4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Panel T12-P03 Session 1

Feminist Governance in the 21st Century

Title of the paper

Advances or stagnation? Relationship between the feminist agenda and the Peruvian congress 2011-2016

Author

Katherine Zegarra

Pontificia Universidad Catolica del

[email protected]

June 27, 2019 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Introduction

When Latin America began its democratization process in the 1980s, exclusionary effects on women resulted (Rousseau 2012: 43). As the political regime does not define a better or worse situation for women's rights, Rousseau proposes that institutions themselves to account for these dynamics. This is reinforced by Ginwala: "So as in emerging and as in established democracies, it has become clear that universal suffrage by itself does not necessarily lead to the establishment of legislative entities representatives of an entire society. Indeed, many sectors of the population continued to be marginalized" (Ginwala 2002: 5).

Against sub representation of women and due to an adverse context for their political participation, gender quotas and parity have been developed since the nineties as mechanisms of positive discrimination. Giving women preferential treatment, in order to balance the inequalities, they face and not to leave participation in the simple willingness of political parties (Peschard 2002: 174). These measures had an important effect on the increase of women in public positions, such as in the Parliament.

The legitimization of affirmative actions is based on diverse arguments. First of all, they are based on the under-representation of women in public positions. In order to understand this reality, we must highlight that representation can have different meanings. First, descriptive representation appeals to the proportional presence of a social group in the representative institution, i.e. that the organ is a "mirror" of society. Thus, if women constitute 50% of the population, an organism such as the Congress should have an equal number of women and men. Second, symbolic representation refers to how representatives are perceived by those they represent. In this way, the visibility of the representative can empower those who identify with him or her. Third, substantive representation refers to the promotion of group interests being represented. Thus, it is assumed that the representative identifies with one or more social groups 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

and that due to his or her experience he or she will act in favour of this or these groups (Franceschet 2008: 61).

Secondly, and linked to symbolic representation, Susan Peschard points out that the quotas generate a sensitizing effect on the population regarding the problem of inequality, the situation and problems faced by women. Thus, the habit is created of thinking of women as "professionally and politically capable of occupying positions of public responsibility" (Peschard 2002: 183). Thirdly, the greater presence of women, as a consequence of quotas, can form a "critical mass", which is an important minority of members (approximately 30%), which generates, in addition to a numerical change, a change in power relations that allows the minority group to use the resources of its institution or organization to improve the situation of the group to which it belongs (Dahlerup 1993:134). This, in turn, is related to the presumption of substantive representation.

It should be noted that measures such as these are necessary, but not sufficient to achieve greater female representation. There are conditions that must be guaranteed to achieve this objective: the political culture, such as the stereotypes and dynamics of a society; the attributes of the electoral system, such as the type of list (closed or open); and the content of the quota law, whether mandatory or prepositive (Archentil and Tula 2007: 188-192).

Gender quota and parity have different legitimizing arguments. There is consensus on the link between symbolic and descriptive representation (Franceschet 2008:64). However, substantive representation is controversial, first, because of the identities a woman may possess - ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. -. Second, because it is assumed that there are common interests among all women, exacerbating essentialism. Third, because there is empirical evidence that women elected as representatives do not necessarily defend gender-specific issues (Rodríguez, 2010).

In the parliamentary field, Htun, Lacalle and Micozzi point out that some women defend gender equality more than others and that some men give more support than some women and that 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

different institutional contexts foster different amounts of feminist activity (Reingold 2008: 128, cited in Htun, Lacalle and Micozzi 2013: page 98). They also show that the number of women does not determine the number of outcomes in favour of their rights, as an example, in 2013, the United States with 18% women in Congress generated more feminist legislation than Rwanda, with 56% of women in Parliament (Htun, Lacalle and Micozzi 2013:96).

Empirical evidence signals mixed results for women's substantive representation (Wängnerud 2009). In the Peruvian case, Denisse Rodríguez (2010) studied the 2001-2005 parliamentary term and demonstrated that women do not necessarily generate bills in favour of women's rights.

The above mentioned does not intended to detract from the need of greater representation of women in political representation areas. Since "in Latin America, a greater presence of women in the legislative sphere coincided with unprecedented attention to issues related to women's rights such as domestic violence, reproduction and family law" (Htun 2002: 37). Htun also points out that it is unlikely that issues related to women's rights have been raised without the work of congresswomen.

Women and Congress in Peru

During Peru's democratic transition in the late 1970s, the women's movement was incipient. The following decade meant for the country, a social and political destabilization coming from armed groups, as well as an acute economic crisis, which resulted in the election of , who generated a military self-inflicted coup. This meant the rupture of the party system, breaking its ties with civil society, a concentration of powers in the Executive and the lack of accountability (Rousseau 2012: 46-47). Under this scenario of authoritarian traits, it could be assumed that women's rights, as well as those of the general public, suffered setbacks.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

However, in this regime some important citizens' rights of women were institutionalized, and a greater presence of women in power began, especially in Parliament. The reasons for greater empowerment of women are not due to President Fujimori's commitment towards them but were generated from a utilitarian vision. He saw in women a flow of votes and the possibility of increasing their international recognition (Blondet 2004: 3).

Despite the "Machiavellianism" of these incentives and the non-democratic regime, there were very important advances in the legislative power: laws on family violence, the norms on gender electoral quotas, and the creation of the Women's Commission, among others. These were encouraged by some congressmen, such as Luisa María Cuculiza, the lobby of feminist organizations and the advisors of some congresswomen, and international pressure (Rousseau 2012: 199-204).

