Spanish Gender Stalinism – Part I

Over two months ago, I wrote a comprehensive story about the Gender Stalinist regime instituted in Spain, following the election of José Louis Zapatero (Partido Socialista Obrero Español – The Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party) as prime minister and the enactment of the Law nr. 1/2004, also known as Ley Contra la Violencia de Género (Organic Act of Integrated Protection Measures against Gender Violence).

Last Friday, on the Voice of Europe Radio program, we had Antonia Carrasco as our guest[1]. She is the president of Asociación de Víctimas de la Ley de Violencia de Género Madrid (The Association of the Victims of the Gender Violence Law – Madrid) and what she had to say about the long years of the Gender Law makes the term “Gender Stalinism” seem rather mild and incomplete when it comes to describing the brutal misandric tyranny that this Law has furthered.

So now, for the first time in the English language, we will be publishing a comprehensive report about what happened in Spain between 2004 and 2012, a report issued by the aforementioned association alongside with another association called Feminist Association for Equality (FEMII). The report is lengthy and we will publish it in a two part article.

Part 1

 

ANALYSIS OF THE FIRST 8-YEARS OF THE

SPANISH LAW OF “GENDER VIOLENCE”

2004 – 2012

Antonia M. Carrasco, President GenMad (Asociación de Víctimas de la Ley de Violencia de Género Madrid and Marisa Culebras, President Feminist Association for Equality (FEMII)

January 2013

 

This past December marked the eighth anniversary of the implementation of Spain’s rather infamous Law 1/2004, a law that aimed to “guarantee integrated protection measures against Gender Violence”.

The General Council of Judicial Power (CGPJ) has now published the official statistics for this period, allowing an in-depth analysis of the legal effects of the law in regards to: a) women, as beneficiaries of the law, b) men, as subjects of the law, and c) police forces: responsible for implementing the law and its policies.

Due to the widespread controversy created in Spanish society by the adoption of the law, during these eight years many groups have been formed in its support, yet equally, many others arose to questioned it’s very legality, many of which have been formed by citizens directly affected by the law itself.  It is undeniable that this topic has been one of the most hotly debated issues due to the intense interest it has generated amongst members of various professional institutions, equally as much as in the associations of affected citizens and general detractors of the law of “Gender Violence”.

Questionable Constitutionality

In our opinion, the law of “Gender Violence”, that is to say a law defined as violence against women originating exclusively from male partners, is in itself, unconstitutional and should never have been approved. The pre-approval reports issued ​​by the General Council of the Judiciary, the State Council and the Attorney General, were extremely negative and warned of serious legal and constitutional consequences.  The question we ask ourselves is why was it approved despite the negative reports issued by important advisory bodies?

This law is fundamentally sexist (protecting only female partners), legally asymmetric and unidirectional. The law interprets lesser acts of violence committed by a woman against a man as a misdemeanor, whereas if the perpetrator is a man, it is interpreted as a crime. It also disregards the right that a Spanish citizen may not suffer discrimination on the grounds of sex. But what is most alarming is that the constitutional principle of presumption of innocence becomes, in the case of a man, a presumption of guilt, reversing the burden of proof, forcing the accused to prove his innocence beyond doubt, directly violating several international laws ratified by Spain, which guarantee the presumption of innocence, as for example, article 14.2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 6.2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

After the board of Spain´s Constitutional Court had been “reorganized” by the past government, it declared the law of “Gender Violence” constitutional by just one vote, basing the judgment on the fact that the perpetrators of the majority of domestic violence are overwhelmingly male, and as such allowing the imposition of heavier penalties against men. Following this reasoning, as a renowned jurist mentioned at the time, given that the majority of the prison population is foreign, the legislature could just as well amend the Criminal Code to set a higher penalty on crimes committed by foreigners, as opposed to those committed by nationals!

With the law in vigor, numerous Spanish feminist associations began to make recommendations to women seeking assistance that instead of going to a family therapist – that existed for the very purpose – that they applied to a court of “gender violence” to resolve their marital or family issues. There are sites such as www.infomaltrato.com, where they recommend making a complaint to the police for numerous types of issues.

Obviously, there are many instances that relate to serious abuse, thus reporting the matter and requesting protection measures are reasonable, but a substantial number of cases have been based on trivial complaints, such as not letting the female partner watch a certain TV program, or not letting them finish a crossword, or even criticizing the partners clothes.

If we visit this site and read all the cases in which the recommendation is to make a police report, almost all men should be reported for abuse, as it is difficult if not impossible for a couple to never suffer one of these type of minor squabbles at some moment during their relationship.

Apart from these issues, economic motivations have been created in which a woman becomes automatically entitled with just simple certificate of “bad treatment” issued by a women’s association (and without even a court judgment), to receive aid of several thousand euros or more having reported their male partner.  The complaint only has to be within any of the many cases defined in this link.

