A judge asks that habitual non-payment of the pension is a crime


The feminist demonstration of 8-M 2019 in Barcelona, ​​on Passeig de Gràcia.

The feminist demonstration of 8-M 2019 in Barcelona, ​​on Passeig de Gràcia.
Ferran nadeu

The judge of the penalty number two in Mataró, Lucía Avilés Palacios, has remitted a reasoned statement to the Government of Pedro Sanchez for me to study include in the Penal Code economic violence as a form of gender or sexist violence, as well as the possibility of establishing civil liability clauses that “allow comprehensive reparation of the damage caused to the victims” when it occurs non-payment of alimony repeatedly.

This rationale arises from a case of non-payment of alimony in a divorce proceeding and in which the magistrate condemns a person to 11 months in prison for a crime of abandonment of the family (in the form of non-payment of pensions), in addition to the payment of compensation of 7,375 euros, corresponding to the periods of unpaid pensions between September 2014 and July 2019. In its judgment, the gown states that “the facts prosecuted also have a specific context of gender violence that cannot go unnoticed when making an assessment of the test ”.

It is a matter where the defendant has been convicted up to two times for crimes related to the procedure of violence against women. The magistrate describes that despite “this context of violence” and the existence of two minors, the family process was processed with the “patina” of a divorce by mutual agreement, which implies an “agreement of the will of both parties”. However, it specifies that “the trace of gender violence” determines an “asymmetric” situation between the parties that “questions the true negotiating possibility” that the woman could have when agreeing with her ex-partner a regulatory agreement, that ” he made “a context” invisible for the sole reason of being processed as a divorce by mutual agreement “.

Deprivation of the well-being of the woman or her children

For this reason, the judge raises in the sentence a reasoned exposition to the government. Thus, he analyzes what, in his opinion, economic violence means and in what situations and contexts it can occur. “It consists of the intentional and unjustified deprivation of resources for the physical or psychological well-being of a woman and / or their sons or daughters, in the repeated and unjustified non-payment of alimony stipulated in the event of separation or divorce, in the fact of hindering the provision of own or shared resources in the family or partner environment and in the appropriation illegitimate property of the woman ”.

The resolution maintains that economic violence is carried out by controlling women’s access to economic resources, decreasing their ability to support themselves, their children and their previous life habits, depending financially on the husband or ex-partner and “undermining their chances of escaping from the cycle of abuse. ”In his view, affects “both women and their children” and gives the father “this an instrument of power that leaves them at the mercy of their decisions.” It emphasizes that this type of violence has consequences “more serious than it might seem at first glance”, having a “strong impact on the mental health and the psychological well-being of women “, especially when they are victims of other forms of gender violence, and” can condition the well-being and emotional educational development “of the children.

This economic dependence on her aggressor ends up affecting the woman’s ability “to generate financial resources and acquire economic self-sufficiency”, for herself and for her children, “emphasizes the resolution. Not only that, but also” conditions on many occasions their decision to denounce. “This” economic violence “, explains the judge, can occur exclusively or in combination with other forms, as the “control” of bank accounts, the so-called economic “exploitation” of women who may be deprived of the availability of their salary or forced to work in the family business without the right to a salary and the so-called labor “sabotage” that slows down their employment expectations with the “imposition of care tasks and roles associated with the female sex and motherhood “. With the breakup of a couple, this situation can occur with the mortgage of the family home, other debts or alimony. The magistrate concludes: they are “an ideal instrument to continue to subdue and control women.”

.



Source link