Panel T12-P03 Session 1 Feminist Governance in the 21St Century
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
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 Peru [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 Alberto Fujimori, 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