They called off the prosecution of a woman who did not act as a tabular authority: she suffered from gender-based violence

The National Electoral Chamber has dropped the prosecution of a woman who apparently did not fulfill her role at the table in the 2021 national parliamentary elections because she could not justify her absence, she was prosecuted, but the chamber insisted The context of the gender-based violence the woman suffered was not analyzed in the case, with an attempted murder of the woman occurring in the same year.

“It cannot be emphasized that situations such as those raised in the proceedings oblige this court to carry out an analysis that will assess the conflict manifested in the process from the perspective of gender. For this reason, any interpretation that may mean analyzing the situation based on prejudices and stereotypes that place women at a level of inferiority must be abandoned,” Santiago Corcuera, Daniel Bejas and Alberto Dalla Vía in his resolution to which he agreed Infobae.

The court found the woman – whose personal details will be kept confidential – lacking merit and ordered a series of testing measures to confirm the situation she was going through.

The event took place in Neuquén in the national parliamentary elections of 14 November 2021, which were held with health measures due to the coronavirus pandemic. A woman was called as tabular authority at a school in Cutral Co. But she didn’t show up on election day and didn’t give a reason for her absence. Therefore, she was prosecuted for violating Section 132 of the National Electoral Act, which punishes six months to two years in prison for those who “stop going to places where they have to comply without a valid reason.”

The woman explained in her investigation that she went for a medical examination on the Friday before the election and was sent to study at a hospital in the city of Neuquén. He was traveling with the intention of returning on Saturday, but had not received a ticket and could only do so on Sunday evening. He stated that he tried to communicate to inform that he would not be able to be a table authority and was unsuccessful.

Electoral judge Neuquén rejected these arguments. He explained that it was indeed possible to verify that he had traveled on Friday and returned on Sunday, but there was no record of his treatment at the hospital in Neuquén or of a previous doctor’s recommendation. So it was understood that her absence was not justified and she was prosecuted.

The defense appealed, pointing out that there were reasons supporting her not to go. The case thus reached the National Electoral Chamber, which shared this criterion. Chambers pointed out that the first instance decision “neglected to take due account of the situation of gender-based violence” that the woman reported.

She also told the inquest that she had been subjected to violence by two ex-partners, one of whom had tried to kill her. She explained that she had experienced situations of violence, which she confirmed in medical records that showed blows to various parts of her body, and that she had a high-risk pregnancy when the election took place. She also indicated in court that she had no fixed address and that what she had experienced had kept her from going out alone because she was afraid.

“The situation presented by the accused cannot fail to take justice into account,” said the Electoral Chamber judges, who pointed out that as part of the investigation, criminal justice cases dealing with acts of gender-based violence and attempted femicide should have been sought and a socio-environmental study conducted.

“The mission of the judiciary is to decide on all the necessary means to achieve the protection of the rights of women in a state of vulnerability so that the situation of violence externalized by the accused in her role as a victim receives an adequate response. solve “said problem”they added.

“Violence against women in all its manifestations is no longer an intimate and hidden problem, but has become a state concern. From the position of the guarantor of women’s rights, he must use all possible means and his organs to prevent, eradicate and punish all acts that violate women, under the penalty of incurring international responsibility,” the chamberlains said in another point of his failure.

So they came to the conclusion that the cause “there is insufficient evidence to support” the charges and ordered that the case be returned to the first instance so that measures can be taken to verify the context of gender-based violence.