Until now, the representation of women has never reached thirty per cent, causing this social group to be underrepresented. On the other hand, bearing in mind that bills are referred to commissions for study1, the number of legislative bills that especially affect women's rights tend to be concentrated in certain commissions more than others.

It should be noted that there are two bodies responsible for the derivation of bills: the Parliamentary General Directorate and the First Vice-Presidency (article 77 of the Regulations of Congress). The Parliamentary General Directorate has a more technical character, while the first vice-presidency has a more political character2. The final decision on the referral of bills to one or more committees rests with the First Vice Presidency. As a result, gender-sensitive bills have not been placed on the women's commission. However, due to the fact that the analysis of the correct derivation of legislative projects requires a separate study, it has been

1 Article 34 of the Regulations of the Congress of the Republic: "(...) they are responsible for the study and opinion of bills and the absolution of consultations, in matters that are brought to their knowledge according to their specialty or subject matter".

2 Pointed out by Tania Sabbagg, Technical Secretary of the Women's Committee for the 2016-2017 parliamentary term. Date: May 03, 2017 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

decided to take as reference the number of bills derived from the women's commission as those that have been identified as women's issues.

In this regard, the Women's Commission has been one of the committees that has received the fewest bills in five parliamentary terms. There are two reasons for this: the first is that there are few legislative proposals that legislate on women's rights, and the second is that both the Technical Secretariat and the First vice Presidency have not identified the bills with an adequate gender focus3.

Legislation in favour of women's rights

Legislative output in favour of women's rights has differed between periods, despite being numerically low. However, this differentiation is also presented in the relevance of the issues that are put on the parliamentary agenda. In order to understand this agenda of women's rights in Congress, it is necessary to observe the work of feminist organizations.

After the professionalization of feminist movements in non-governmental organizations, as well as their change of practices towards the formulation of legislative proposals on women's rights through advocacy and lobbying, it can be pointed out that feminist NGOs have had and are having an impact on legislative advances favourable to these rights (Rousseau, 2012: 195- 200). The agenda of Peruvian feminist organizations tends to go hand in hand with an international agenda of transnational human rights organizations.

The most relevant campaigns in the last 10 years, of the four most important organizations in favour of women's rights, are the following.

3 Pointed out by Diana Chávez, an expert in parliamentary analysis and coordinator of Projects of the Transparency Civil Association. Date: May 05, 2017 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Table 1: Main campaigns of the main feminist NGOs

Demus Flora Tristán Manuela Ramos Promsex

-Femicide -Decriminalization -Political Harassment -Electoral quotas Law of abortion -Let her decide: and political the right to -Decriminalizing participation -Prevention of unplanned abortion abortion -Violence against pregnancy in -Against Feminicide women -Case of adolescents emergency -Climate change -Alternance contraception -Invisible girl: -Sexual education to -Mental health for Trafficking in -Therapeutic prevent teenage those who suffered persons abortion pregnancy violence -Sexual education -Forced -Safe cities: street -Sexual education -Liberalization of Sterilizations harassment as State policy emergency -Empowerment -Empowerment of contraception rural women Source: Official websites. Made by the author.

As can be seen, the campaigns presented tend to follow four main axes: political participation and citizenship; sexual and reproductive rights; economic autonomy; and the right to live without violence4. For this reason, the bills in favour of women's rights that we will study in this research are classified in these axes.

However, it should be noted that the campaigns of both local and international organizations come from the perception of a problem in society, which needs to be solved with public policies or the change of legislation. This complex process, which will not be explored too much, can be understood as follows: the perception of a situation as a social problem, and later political,

4 A similar theme has been promoted by international organizations. UN Women's main lines of action are leadership and political participation; economic empowerment; putting an end to violence against women; among others. Source: http://www.unwomen.org/es/what-we-do. Likewise, Amnesty International presents the following axes: Violence against women; sexual and reproductive rights; participation in public and political life; among others. Source: https://www.es.amnesty.org/en-que-estamos/temas/mujeres/. It should be borne in mind that it is international organizations that usually finance Peruvian NGOs. 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

comes from a collective construction linked to the perceptions, interests and values of the actors involved in that situation (Subirats, Knoepfel, Larrue and Varone 2008:126). Sullivan (1980) goes in the same line when pointing out that "there is a social problem when an influential group is aware of a social condition that affects its values, and that can be remedied through collective action" (Sullivan 1980:10).

Feminist organizations positioned themselves as the vehicle representing "women's interests" (Rousseau 2012:111), this can also be understood as the defence against women's problems. NGOs were institutionalized and opted for a dynamic of lobbying for the generation of public policies or legislative proposals, but professionalization also meant the identification of new social problems that affect women and the creation of evidence, data and in-depth studies of certain social problems. This, in turn, has led to the visibility of certain problems in the media agenda as policy.

The generation of these specialized inputs by feminist organizations generated three effects that help answer the research question. In the first place, feminist organizations provide congressmen with evidence on a problem, through working groups, lobbying, and presentation of legislative proposals, among others. Secondly, they make visible a social problem in the media and political agenda, on which he or she observes and decides to legislate on it. Thirdly, the State has been providing information that was generated by feminist organizations5; this official data is also used in the production of bills. Thus, apart from the relationship or perspective of a congressman towards feminist NGOs (and vice versa), there is a consumption of relevant information provided, directly or indirectly, by these organizations.

In conclusion, NGOs continue to help fill a gap in the State regarding women's rights, by generating statistical inputs and in-depth studies. The subsequent generation of this information

5 As an example, the figures on violence against women currently generated by the Public Prosecutor's Office and the Ministry for Women were incorporated years after feminist organizations, such as Flora Tristan, generated figures on the problem. 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

by the State shows the important role of these organizations in problem-solving, as they are also used to generate legislative proposals.

