar sense the Superior Court of Justice of Entre Ríos on May 14 of this year.

Even with all these pronouncements against it, the Government of Entre Ríos, by decree No. 2239/19 (dated 08/01/2019), insisted on reducing the distances of application of agrochemicals around rural schools. On this occasion, it established exclusion distances in relation to the hulls of rural schools, 100 meters for land spraying and 500 meters for aerial spraying. Before this new decree, the NGOs Forum Ecologista de Paraná and Agmer again resorted to justice by filing a new environmental protection, but this time against this new decree, arguing that the first of the sentences already analyzed was affected again. Such action obtained a positive pronouncement from the Third Chamber of the Second Chamber of Civil and Commercial Appeals, which ruled in favor of the amparistas, which decided to dictate the decree in question, under similar arguments as those that were held before the first attempt of the entrerriano Government to limit the distances of protection.

Before this last resolution, again contrary to the interests of the Government of Entre Ríos, and of its intention to reduce the distances of application, he appealed the sentence, finally obtaining a sentence favorable to his interests, at the expense of the protection of the health of students, teachers and staff of rural schools. Thus, the Superior Court of Justice of Entre Ríos, on October 28, ended the judicial course, ruling the validity of the last of the decrees (No. 2239/19).

Its main rationale was that the provisions resolved in the first ruling were transitory and therefore did not have the effect of “res judicata” and that said transience ended with the issuance of this decree. However, and almost absurdly, it raises a ridiculous modification: the 100 meters of shelter for ground spraying and the 500 meters for aerial spraying should be measured, not from the center of the school helmet, but from a plant barrier to be implanted. 150 meters away.

This questionable pronouncement, put an end to the judicial question in the Entre Rican justice. The organizations that were part of the fight for health and environmental rights, chose to continue their way before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. Thus, it will be up to the highest judicial body in Argentina to resolve the conflict in rural Entrerrian schools, ending an issue that will undoubtedly affect all rural classrooms in the country.

The Executive Board of the IDB approved on November 4 the beginning of the process for the revision of its policy of access to information, whose last update was in 2011. This process will be open to virtual and face-to-face public consultation, and will be extended until May 2020.

“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”.

In 2018, the private sector investment arm of the Inter-American Development Bank, the IDB Invest, carried out an update of its access to information policy; in 2020, it will be the IDB’s turn, in charge of financing the public sector. According to the Bank, this update will be carried out in two phases of public consultations: the first one, started last November 13, will last 45 days and at the end a document called “Profile of Access to Information Policy” will be prepared. The second phase will have 120 days for review where comments on the consultations will be incorporated and a “Policy Draft” will be prepared. After the deadline, said document will be submitted for the consideration and approval of the Board of Directors scheduled for July 2020.

The consultations are open and free for anyone who wants to participate virtually by answering the questions presented by the IDB here or for an open participation by sending an email to consultapai@iadb.org

On the other hand, face-to-face participations will only be by invitation at the Bank Headquarters in Washington DC and for the second phase it is expected to hold meetings in borrowing member countries during the months of February and March 2020, but they have not yet been confirmed.

With respect to the Bank’s performance in terms of its policy of access to information and transparency, according to the index published annually by the Publish What You Fund called “Aid Transparency Index”, the IDB is in the highest category. However, it is evident that he has been in the same position since 2015, so there have been no improvements since that year. This is disturbing considering that in the period 2011-2015 the IDB climbed from the 14th position in the ranking to the 9th position, stalling in the 7th position from 2015 to the present.

It is considered that the last revision of the policy carried out by the Bank in 2011 resulted in the approval of a policy with high standards of access to information and transparency, although subsequently the implementation of said policy has not been effective. This new update in 2020 opens a door for the IDB not only to strengthen and improve the 2011 policy, but also to make progress in its better implementation. However, there is also a risk that the update will result in a weakening and / or dilution of current policy standards, something that the IDB should seek to avoid.

Taking into account the role played by International Financial Institutions such as the IDB in society and the impact generated by the projects they finance, it is essential that they have an updated, effective and accessible access to information policy according to the highest standards international in the matter; in a way that strengthens its transparency and institutional governance.

Thus, it is expected that this process of updating the IDB’s access to information policy will culminate successfully by actually incorporating the requests expressed in the public consultations so that such revision can increase the problems and good practices of the right to access information. , which not only constitutes a human right in itself; It is also essential to implement other rights.

