Justice and Equality cross counterproposals on the 'law of only yes is yes' but collide on how to raise the sentences

The Minister of Equality, Irene Montero, during the appearance of Pedro Sánchez in the Senate, on January 31. ZIPI (EFE)

Things had apparently started to change on Tuesday.

Both the socialist sector and that of Unidas Podemos lowered the tone of the public statements, which on Monday were very harsh.

In the Senate, where almost all the ministers spent the whole afternoon, there were huddles and discreet conversations.

The two sectors insisted on their willingness to negotiate.

But the PSOE was pressing: there is no time, the president decided on Monday, and thus he communicated to his closest team in the so-called matins meeting, that this matter must be resolved politically this week with the presentation of a bill in Congress.

If there is an agreement, it will be joint, PSOE-Unidas Podemos, and support will have to be sought.

It is something that does not seem very difficult.

Most groups assume that the law needs to be corrected,

That is plan A. But if there is no agreement this Thursday, the day it should be closed, according to the PSOE's calculations, it would go to plan B: the proposal would be presented alone.

And that is an unexplored road, which would put the coalition to the limit and would give the PP a key political asset, because the PSOE would need their votes to move it forward.

Nobody wants to get to this point, but the Socialists are determined to solve this problem now, which has generated great concern in society and the consequent wear and tear on the Government.

"We cannot continue with this open wound, we must close it now," says a member of the Executive.

In this context, on Tuesday night counterproposals began to move, first from Equality, then from Justice, in a frantic exchange of papers that predicted progress.

At some point the possibility of presenting the proposal this Wednesday was even raised.

Everything was ready in Congress to do it.

The sooner the better.

But the negotiation stalled again in the middle of the morning.

Equality proposes solutions to increase the penalties, something on which the two sectors of the Government already agree, but all of them include completely changing the scheme that Justice has proposed to solve the problem, which implies introducing violence, intimidation or annulment of the will as justification for a greater range of penalties.

In the case of the general type, which is from 1 to 4 years, it would go from 1 to 5 with violence.

In the case of penetration, with a general penalty of 4 to 12, it would go from 6 to 12 when there is violence.

And so on.

Equality insists that this formula, the only one that Justice sees viable to guarantee that there are no much lower sentences than before, would make the trials revolve around whether there was violence or if the victim resisted.

That is why they propose as a solution to increase the penalties that violence be placed as an aggravating circumstance, and not in the basic type.

They allege that by establishing two basic types of aggression, with or without violence, it is returning in some way to the previous scheme, with abuse and rape, and they believe that many judges will go to the lowest type or force women to go through Calvary. of having to justify violence and resistance to achieve high sentences.

Justice answers that this is not the case, that nothing changes in that sense and that in any case, also with the current law of the

Violence, intimidation or annulment of the will will always be an element of judgment and proof, because that is how criminal law works.

Justice is convinced that its modification, which it is willing to negotiate —in fact, there have been technical counterproposals to overcome the objections of Equality— does not imply at all distorting the law or a retreat for women, and simply has the effect of raising the penalties in the case of violence, the most serious, to avoid giving very low sentences, which is what can be deduced from the reviews that are taking place in the first three months of application of the law, more than 300 Equality insists that it will not accept two basic types under any circumstances with this link to violence.

And therein lies the crux of the deal.

02:42

Patxi López: "We hope to reach an agreement with our partners to present this modification of the law as soon as possible"

The PSOE spokesperson in Congress, Patxi López, during a press conference prior to the meeting of the Board of Spokespersons, in the Congress of Deputies, on January 31.

Photo: Eduardo Parra / Europa Press 01/31/2023 |

Video: Europa Press

While in private there is intense negotiation, the battle is also played out in public.

The general secretary of Podemos, Ione Belarra, raised the spirits in Ferraz and La Moncloa early in the day, stating that the PSOE's "legs have trembled due to the pressure of the political, judicial and media right" and that is why it has been seen “forced” to propose “some kind of reform”.

Belarra has also insisted that the reduction in sentences and release of sexual offenders is the result of "bad application of the law" by some judges "who continue to apply a macho and patriarchal look," as stated in

from RTVE.

"The problem is not in the law, it is in resistance to its correct application," Irene Montero reiterated at night, who, like Belarra, insisted that there is a conservative "offensive" against the sexual freedom law and has stressed that " the majority of judges are applying the legislation correctly”.

The Minister for Equality acknowledged that there is a "strong discrepancy" with the PSOE regarding consent: "My main objective is to protect consent as the center of the law and maintain that any sexual act without consent is sexual assault," she said.

"The harshness of the criticism is surprising with the absence of proposals," Montero concluded in an interview on Telecinco before the reproaches of leftist leaders such as Manuela Carmena.

The Socialists have prioritized reducing the tension with their partner and have avoided entering into a clash with Podemos.

"The PSOE has more than 140 years of history to achieve what it is also achieving with this Government: that Spain advances, that there are more and more rights, more freedoms, a better economy, more employment and less precariousness and temporality", claimed Félix Bolaños , the Minister of the Presidency, in the face of criticism from Podemos.

But the most notable movement was left by Yolanda Díaz, the second vice president and Minister of Labor, who distanced herself from Belarra's statements: “I am very respectful of all political groups and they will always find me in dialogue.

They will not hear another word from me in this regard and I am sure that we will reach an agreement.

Some Socialists interpret that the United We Can group could break up if the negotiation becomes very tense, but no one is betting on those scenarios that would be disastrous for the coalition in an election year.

The lack of agreement would place the government parties in a very difficult situation less than four months before the regional and municipal elections,

and it could also further crack the relationship between Podemos and the political project —to be defined— that Díaz wants to lead in the general elections.

"There is nothing more that I would like to see an agreement reached, I am going to try to take care of the progressive coalition, of which I feel very proud," the second vice president tried to relax.

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I'm already a subscriber