However, there is no direct path from the identification of a problem that affects women's rights, their study and generation of information, to the creation of public policies or legislative proposals. This process can last for years (even decades6). It is worth asking how this relationship occurs -directly or indirectly- through the case studies.

Hypothesis

It has been shown that there is no consensus to explain why representatives produce gender equality policies. Therefore, the research question is as follows: What are the factors that motivate members of Congress (2011-2016) to generate and push bills in favour of women's rights?

Table 2: Summary of the legislative process: Actors

Actor with more N° Process Actors with influence power -Feminist civil 1 Creation of the bill Congressman associations -Advisors -Congressman Discussion in President of the 2 Commission Commission -Members of the commission -Board of Spokespersons Chairman of the -Parliamentary Group 3 Plenary Discussion Board -Congressman (political weight)

6 Mentioned by Dr Melendez of Flora Tristan. Date: June 12, 2017 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

The bill has two important political filters: discussion in the Commission and in plenary. The first process is the presentation of the bill, which means that the actor with the greatest power to create the legislative bill is the congressman. Not only understanding it as a subject with legislative rights but also as a subject with interests and experiences that facilitate the generation of bills in favour of women's rights. In this sense, it is understood that the congressman has an agenda 7based on these interests and experiences. On one end, with political interests (with their electors, seeking re-election, among others) and with the interests of their social group (gender, ethnicity, etc.). On the other hand, because of the experience of the congressman, where sensitization and political and professional experience are taken into account. This converges so that there is - or not - an opening of the congressman for gender issues and for receiving an important influence from feminist civil associations and advisors.

The second process is that of discussion in the commission or commissions, the power of influence of the congressman is relative to the person who has more power in that scenario: the president of the Commission. In order for the bill to "get past" this stage, the congressman must convince the president of the importance of discussing the bill, as well as persuade the members of the commission to vote in favour of the opinion. In this sense, the congressman has resources such as pressure, convincing through empirical and legal evidence of the importance of his project and convincing a small group of congressmen. Likewise, at this stage, the legal formula can be modified, entering a technical and political trial.

Table 3. Second Process: Actors, Resources and Objectives in the Commissions.

Actors Persuasion Resources Objective

-Conviction Presidency Scheduling -Insistence

7 This agenda may not be clear in the case of some congressmen and depends mainly on the conjuncture. But all of the advisors interviewed mentioned that there is a minimum line of work of the congressmen, which they understand as "agenda". 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

-Convincing arguments Members Favourable Opinion -Relationship with members

The third process is the discussion in the plenary session, where the political weight and dynamics take on greater relevance, thus the congressman is facing a more complicated scenario. In the first place, because the agenda takes much more effort, since it is the spokesperson of the bench who represents the voice of conviction before the Board of Directors, in this sense, the congressman loses control of argumentation if he does not have that position.

Secondly, because the Board of Directors, especially the President of Congress, decides when each bill will be discussed. In third place, the proportionality and cohesion of the parliamentary groups can approve or disapprove the opinion, this becomes more complex than in the previous stage because there are a greater number of congressmen with whom it is necessary to negotiate. Finally, time also influences voting and inclusion in the plenary agenda: women's representative days, changes due to the beginning or end of the parliamentary term, among others.

Table 4. Third Process: Actors, Resources and Objectives in the Plenary Session.

Actors Persuasion Resources Objective

-Conviction Bench Speaker's Office Scheduling -Insistence

Board of Directors -Insistence Scheduling

-Convincing arguments Parliamentary groups -Relationship with members Vote in favour

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

In accordance with the dynamics presented, the following hypothesis is proposed, which is divided into two periods of time. The first is before the presentation of the bill (first process), and the second stage is after the presentation of the bill (second and third process).

In the first stage, which contains the first process previously explained, the actor with the most power is the congressman who has proposed the bill. Different actors participate in this decision-making process to draft and present the bill, which encourages the congressman to use his or her right to legislate. What is proposed to answer the research question is that the factors that motivate the congressman to generate a bill are three.

The first factor that explains the legislator proposing bills in favour of women's rights is that the congressman has extensive or relative experience in producing bills in favour of women's rights. In addition, during her previous experience as a congresswoman, she had experience and work related to the protection of women's rights. In this sense, the generation of bills on this subject is expected and coherent. This variable is that of Experience.

The second factor is Sensitivity, which refers to scenarios that generate a sensitivity in the congressman, these may come from people close to the parliamentarian - advisors, family, and friends - who generate a concern to legislate on a specific issue. They can also come from a favourable agenda or a journalistic or social case of special relevance. This sensitivity can be long-lasting or fleeting.

The third factor refers to the Context as the creation of alliances with women's organizations, who generate information and provide resources for the solution or attention to a problem identified by the feminist agenda. In this sense, the congressperson generates an alliance (explicit or implicit) with the organization(s) to obtain technical, social and/or political support.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

It is hypothesized that it is necessary to comply with at least one of the factors in order to generate a bill in favour of women's rights since in this process the most important actor -the congressman or woman- has all the resources at his or her disposal to achieve it.

As a second scenario, three explanatory variables are considered. In the first place, the commitment, that is to say, the formal and informal practices generated by the congressman so that the bill can pass through the two political filters. These can be statements to the press, memos asking for prioritization of the bill or conversations with diverse congressmen. In the second place, the power of the congressman is taken into account, with respect to having key positions, such as the presidency of the commission or the Board of Directors, as well as the political weight or being the spokesperson of the bench, and the number and cohesion of the latter. Thirdly, the political-social situation and scenario, which refers to how the political agenda is, as in the media and on "special" days, such as the International Day against Violence against Women.