From Fundeps, we invite you to participate in the process and we look forward to more information regarding face-to-face public consultations in Washington and the rest of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean; and we will actively participate in this update process seeking not only to avoid a dilution of the policy but, on the contrary, to promote its strengthening and improve its implementation.

The eighth annual United Nations Forum on Business and Human Rights in Geneva was held from November 25 to 27. The Forum was attended by representatives of the Member States, Civil Society Organizations and other interested actors.

“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 United Nations Annual Forum on Business and Human Rights is the global platform for evaluating and exchanging lessons learned about efforts to ensure that the UN Guiding Principles on business and human rights are not only theoretical, but applied in practice. More than 2000 people participate, including government, companies, community groups and civil society, law firms, UN agencies, academia, investors, media, among others.

The objective of the annual meetings of the Forum is to serve as an international platform where the actors involved evaluate and analyze the application of the UN Guiding Principles. In addition, it will seek to promote cooperation and dialogue regarding the issue of business and human rights. The meeting chairs the Working Group on Business and Human Rights.

This year, the forum focused on governments demonstrating progress, commitments and plans for the implementation of the State’s duty to protect and strengthen accountability. The agenda focused on what governments have to do in order to promote respect for human rights by companies and encourage them to develop responsible business behavior.

From Fundeps, the business and Human Rights agenda is transversal to all areas. Therefore, we monitor the results of the sessions and the annual Forums in the framework we work on the Guiding Principles and the binding treaty.

We demand it in the marches, the partisan companions asked for, it has been promoted for decades with laws and projects and yet not. Again a priority male cabinet. Again a non-representative and non-diverse cabinet.

After speculation, meetings, arrangements and negotiations, finally Alberto Fernández, the president-elect, announced the formation of his cabinet. The Vice Presidency of the Nation, a charge of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, joins the Office of the Chief of Staff, a charge of Santiago Cafiero, the General Secretariat of the Presidency headed by Julio Vitobello, Vilma Ibarra in the Technical and Legal Secretariat (the authorities of the Secretariats have the rank and hierarchy of Minister) Gustavo Beliz in the Secretariat of Strategic Affairs, Martín Guzmán in the Ministry of Economy, Martín Kulfas in the Ministry of Production, Felipe Solá in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Wado de Pedro in the Ministry of the Interior, Daniel Arroyo in the Ministry of Social Development, Eliana Gómez Alcorta in the Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity, Marcela Losardo in the Ministry of Justice, Ginés González García to the Ministry of Health, María Eugenia Bielsa to the Ministry of Territorial Development and Habitat, Gabriel Katopodis to the Ministry of Public Works, Agustín Rossi to the Ministry of Defense, Sabina Frede ric to the Ministry of Security, Claudio Moroni to the Ministry of Labor, Mario Meoni to the Ministry of Transportation, Nicolás Trotta to the Ministry of Education, Tristán Bauer to the Ministry of Culture, Roberto Salvarezza to the Ministry of Science and Technology, Matías Lammens to the Ministry of Sports, Juan Cabandié to the Ministry of Environment and Luis Basterra to the Ministry of Agriculture.

To these Ministries, the state company AYSA and the AFIP and PAMI organizations, headed by Malena Galmarini, Mercedes Marcó del Pont and Luana Volnovich, respectively, are added. In addition, Cecilia Todesca as Deputy Chief of Staff, Adriana Puiggrós as Deputy Minister of Education and Victoria Tolosa Paz in the Social Policy Council.

The photo of the brand new Pink house: Suit, tie, suit, tie, beard, mustache, shirt, handshake. What does that photo tell us that returns so much homogeneity, classism and androcentrism?

D´Alessandro, Vales and Snitcofsky, in an article published in 2017, “Overview of the glass dome in the State” state that: androcentrism?”

“There are more ministers called Juan than female ministers in the history of Argentina. Since 1983, there were only 16 women in this position in different governments, with 154 male ministers who succeeded each other. Nor is there a long history, the first was the first was Susana Ruiz Cerutti in 1989 and lasted only 45 days. Today, women are 31% of the total workers in the positions that make up the organic structure and authorities of the national executive branch, however, there are only 3 women in the 23 front-line positions (ministries, cabinet and chancery); that is, just 13%. In this layer there are also more graduates of the Cardenal Newman school than ministers. ”

This image of the outgoing government ministerial portfolio is a photo that is repeated. Far from parity, once again the political dynamics, relegate women to a few positions.