Once a female partner has filed a complaint, the steps that the police and Women’s Court can take are often emotionally scarring for many of the men involved.  Without trial, and often without evidence or any sign of physical violence, men of all positions are often arrested by police, even at their place of work, and taken into custody. Sometimes this is done on a Friday, with the result that the man may have to spend the entire weekend in a cell if he does not “fully cooperate”.  Judges at the Women’s Courts usually give an immediate “distance order”, which can result in the man being unable to attend his work if his partner is also working at the same location.

Obviously there are no statistics about collateral victims, but we cannot forget that behind every unfairly accused man, there are family, friends and many others that can be affected watching the suffering caused by an ordeal of this nature that may last years until they are finally acquitted.

In the accompanying article from 2009, a judge of a Madrid Court for “Gender Violence” stated that in 2007 he handled some 5000 cases, and that with such a saturation of cases for all types of petty complaints, many real cases of domestic violence were left unprotected having devoted resources to those that in reality needed little more than family counseling, which is the case in the vast majority of allegations, as shown below.

This same judge, exhausted from all the cases, freed a man in error, who had been imprisoned temporarily for gender violence, who later broke a restraining order for assault, breaking into the home of his former partner with a 12-gauge shotgun and, after physically and sexually assaulting her, held a 6 hour siege at her home with shotgun in hand, tying up a police negotiator team in the process.

In domestic violence, as it is called in Europe, or gender violence in Spain (which excludes violence against male, homosexual partners, or children), Spain is the only country in the European Union and developed countries, where the law differentiates between men and women in the same crime or misdemeanor, and the only country in which Courts exist dedicate to the exclusive prosecution of men; with 106 “Gender Violence” Courts in total.

Actual statistics:  In the seven years since the law was implemented, the Women’s Courts have processed 963,471 criminal cases against men, of which just 10% (101,900) related to cases where signs of violence could be seen.  A total of 520,839 sentences where handed down against men where no physical signs of violence could be found, and where in many cases, the only evidence was that of the ex partner.

Of nearly one million cases against men, just 33,473 related to serious violence.

IS EVERY CASE MACHO-BASED VIOLENCE?

In most European countries the cause of domestic aggression is investigated and fully reported. In Spain, this has not been the case: the Spanish judiciary have assumed that all aggression against women has a sexist basis. For example, when it comes to aggression caused by jealousy following infidelity, if the aggressor is male, it is automatically considered “macho” violence, or “violencia de género”, exclusively from male perpetrators aimed at women for being women.

However, when the aggressor is a jealous woman, or when a woman is under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or diseases such as schizophrenia, the cause is not considered to be feminist violence against men. Machismo, or violence against women, is a very distinct concept in Spain, and is used to push the statistics that justify the vast economic and media barrage aimed at so-called gender violence. Regardless of the propaganda in Spain, the statistics on “gender violence” murders in Spain are the lowest in Europe.

The aggressive national campaigns against gender violence since the law was implemented, where, as mentioned earlier, women were strongly encouraged to report any and all types of relationship problems to the Police, including, for example, where a man had simply raised his voice against his partner, have created a collective paranoia that has led many women to report their partner, with many subsequent arrests and prosecutions, with many men being condemned and forced to take rehabilitation courses.

However, far from rehabilitating these hundreds of thousands of men, it seems that in some cases more violence has occurred, by men embittered by unjust and often ruthless treatment in Women’s Courts that only serve the interests of women. Given the actual statistics, it seems that the gender violence campaigns of “Zero Tolerance” would have us believe that a molehill is a mountain and a mountain a molehill.

How has social propaganda in Spain achieved to paint all domestic violence as macho? In our view, the strategy used was, in short, very similar to the 11 principles of propaganda created by Goebbels and used by the Nazis to raise awareness among German citizens of the “Jewish problem”.

In his book Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler explains how the media is essential in the indoctrination of the public. What is truly sad is that history shows us that these techniques work perfectly time and again.

Whatever definition we may give to the term ‘public opinion’, only a very small part of it originates from personal experience or individual insight. The greater portion of it results from the manner in which public matters have been presented to the people through an overwhelmingly impressive and persistent system of ‘information’.

In the religious sphere the profession of a denominational belief is largely the result of education, while the religious yearning itself slumbers in the soul; so too the political opinions of the masses are the final result of influences systematically operating on human sentiment and intelligence in virtue of a method which is applied sometimes with almost-incredible thoroughness and perseverance.

By far the most effective branch of political education, which in this connection is best expressed by the word ‘propaganda’, is carried on by the Press. The Press is the chief means employed in the process of political ‘enlightenment’. It represents a kind of school for adults. This educational activity, however, is not in the hands of the State but in the clutches of powers that are partly of a very inferior character. While still a young man in Vienna I had excellent opportunities for coming to know the men who owned this machine for mass instruction, as well as those who supplied it with the ideas it distributed. At first I was quite surprised when I realized how little time was necessary for this dangerous Great Power within the State to produce a certain belief among the public; and in doing so the genuine will and convictions of the public were often completely misconstrued. It took the Press only a few days to transform some ridiculously trivial matter into an issue of national importance, while vital problems were completely ignored or filched and hidden away from public attention.