Table 5. Hypothesis synthesis

Period Explanatory variables

Experience

Prior to the submission of the bill Sensitivity

Context

Commitment

After the presentation of the bill Political weight

Situation

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Methodology

In order to be able to respond, what motivates congressmen to generate and push bills in favour of women's rights? A qualitative methodology has been chosen since it seeks to respond based on the analysis of cases. In the first place, because it is very complicated - due to resources and time - to be able to evaluate and analyse the totality of bills in favour of women in a legislative year. Secondly, because in the interviews new variables and actors can be discovered that could not have been considered in the hypothesis. Thirdly, by analysing cases, the dynamics of Congress can be studied with greater severity with some congressmen. For this reason, it will be based on the in-depth investigation of four bills, from the process of creation to their completion in the process of drafting the law.

In addition, the following criteria were chosen to constitute our case selection. First, the gender parity of those who initiated the bill, two women and two men congressmen, to study whether sex has any influence on the quality and progress of the bills. Second, we will analyse projects from different groups in order to determine if there is a weight of the political party. Third, bills that have culminated in different stages of the legislative process have been selected in order to determine the obstacles in the legislative process and the adjustment of the congressman's motivations vis-à-vis them. Fourth, in reconstructing the cases, we will study the issues on the international agenda in order to analyse the influence of the situation on the decision of the congressmen. Finally, bills related to feminist issues of the four most important NGOs in the country -Flora Tristán, Manuela Ramos, Demus and Promsex- have been taken into account to see their influence on the lobby.

Likewise, the reconstruction of the four bills involved interviews with advisors, congressmen, members of feminist organizations and experts in Congress. Finally, it has taken into account bills that have been in the Justice and Human Rights commissions, and Constitution and Regulations, as they are commissions with a larger number of staff and budget, and the Women and Family Commission, as it is a commission that traditionally analyses issues of "women". The election of these commissions is based on their specialization with respect to rights. 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

During the 2011-2016 parliamentary term, a total of 5'425 bills were presented, of which 4'655 were promoted by congressmen. In total, there are 878 bills referred to the Justice Commission, 141 to Women and the Family, and 557 to the Constitution and Regulations. Through the selection process mentioned above, the following bills have been selected.

Table 6. Cases of study

Number- Law Projects State Congressman/Bench Commission Year

Act amending -Justice and article 107 of the Law enacted 0008- Luisa María Cuculiza Human Rights Criminal Code, in “El 2011 / Fuerza Popular incorporating Peruano” -Women and femicide Family -Constitution Law Against Verónika Mendoza / and Rules of 01903- Political Opinion Acción Popular- Procedure 2012 Harassment of Frente Amplio Women -Women and Family Act amending article 29 of the Consolidated -Justice and Law enacted 4033- Ordered Text of Human Rights in “El 2014 Act No. 26260, Act /PPC-APP Peruano” -Women and on Protection Family against Family Violence Amendment of the Code of Criminal In committee 4439- Procedure for Justice and (without an /Acción Popular 2014 proceedings for Human Rights opinion) offences against sexual freedom

As mentioned above, we also sought to understand the degree of commitment of the congressman with respect to the bill presented. In this sense, the history of the four legislative 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

initiatives was reconstructed. Beginning with the birth of the bill, we will analyse the context in which it was created, that is, what issues were on the agenda at the time. In this sense, the national and international media were searched for the main topics under discussion, as well as if there were any summits of international organizations in Peru.

Law on the Criminalization of Feminicide

The bill that "incorporates the crime of femicide into the penal code" (N°08/2011-CR) was presented by Luisa María Cuculiza Torre, congresswoman of the Fujimori political party, on August 20, 2011. Firstly, the bill to classify femicide as a crime was presented during the 2006- 2011 parliamentary term by three female members of Congress. None of the three bills was able to advance beyond the Commission. It should be noted that Cuculiza was not the first congresswoman to propose this bill.

In the parliamentary period of study (2011-2016), Congresswoman Cuculiza was the first to present the bill to define the crime of femicide, but she was not the only one. During 2011, three more bills were presented on this issue, two by parliamentarians and one by the Executive. The four bills were presented one month apart.

Congresswoman Cuculiza was advised by Dr Rosa Velarde, a lawyer specializing in family violence issues. She was invited by the Fujimori congresswoman and does not consider herself a feminist, but pro-family. Velarde considers that the bill arises from the "phenomenon of violence against women," being the main function of the congressmen to legislate, they sought to generate a more comprehensive law, including prevention and punishment. Despite the fact that the legislation presented (N°008-2011) only included the final measure, that is, the sanction and not from the prevention process, the advisor pointed out that it was a project of the congresswoman difficult to remove.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Dr Velarde also mentioned that there was opposition from male congressmen and some of the women on the bench. However, she acknowledged that "Cuculiza puts on the shirt" and the fight. This is added to the fact that she has "political weight", to the latter, she explains it as the ability to generate bridges, as other women congressmen of all benches, and persuade.

Regarding the role of NGOs, letters were sent to Congress by the Manuela Ramos Movement. In this letter, they expressed their concern about the archiving of bill N°08/2011, it also presents information on the typification of femicide in other Latin American countries, the characterization of the problem in Peru and legal recommendations. This was confirmed in the interview with Dr Velarde, who mentioned that institutional opinions (feminist associations and NGOs) were used.