After the ministerial reorganization, the Cambiemos government left only 2 of the 11 ministries run by women. The new government shows a slight improvement as it increases the number of women in these positions to 5, but still, it is very far from parity: in total, women occupy 21.7% of the 23 positions with ministerial hierarchy of first line (counting the Headquarters of Cabinet).

In the case of the Legislative Power, the permanent struggle of women and dissidents became legal tools. Not without enormous resistance, criticism and violence, in 1991 Argentina sanctioned a Women’s Quota law – law 24.012 – which states that “lists submitted to elections must have women in a minimum of 30% of candidates for office choose and in proportions with the possibility of being elected ”. Today, about 30 years after its implementation, we recognize that the measure was positive. Discussion topics were expanded, key laws were passed and new rights were acquired in matters of identity, family, health and education. In 2017, the Chamber of Deputies of the Nation approved and converted into law the so-called gender parity for the integration of lists of legislative candidates in the national jurisdiction. Thus, as of 2019, the lists should place men and women in an interleaved and consecutive manner, achieving a 50% distribution for each gender. But in the case of the Executive Power, there is no regulation that requires expansion or parity in the formation of cabinets. The participation of trans bodies and dissent in the public-political sphere and in the key decision spaces are still pending challenges.

“In addition to these obstacles, and others where stereotypes and machismo play an important role, there is an underlying prejudice and it is that women do not reach high-level positions because they do not have the necessary education, experience and / or capacity . If we assume that the best or most qualified are always in the government leadership then we should ask ourselves why women are only 10% of the ministers we have had since 1983 to here. Women (…) are more than 40% of workers, have an average year of education more than their peers and are 60% of university students and graduates ”(D´Alessandro, Vales and Snitcofsky, 2017).

According to the UN Women in Politics map, as of January 2019, women have only 20.7% of ministerial positions worldwide, being the highest figure in history. Argentina today, manages to overcome this figure with a government that announces itself progressive, has equity as a priority and addresses specific issues that are fought from feminisms and dissent.

We are more, but there is still much to conquer

Those who militate diversity, rescue what has been achieved and continue fighting for spaces, laws and actions that are still to be achieved. Regarding the presidential cabinet, first, we look at those who access positions of power, questioning how and why they get there. When we see relatively homogeneous and masculine bodies, we only have to ask ourselves whether as a society and from politics we are doing enough to guarantee equal opportunities, more friendly spaces and other more open and inclusive ways of leading. Second, the glass ceilings and walls. Those hermetic power structures, continue to define what roles are assigned to whom based on the generic sex system. Women with some access to education can occupy spaces but only up to a certain point (in this case, be the second of, secretaries, vice-ministers and always advisors), and in certain work areas associated with an extension of care tasks and reproduction: habitat, equality, education or justice, among others.

Now we add a new ministry, the great campaign promise. The Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity. A whole team dedicated to work on these issues, something not less and appropriate to the demands of our times. However, the commitment to equality and equity must be reflected beyond a ministry. It requires a commitment to mainstreaming and not a mere name.

We want diversity to ensure effective representativeness. But the mere existence of women in positions does not guarantee the gender perspective: it is not enough only with the greater presence of female bodies, but with people who are aware and work to reduce the inequalities of power that cross us through issues of gender, sexuality , race, age and class.

The demand for diversity in ministerial positions and the gender perspective at the transversal level is not a whim. It is shown that the greater the diversity, the better decisions are made. We have seen how the gender perspective allows us to be aware of multiple oppressions and build fairer societies. We want to have leadership figures that represent us, who know about our vulnerabilities and build forms of governance that tear down walls and glass ceilings.

In a context where, according to official INDEC figures, women have a lower participation in the labor market (42% against 64% of men), a higher unemployment rate (8.4% against 6.9% of men) and we charge 74% of the salary a man charges for the same task, we will fight until we get a different photo, at the height of our times, at the height of our battles.

Returning to the words of Simone de Beauvoir: “Never forget that a political, economic or religious crisis will suffice for women’s rights to be questioned again. These rights are never taken for granted, you must remain vigilant all your life.

Authors

Paula Kantor and Emilia Pioletti.

Contact

Cecilia Bustos Moreschi, cecilia.bustos.moreschi@fundeps.org

The purpose of this document is to bring observations and comments made by civil society organizations to the rules of implementation of the IDB Access to Information Policy Invest.

This document aims to bring observations and comments to the draft of the new Environmental and Social Sustainability Policy of the IDB Invest. These observations are made with the objective of making visible conflicts and problematic problems in the IDB Invest.