[ad_1]
The Minister of Women and Gender Equity, Monica Zalaquett, criticized the divided ruling of the Supreme Court that reversed the decision of the Administrative Corporation of the Judicial Power (CAPJ) of expel the zone administrator of the Copiapó Judicial Power, Alex Muñoz Prado, for sexual harassment.
As published The second, it was found that between 2017 and 2018 the defendant incurred improper behavior towards subordinates: For example, the first resolution indicates that five officials were spanked for “alleged misconduct”; She told another that “I am a man, why am I going to lie to you, I may have looked at your butt”, and another employee who had undergone an operation warned her to be careful “because I can still put my finger in it. pit of surgery “.
Finally, on October 19, the highest court ruled – by seven votes to five, among which was that of its deputy president, Sergio Muñoz – the suspension of the official for one month with half remuneration, holding that although he engaged in “inappropriate, undesirable, unpleasant, disrespectful and even grotesque conduct, they do not transform it into sexual harassment”.
The dissident ministers -Muñoz, Rosa Maggi, Eugenia Sandoval, Andrea Muñoz and Angélica Repetto- argued that “sexual harassment is a manifestation of gender violence, contrary to human dignity, and that the conduct to be banned can be carried out by anyone means …, causing harm or suffering, humiliation, and an abusive or offensive environment “.
Minister for Women “regretted the interpretation”
Although for now the Ministry of Justice has not referred to the matter, the Minister of Women, Monica ZalaquettHe maintained that “although we respect the autonomy of the Judicial Power, we regret the interpretation made by the Supreme Court in this case.”
“Here it is not only about improper or inappropriate acts, it is about actions that violate women and that also constitute violence,” therefore, he stated that “We must urgently advance inincorporate the gender perspective also in judicial decisions “.
On the other hand, Gloria Ana Chevesich, a spokeswoman for the Supreme Court, maintained that it is not her responsibility to comment on the court’s rulings; however, “I can only say that integrating the Superior Council I concurred with my vote to remove the official, and the agreement was unanimous at said headquarters “.
“Back the way forward”
Meanwhile, the president of the Magistrates Association, Soledad Piñeiro, remarked to the evening that the ruling “dangerously backward all the way forward from the gender secretary in which the four unions participate “.
“It re-victimizes, discourages new complaints and unprotects the work environment of women in the Judiciary. We hope that the narrow difference between majority and minority vote will be reversed in the immediate future.“he added.
The other three guilds of the Judicial Power joined the rejection of the sentence -employees and employees, counselors and management professionals-, who ask for a reflection from the highest court, pointing to “a severe incongruity” between the gender equality policy promoted by the Supreme Court, and the consensual resolution. “