In interviews with members of feminist organizations, it is pointed out that the problem of feminicide comes from 2003, with work groups, incidence and generation of data, which the State did not yet produce. In addition, this problem was identified at the regional level, with legislatures from Mexico, Argentina, Honduras, among other countries. With this, several NGOs such as Flora Tristán, Demus, Manuela Ramos, among others, joined together to make feminicide visible and present it as a social problem.

However, despite the work done for years by various organizations, the support given by feminist organizations to the project follows its presentation. In this sense, there was no coordination on the part of the congresswoman's office with these organizations. Likewise, the bill does not mention any information provided by any NGO, only mentions the international treaties signed by Peru and official data from the Ministry of Women and the Public Ministry.

It should be noted that Liz Meléndez (Flora Tristán) pointed out that it was thanks to the generation of data on femicide, which different feminist organizations produced, that this measure was adopted by the Public Prosecutor's Office and then by the Ministry of Women. The latter requested advice from members of the organization Flora Tristán. This demonstrates 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

the importance of the work of these organizations and how the State is incorporating it into its public policies. In other words, it can be pointed out that there is indirect support from feminist organizations for the production of this bill. It is because of the dynamics of these organizations with respect to , and vice versa, that there is no joint work.

With regard to the context, it can be noted that this was favourable. In the first place, because this law was being implemented in different Latin American legislation. Secondly, the news about femicides was constant, so it was established as a structural problem. Thirdly, because both the congressmen and women who were in favour of the typification of feminicide and the feminist organizations were pressing for this issue to be discussed. Finally, because there were four bills that were promoting this measure.

Table 7. Bill to criminalize Feminicide: Factors that motivate the generation of projects

Prior to the submission of the bill

Experience Environment Organized Society

High High High

After the bill was presented, it was referred to the Justice and Human Rights Commission as the first ruling commission. However, through an official document, the Principal Officer's Office agreed that it should be referred to the Committee on Women and the Family for study and opinion. That is why it became the second ruling commission. This was the product of Cuculiza's request, as president of the Women and Family Commission. With this, it can be observed that there is no gender analysis in the bodies in charge of the referral and that there is a backlog towards this small commission.

As chairwoman of the Women's Commission, she put the law as the main item on the commission's agenda, which allowed the first filter to be easily overcome. However, this was 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

not taken as an arbitrary decision, as many of this woman's congresswomen agreed with the importance of discussing this issue.

The women members of the commission unanimously approved the bill and there is no discussion about it, but how to get it approved in plenary. In this sense, the vice-president of the commission, Rosa Mavila, intervenes saying to the congresswoman Cuculiza "President, obviously, we are going to vote in favour, but I believe that we should have a common strategy to go consensualizing some basic ideas, to avoid that they disintegrate us the proposal".

Secondly, they talk about the strategies that will be used to argue the bill and mention the congressmen who are in favour or can support them. In the third place, they want the bills to agree with each other. In this sense, Cuculiza tells Condori that "we are going to align his bill with the current one in order to be able to get something out that is not denied anywhere. In fourth place, it is observed that there is a good disposition to the participation of civil society in this and other bills, especially towards the Manuela Ramos Movement, with Gina Yáñez and Jennie Dador, member of the Assembly of associates and president of the Movement respectively, present at the session.

In conclusion, one can observe a cohesion in front of the commission against this law, a clear leadership of Luisa María Cuculiza to achieve the approval of this bill, active participation of the congresswomen, especially Rosa Mavila and a willingness to work with civil society.

However, the dynamics in the Commission on Justice and Human Rights are different. In the first place, they did not generate an opinion, being the first commission to issue an opinion. PPC congressman Juan Carlos Eguren asked the Board of Spokespersons to exonerate itself from the rulings of the Justice and Women's Commissions and prioritize the debate. This was approved by 80 votes in favour, 5 against and 16 abstentions to be discussed in plenary. It should be noted that Nationalist Congressman presented the motion for it to be discussed again in the Justice Commission. In an interview with former Congresswoman 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Cuculiza, she mentioned that she had never promised to say who they were, but that among those who voted against were women from her party.

On Thursday, December 1, 2011, is discussed in Plenary the bill 537, presented by the Executive as a matter of urgency, dispensing the processing of the opinion of the commissions of Justice and Women by the Board of Spokespersons. In Plenary, Cuculiza said that "has been taken into account the following projects: Congresswoman Cuculiza's bill, Congresswoman Condori's bill, Congressman Molina's bill, the Executive's bill. Everyone get together. We have made a whole conglomerate. I don't have any contradiction that everyone contributes so that this law comes out."

The main reason for approving this law, according to Cuculiza, is the alarming numbers of violence against women in the country. In addition, the congresswoman mentions that it is not a particular case for which the bill is being promoted, but rather an attempt to combat a more structural problem, since Peru has the highest number of deaths due to feminicide in Latin America.

In the discussion of the Plenary, it is pointed out that the Bill presented by the Executive has greater legal quality (mentioned by Mulder from Apra). However, the Executive's project was badly taken over by Cuculiza and the heads of the Women's Commission. In this sense, a rivalry can be observed in the legislative production between the Executive and the Legislative. In an interview with Dr Sabbag, advisor to the Women's Commission, she relates this annoyance because the Executive does not pass through the filters that congressmen's bills must pass. With it, it is possible to bring the mentioned theoretical Framework, on the possible marginality of the congressmen, compared with the Executive.

In spite of this conflict between powers, it can be said that this bill has had the support of the majority of congressmen, the Executive and NGOs, in a context of exposure of the increase in cases of women murdered by their partners. On the other hand, Congresswoman Cuculiza's 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

leadership in the face of this problem is remarkable. Finally, the bill was approved with 90 votes in favour in the first vote and 81 votes in favour in the second vote.

