Vox wants to eliminate the express mention that the Spanish Penal Code makes of “racist and anti-Semitic motives” in the definition of hate crimes. This is included in one of the amendments presented by said group to the draft Organic Law for the Comprehensive Protection of Children and Adolescents against Violence, which is being debated this Wednesday in a presentation in Congress.
The ultra party proposes to change the classification of this crime, provided for in article 510 of the Penal Code, maintaining the punishment of those who encourage, promote or incite hatred, discrimination or violence against a group or a person because of their ideology, religion, ethnicity, race, nation, sex, sexual orientation, etc., but suppressing the express references that the current law makes to “racist and anti-Semitic motives”. Although this mention may seem redundant, as it is already implicit in the allusions to race or religion, Spain included them in its legislation due to the international commitments acquired and to focus on two of the historically most serious manifestations of crimes against the race. humanity: racism and anti-Semitism.
It is not a phenomenon eradicated in Spain. The Prosecutor’s Office has recently opened proceedings against the anti-Semitic proclamations launched in a neo-Nazi tribute to the Blue Division held on February 13 in Madrid, in which a Falangist leader sentenced: “The Jew is the culprit.”
Vox has not responded to the request of EL PAÍS to explain the reasons for this modification and neither does it justify it in the brief it has presented in Congress. However, it cannot be due to a mere error, since he has deleted the expression “racist motives [y] anti-Semites ”five times, in five different paragraphs of the bill.
He also opposes considering as aggravating those hate crimes that “alter the public peace or create a serious feeling of insecurity or fear” among the members of the community who are the object of attack or harassment, because they are, he maintains, “absolutely indeterminate legal concepts. ”.
Vox has been the subject of numerous complaints for its campaigns against irregular immigrants and the Muslim community residing in Spain, which it collectively identifies with crime and terrorism, but so far it has not been convicted of a hate crime.
The ultra party proposes to eliminate from the law for the protection of children and adolescents the objective of “overcoming stereotypes of a sexist, racist, aesthetic, homophobic or transphobic nature”, on the grounds that this claim restricts the freedom of citizens of express your opinion on “such sexual choices, based on your ideology, morals or religious beliefs.” And it does not want teachers, judges or prosecutors to be trained in the impact that gender roles can have on violence against minors; since “these stereotypes”, he assures, can be “those who, in exercise of their religious freedom and right to the education of their children, are presented as desirable for the consideration of parents.” In his view, prohibiting them “would mean irreversible damage to the freedom of parents to educate their children.”
Along the same lines, Vox also does not accept that it is included as “advertising that violates the dignity of the person” or violates constitutional values and rights, that which “promotes stereotypes of a sexist, racist, aesthetic or homophobic or transphobic nature” .
With its amendments, the ultra party has erased all the references made in the text to “girls”, claiming that the generic “boys” includes both sexes, according to the RAE: and, based on the “Technical and language improvement”, proposes to use the term “disabled” instead of “people with disabilities”; contrary to the provisions of the 2006 United Nations convention, ratified by Spain.
It also asks to eliminate the so-called “risk indicators” that allow the Administration to intervene to provide protection to the minor, when a series of circumstances arise, among which the project includes the use of disproportionate habitual punishments and “violent correction guidelines” or “The non-acceptance of the sexual orientation, gender identity or sexual characteristics” of the ward. Voz dismisses this catalog as “delusional” and wonders if the refusal to vaccinate children or education segregated by sex could be considered a “risk indicator”.
It also wants to eliminate the obligation for minors convicted of crimes against sexual freedom or sexist violence to have to follow a course on “gender equality” to rehabilitate themselves; and it considers it “unnecessary” to specify that victims of crimes of sexist violence must be informed of the measures taken to protect them from their aggressors.
Eddie is an Australian news reporter with over 9 years in the industry and has published on Forbes and tech crunch.