STATISTICS FOR DECEASED GENDER VIOLENCE

Figures shown below are from the French authorities, and relate to deaths within the scope of couples, produced by a variety of causes rather than the “sole and indisputable” one that is promoted in Spain, namely macho violence. As we can see below, the motives and circumstances of domestic violence resulting in death, are: discussion, alcohol, separation, jealousy, depression, drugs, medication, mental illness. Source: French National Assembly.

In a 2006 study by the Centro Reina Sofia, that excluded countries whose population were very small, such as Monaco and Andorra, Spain holds sixth place from bottom, with a rate of 2 people per million murdered (81) through domestic violence, this being just below Bulgaria, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovakia and Scotland. All other European countries are above this rate. 12.37 Cyprus, Austria 9.40, Finland 9.35, Czech Republic 8.15, 7.14 Croatia, Estonia 6.38, Hungary 5.95, France 5.22, 5.09 Luxembourg, England 4, 20, Norway 3.67, Italy 3.66, Slovenia 3.99, 2.81 SPAIN.

Based on these figures, the European average is 3.94 deaths per million people. It should be noted that the implementation of law 1/2004 of Gender Violence in Spain did not result in this reduced level of female deaths, in contrary, death rates increased following the law.

CUSTODY AND GENDER VIOLENCE

At this time, the government is expected to approve the joint custody law nationally.  Will this affect the number of cases of domestic violence?

The Civil Code, Article 92.7, states that joint custody will not be allowed if either parent is the subject of criminal proceedings or when a Judge finds evidence of domestic violence.  This opens the door to an increase in the number of reports by women of “bad treatment”, to ensure that child custody will be awarded to the mother exclusively. This is nothing new, in Aragon the joint custody law was passed in late 2010, following which in 2011 complaints increased by 25.40%. What will happen nationwide on adoption of the Joint Custody law?

GENDER VIOLENCE LAW AND MALE POLICE OFFICERS

Male member of the Spanish police forces have not been strangers to this problem. A lot of our associations have come from different bodies at all levels. Police officers (Guardia Civil, local and national Police) have been reported from the constables to high-ranking officers, the vast majority in divorce and without any form of aggression or physical injuries.

In some cases, the fear of being expelled from the Police for a sentence exceeding two years, has led many policemen to accept lesser convictions for crimes they had not committed, including those who had been arrested and charged without evidence against them, simply to avoid long and costly court cases and heavy penalties that would affect their careers. Take the case of an officer who was reported for psychological abuse by his ex-wife. The simple existence of the complaint of gender violence gave his ex-wife guaranteed Court support against her former husband, who immediately not only lost shared custody, by also lost the chance for promotion, international missions, and future decorations.

As far as he’s concerned, he lost sole custody and a future in the service, yet his ex-wide continued to collect a government allowance and kept the family home, whose mortgage was half paid, in addition to receiving economic benefits as a “battered woman”, although there had been absolutely no evidence of any physical violence, and the psychological violence had only one witness, the ex-wife herself. Finally, this officer was prosecuted for serious misconduct by a Police disciplinary committee, and received a fine.

We call attention to two issues: the first is the lack of monitoring of complaints of psychological abuse by social services, and the other is disciplinary action taken following such complaints. The quick response from Police authorities to take disciplinary action violates, in our judgment, the right under national and international law, ratified by Spain, to not punish the same crime twice. The inability to access official figures of officials accused in this type of offense or the circumstances surrounding them, as in other countries, i.e. unpublished statistics, leaves us unable to consider the scale of the problem.

We believe, therefore, that the Secretary of State for Security should make public the detailed statistics of the agents involved in gender violence complaints and create a protocol for psychological assessment to allow officers some level of protection from false complaints.

 

The second part will be published by the end of this week.

Literature recommended:

  • The Dictatorship of Género (Violence against Women). (ex-Judge, Francisco Serrano 2012)
  • I A Social Engineers To Destroy Love (Rafael Palacios 2012)
  • Femicide or Self-Construction of Women (María Stephen Prado and Félix Rodrigo Mora 2012)
  • 400 International Reports Prejudice Against a www.escorrecto.org (J to L Alvarez Deca)
  • All legal/police protocols and instructions referred to in this article.
  • Legislation alluded to in UN and European policy.

Reference sources:

EP article with statements from Immaculate Montalbán, “Balance of seven years after the creation of the Courts of Violence

General Council of the Judiciary, Author: Observatory against Domestic and Gender Violence (Spain), “Balance of seven years after the creation of the Courts of Violence against Women

[1] http://www.blogtalkradio.com/avoiceformen/2013/05/17/the-voice-of-europe-male-health

[2]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1mUFSzWDaI (all youtube links are in Spanish)

[3]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUZBd-kpYSs

[4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6niIU0vjkc

[5]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-X7WNwbWaWY

[6]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Osk33k4RI

[7]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohcm7PICw6ISo

[8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHlk4Fd5qME

[9]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohcm7PICw6I

[10]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M32HQCxS1_o

[11]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8Dk22gNDP4

[12]www.projusticia.com

Recommended Content

Skip to toolbar