Table 8. Draft law on the criminalization of Feminicide: Factors motivating the push for projects in favour of women's rights.

After submission of the bill

Commitment Political Weight Situation

High High Favourable

Law against political harassment

Bill N°1903/2012, a law against political harassment of women, was promoted by the congresswoman of the Acción Popular- Frente Amplio bench, Verónika Mendoza. This bill was presented on February 1, 2013, and is the first on this subject. The explanatory memorandum acknowledges that this bill was generated from participatory workshops of the National Network of Local and Regional Authorities of Peru 8(Renama).

In an interview with the president of Renama, the importance of economic, technical and logistical support from feminist NGOs to Renama was pointed out, which allowed for workshops to collect data and testimonies from different women authorities in Peru.

The participation of civil society and NGOs is fundamental in this bill, especially the Center for Peruvian Women Flora Tristan. On this, the former director of Demus, Jeannette Llaja, mentions that "Verónika Mendoza had a close relationship with feminist NGOs". So it can be said that for this bill has had a direct influence of feminist NGOs by the disposition of Congresswoman Mendoza. However, this relationship began when she entered Congress.

8 Name in Spanish: Red Nacional Autoridades Locales y Regionales del Perú (Renama). 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

In this sense, the relationship of the feminist organizations with this congresswoman has been strong and fluid. Liz Meléndez of Flora Tristán said in an interview that Mendoza "fully supported them" and that there was permanent communication. She also pointed out that there is "agreement on values and principles". For this reason, the organizations provided information and statistics directly. With this, the congresswoman had better tools to improve her discussion in the commissions.

This bill sought to guarantee the exercise of women's political rights within political and social organizations or when holding elected office (Sec. Nº2). In addition, the crime of political harassment is defined, as are prevention, precautionary measures, sanctions and criminal proceedings for political harassment.

With respect to the situation, in February 2012, the case of Councillor Ruth Paz was presented, who was attacked by the mayor of the province of Cotabambas, Guido Ayerve. Feminist organizations and women's associations pronounced themselves on this case, however, it did not manage to have a media impact in the main national media.

It should be noted that this was the first bill by Congresswoman Mendoza, which was referred to the Women's Commission, as it had an agenda set on indigenous and conflict issues. However, since the congresswoman had a close relationship with civil society organizations9, she found a synergy.

9 Marked in an interview with Augusto Mosqueira. February 2017. 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Table 9. Political Harassment Bill: Factors motivating the generation of projects in favour of women's rights

Prior to the submission of the bill

Experience Environment Organized Society

Low Neutral High

The bill against political harassment was sent by the Documentary Processing Area to the Constitution and Regulations Commission as the sole ruling commission. However, it is through the office of pro-Fujimori President Aurelia Tan of the Committee on Women and the Family that a referral to that committee is requested. During its study, information and opinions were requested from different institutions: Ministry of Justice, Transparency Civil Association, Ombudsman's Office, Judicial Branch, among others. All these bodies responded favourably to the legislative initiative.

The opinion of the Women and Family Commission was received on March 11, 2015, that is, two years after the presentation of Mendoza's bill, under the presidency of Fujimori's Maria del Pilar Cordero. However, this bill was not discussed in the plenary session, despite being on the agenda of Ana María Solórzano, president of the Board of Directors in 2014-2015.

With this, the limited political capacity of Mendoza can be demonstrated, since it does not have key positions, such as the presidency of commissions. This generates a dependence on the agenda that the president imposes and the convincing work that must be done by the congresswoman and women's organizations. However, in order to overcome this limitation, a trade production job was generated in the name of Renama, as women authorities of each region, requesting the congressmen of each electoral district to support the agenda of the Board of Spokespersons of the draft law of Mendoza.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Also attached was a letter from Diana Miloslavich of Flora Tristán also requesting discussion in the Board of Spokespersons for agenda in the thematic plenary session of María Solórzano. A total of 14 official documents 10were uploaded to the file to congressmen from different regions and benches, transferring the documents presented by feminist organizations.

The spokespersons' meeting agreement was signed so that it would be exonerated of its opinion and its agenda would be expanded. It can be pointed out that the joint work of the lobbying of feminist organizations and Congresswoman Mendoza managed to overcome the first political filter; however, despite their agenda, it was not possible to discuss it in plenary.

Table 10. Political Harassment Bill: Factors motivating the push for women's rights projects

After submission of the bill

Commitment Political weight Situation

High Low Neutral

Law on protection against family violence

Juan Carlos Eguren has not specialised in the production of bills in favour of women's rights. Likewise, his relationship with feminist organizations is almost nil, due to his position against several campaigns promoted by these organizations (such as the decriminalization of abortion), as well as comments that go against women's rights.

In this sense, he would not be expected to promote laws in favour of women's rights. However, Eguren has had political demonstrations in favour of bills in favour of these rights, as is the

10 Oficio 297-2015-2016-CMF-CR-574; Oficio 047-2015-2016-GPUR-NDLD-CR; Oficio 65-2015-2016-GPSN-CR; Oficio 299- 2014-2015-VFMF-CR; Oficio 114-2014-2015/CUM-CR; Oficio 3852-2015-MEC-CR; Oficio 077-2015-EYCQ-CR; Oficio 846-2014- 2015-CR-LIN-PG-494; Oficio 1980-2014-2015-JMGC-CR; Oficio 847-2014-2015-CR-LIN-PG-495; Oficio 537-2014- 2015/MAMDL-CR; Oficio 1072-2014-2015-AN-CR; Oficio 198-2014-2015/VFMF-CR 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

case of the bill on the typification of feminicide (N°08-2011), presented by Cuculiza. In an interview with this congresswoman, the supporting role that Eguren offered was highlighted.

On the other hand, the dynamic of this congressman with his advisors in particular. In an interview with him, he mentioned that there was a "business" dynamic within his office, where he tried to "challenge" his advisors to be more efficient and generate better "products" as a bill.

This is the case of the bill of protection against family violence, recommended by the advisor Dr Soto to Congressman Eguren, who accepted it. In the interview with the congressman, he pointed out that he did not remember the production of this bill. However, this was enacted as law along with 9 other bills on this subject. It should be noted that Bill No. 4033 was not justified with any source of feminist organizations, only with official statistics and jurisprudence.

Table 11. Project for protection against family violence: Factors motivating the generation of projects in favour of women's rights.

Prior to the submission of the bill

Experience Environment Organized Society

Null High High

The scenario of this bill was very favourable since it was accumulating since 2012, bills against violence against women. These bills were promoted by several congressmen and the Executive. This accumulation of bills was multi-party. This shows that there was a consensus within the political forces to modify the law to protect against family violence.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

On the other hand, Eguren held the presidency of the justice commission, where this accumulation of bills was derived. As well as positions within the Board of Spokespersons. In other words, neither a special effort of the congressman nor a real commitment was required.

Table 12. Project to protect against family violence: Factors motivating the push for projects in favour of women's rights.

After submission of the bill

Commitment Political Weight Situation

Low High Favourable

Law on Protection in Proceedings for Crimes against Sexual Freedom

Yonhy Lescano is a congressman with extensive parliamentary experience. The dynamics of the congressman's work in particular, in the sense that the bills that are presented come from experiences obtained from the media, from cases that enter his office and from concerns that certain issues arise in particular on the part of the parliamentarian. This opening of probabilities generates that Lescano is the congressman who presents more bills.

In 2014, the congressman presents Bill No. 4439 "Law that modifies the Criminal Code for proceedings for crimes against sexual freedom". This bill proposes to modify six articles of the aforementioned Code, in which it generates greater protection for victims. Among them, it is presented that it must "guarantee the physical, psychological and moral integrity of the victim, the Prosecutor or Judge may order their political vigilance, restriction of communication, approach or visits by the aggressor and/or close relatives" (Article 7 of the Bill). It also attempts to diminish the re-victimization since the reconstruction of the crime must be at the request of the victim or of the judge with well-founded reasons.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

In this way, the dignity of the victims is protected, it is worth mentioning that, within the explanatory memorandum, it is presented that sexual violence is a problem faced especially by women. This does not mean that the project has a gender perspective, however, it also shows that there is a recognition that there are problems of this social group.

Table 13. Law on protection in criminal proceedings against sexual freedom: Table Factors motivating the generation of projects in favour of women's rights.

Prior to the submission of the bill

Experience Environment Organized Society

Null-Low High Null

It should be noted that in interviews with Congressman Lescano and Zegarra, his principal adviser, there is a mention of the "good image of women", "identity of women". Both pointed out that the fight against violence against women is an important issue and should be legislated. However, the congressman did not generate a struggle to prioritize this particular bill. Regarding the interviews, it was noted that the focus of interest of the congressman falls on other issues, such as consumer protection.

Also, in the interview, Congressman Lescano points out that "it depends on the president of the commission what he puts on the agenda," recognizing the important role of key positions. However, despite the fact that the congressman was not the president of the Justice Committee, as presented previously, he does have an important political weight, including a high exposure in the press. This capacity was not used with special emphasis for discussion or the generation of an opinion on this bill.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Table 14. Law on Protection in Proceedings for Crimes against Sexual Freedom: Factors Motivating the Push for Projects in Favour of Women's Rights

After submission of the bill

Commitment Capacities Situation

Null-Low Neutral High

Finally, it should be noted that there is no close relationship between the Member of Parliament and feminist organizations. Some of these have a bad image of the congressman because they are against his main campaigns, such as the decriminalization of abortion and because they have a conservative vision of women. The office also does not consider using the resources that these organizations generate in the bills or taking their statements into account.

Conclusions and reflections

The purpose of this research was to answer the following question: what are the factors that motivate congressmen (2011-2016) to generate and push bills in favour of women's rights? In order to do this, it was proposed to divide the response into two phases: before and after the presentation of the bill. In addition, since there were 5425 bills generated during the parliamentary period of study, case studies were chosen using a selection methodology.

It was proposed as a hypothesis that it is necessary to have at least one of the following factors in order to present a bill in favour of women's rights: one's own experience, the environment and/or the influence of organized society. It was found that Sensitivity, understood as close and not close scenarios that generate sensitivity in the congressman, is in most cases, except that of Verónika Mendoza. This is because she is the only one who had a close relationship with organized civil society (women). In this sense, it can be pointed out that there is no variable that is always met for the presentation of bills in favour of women's rights, since these can be generated from circumstantial events, as in the case of Eguren. 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Thus, due to the low level of impediments of congressmen to generate bills - the benches become a vehicle to comply with regulatory signatures - the fact that a congressman generates misogynist comments, like Eguren, does not rule out the possibility of generating a bill in favour of women's rights. This freedom and ease of legislative production also allow congressmen to forget the bills they present. Finally, in this thesis, it is shown, in addition, the little concern of the congressmen to consult the social group that will affect their legislation.

With respect to women's rights, the presentation of bills on this subject can be used as a sign of symbolic commitment in favour of these rights, without a Congressman being really committed to them. However, it is more likely to support women's rights from the point of view of protection against violence - which is more socially accepted - than to support political and sexual rights.

With regard to substantive representation, it may be noted that male congressmen do present bills in favour of women's rights, but to a lesser extent in comparison with women. This is partly explained by the fact that the majority of women have belonged to the women's commission because of personal experiences and because there is a greater rapprochement with women on the part of feminist organizations, especially if they are left-wing. Many of the male congressmen can be allies, however, very few decide to promote bills in favour of women's rights, especially regarding sexual, reproductive and political rights.

In synthesis, it has been found that the creation of bills in favour of women's rights can be circumstantial, due to the ease of generating them. This is the case of Lescano and Eguren, who generated bills in favour of women's rights without being committed to the feminist cause or being opposed to it.

The second stage that we indicate comprises the legislative process of the bill after its presentation, taking into account two important political filters: Commission and Plenary. In this sense, the institutional dynamic becomes fundamental, especially the possession of key 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

positions, as Calvo and Tow (2009) point out; most bills remain in the commission derivation stage. Thus, the bench can mean an advantage or disadvantage for the congressman or the congresswoman, since the formation of the presidency of commissions is proportional to the number of parliamentarians, as well as the political weight at the time of negotiating the plenary agenda. Likewise, there are greater advantages on the part of the Executive so that its legislative projects are attended to more easily than that of the congressmen.

The bill of Cuculiza and Eguren, on violence against women, had no major difficulties or discussions, because of the relatively general acceptance of the existence of violence against women. In Lescano's case, however, there was neither an interest nor a window of opportunity for his bill to be passed. In this sense, it is easier for bills such as these - which seek to change a small number of articles, rather than generate a complete law - to succeed if they are passed along with other bills on the same subject.

Likewise, the fundamental role of feminist organizations in putting issues on the agenda must be recognized thanks to their generation of data and recognition of social problems. In this way, directly or indirectly, they continue to cover the space of generating solutions that the State is unable to cover. In this sense, depending on the relationship they generate with some congressmen, their contributions will be more valued and taken into account. For example, the entire Mendoza bill comes from the experiences of women's organizations. It is recommended that the complex dynamics of feminist organizations be studied in greater depth.

Finally, since this thesis is exploratory, it can be affirmed that members of Congress have different circumstances that explain the generation of bills in favour of women's rights, but it is considered that sensitivity is fundamental for the congressman to be able to promote a bill of this type. Also, the commitment is not always reflected in the success of the bill, moreover, the publication of law cannot demonstrate a commitment on the part of the congressman, this is the case of Eguren.

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Some of the lessons left by this research are that the functioning of Congress has a very high impact on the success of a bill, but also on legislative production. For example, important symbolic dates for women, such as November 25 or March 8, as well as important media cases encourage congressmen to generate laws in favour of women's rights.

It is important to have congressmen committed to the feminist cause so that legislative production is not merely circumstantial. This would generate laws that contain contributions from civil society and gender experts, overcoming the creation of projects created by a specific case. To conclude, it should be mentioned that the success of projects depends on the consensus of the majority, in this sense, it is also essential to understand that the political weight of the congressmen who promote bills on this subject must be high for the success of their proposals. 4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

References

Archentil, N. & Tula M. (2007). Cuotas de género y tipo de lista en América Latina. Opiñiao pública, 13 (1), 185-218.

Blondet, C. (2004). Lecciones de la participación política de las mujeres. Democracia, gobierno y derechos humanos. .

Calvo, E. & Tow, A. (2009). Cajoneando el debate: autoridad política, autoridad institucional y productividad en el Congreso argentino. Desarrollo Económico 49 (195): 451-477.

Dahlerup, D. (1993). De una pequeña a una gran minoría: una teoría de la “masa crítica” aplicada al caso de las mujeres en la política escandinava. Mujeres al timón en la Función pública (Manual de Liderazgo social). Instituto de Liderazgo Simone de Beauvoir

Franceschet, S. (2008) ¿Promueven las cuotas de género los intereses de las mujeres? El impacto de las cuotas en la representación sustantiva de las mujeres. Mujer y política. El impacto de las cuotas de género en América Latina. Santiago de Chile.

Ginwala, F. (2002) Mujeres en el Parlamento. Más allá de los números. Stockholm. International IDEA

Htun, M. (2002) Mujeres y poder político en Latinoamérica. Mujeres en el Parlamento. Más allá de los números. Stockholm. International IDEA, 19-43

4th International Conference on Public Policy (ICPP4) June 26-28, 2019 – Montréal

Peschard, J. (2002) El sistema de cuotas en América Latina. Panorama general. Mujeres en el Parlamento. Más allá de los números. Estocolmo: International Idea, pp.173-185

Rodríguez, D. (2010) ¿Las mujeres hacen la diferencia?: un análisis de la representación de intereses de género en el Congreso peruano actual. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú

Rousseau, S. (2012) Mujeres y ciudadanía. Las paradojas del neopopulismo en el Perú de los Noventa. Lima: Instituto de Estudios Peruanos

Subirats, J., Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C. & Varone, F. (2008) Análisis y gestión de políticas públicas. Editorial Ariel, Barcelona

Sullivan, T., Thompson, K.,Wright, R., Gross, G. & Spady, D. (1980) Social problems: Divergent perspectives. New York: John Wiley and Sons Publishers

Wängnerud, L. (2009) Women in Parliaments: Descriptive and substantive representation. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2009. 12:51–69