MIA’s Collaboration with Congresswoman Sandra Morán

Here at MIA, we’ve been investigating and providing information to help legislators who want to modify and reform Guatemala’s National Education Legislation to educate about and prevent school bullying and sexual abuse in schools throughout Guatemala.

Back in 2011 and 2013, the Government of Guatemala, along with the Ministry of Education and several international donors, published a Guía para la Identificación y Prevención del Acoso Escolar (Bullying) / Guide to Identifying and Preventing School Bullying, as well as a Protocolo de Identificación, Atención y Referencia de Casos de Violencia dentro del Sistema Educativo Nacional / Protocol for the Identification, Attention to, and Reference for Cases of Violence within the National Education System. You can get these documents here: http://www.mineduc.gob.gt/portal/contenido/anuncios/informes_gestion_mineduc/documents/guia_acoso_escolar_final.pdf and here, respectively: http://www.mineduc.gob.gt/portal/contenido/anuncios/informes_gestion_mineduc/documents/Protocolo_Educacion_2013.pdf

These documents are quite thorough and provide in-depth information on the topics. In fact, the Protocol breaks down different types of violence into separate categories, defining each one, explaining how to recognize them, and providing internal and external routes of reference for how to properly handle them. The types of violence identified are: mistreatment of minors and physical and psychological violence; sexual violence; violence on the basis of racism and discrimination; and bullying and sexual harassment.

It is remarkable and innovative that this information has been formally established – especially in Guatemala, where, although these types of violence are rampant, talking and learning about them are still taboo. In theory, these guides exist and should be incorporated in every public school. In practice, however, they are not properly implemented and used as dynamic tools by teachers, administrators, and school staff.

This is where MIA comes in. We are currently collaborating with Sandra Morán, a Congresswoman with Partido Convergencia. Together, we want to raise awareness and provide information that may be used to advance legislation that ensures that the Guide and Protocol are properly enforced in each school and classroom. It simply doesn’t do much good to have all the information officially printed and made available to the public, if the utilization of these tools is not enforced.

Sandra Morán is a really interesting and ground-breaking politician. She was elected in September 2015, amidst the corruption scandal that involved many in public office, and took office in early 2016. She is a staunch feminist in a machista country where being a feminist is radical and even dangerous. She is also openly gay, in a place where violence—and even murder—is perpetrated against homosexual and trans people. Sandra has said, “In Guatemala, to be a feminist is not welcomed, to be a lesbian, even less so. But the fact that I have always been transparent about who I am – a lesbian feminist – took away that weapon from those who use misogynist, sexist, and homophobic attacks as a political strategy.”

Sandra has long been an activist. She was born in 1960 (the year Guatemala’s internal armed conflict began) and from a young age, expressed her anti-military, anti-violence and repression sentiment, joining the Guerrilla Army of the Poor (Ejército Guerrillero de los Pobres, EGP), when she was a teenager. She then went into exile in the early 1980s, when the dictatorship and governmental brutality were most severe, and spent time in other Central American countries and Mexico, until the conflict was officially over with the signing of the Peace Accords. Upon her return, she became part of the Women’s Sector of the Assembly of Women for the Peace Accords, and later the coordinator of the Women’s Forum. Over the past 20 years, she has promoted and participated in different feminist and lesbian collectives, such as the women in exile collective Nuestra Voz (Our Voice); the lesbian collective Mujeres Somos (We Are Women); and the Colectivo de Mujeres Feministas de Izquierda (Feminist Leftist Women’s Collective).

Sandra has a strong agenda to make more visible LGBTQI rights and gender diversity and equality. As she has expressed, upon her election and with regarding her everyday fight: “Lesbian identity in Guatemala is taboo. It was necessary to show it, not only to break that taboo, but more so, it gave the opportunity for the LGBT community to have a representative. I knew that identity was going to be used against me. So I took from them the power they could have had to use it against me.”

She is pushing strongly to include school bullying against LGBTQI students in the Guide to Identifying and Preventing School Bullying, where the unique and persistent ways in which these students are harassed and bullied are specifically detailed. Using homosexual slurs such as hueco, maricón, marica, culero, among others, is extremely widespread against students of all ages, and it is time that this violence is addressed head-on.

At MIA, we are very excited to be working to provide information to Sandra Morán and her party to really make in-roads and lasting change within the Guatemalan education system on identifying and properly addressing violence and bullying in schools. Her energy and deep desire to create change are contagious, and she seems prepared and driven to confront and and all obstacles that would prevent advances towards gender equality and identity. Stay tuned to read more about our collaboration and achievements!

If you’d like to read more about Sandra Morán in the news, The Guardian has a great article: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/feb/11/guatemala-feminist-lesbian-sandra-moran. The Nobel Women’s Initiative conducted an interview with her: https://nobelwomensinitiative.org/meet-sandra-moran-guatemala/. And Guatemala-based Plaza Pública has an in-depth article in Spanish: https://www.plazapublica.com.gt/content/sandra-moran-una-feminista-en-el-congreso.

Jueces renuentes a aplicar ley contra el Femicidio

A través de análisis y estudios a tribunales de primera instancia, penales, de familia, Ministerio Público, Inacif y Policía Nacional Civil la Procuraduría de Derechos Humanos concluyó en un informe sobre la aplicación de la ley contra el femicidio, que los jueces son renuentes a los cambios y a la ley contra el Femicidio.

POR CRISTINA BONILLO Ciudad de Guatemala

Sergio Morales, Procurador de Derechos Humanos presentó ayer el informe que evalúa los dos años de aplicación de la ley contra el femicidio, a la Oficina de la Alta Comisionada de Naciones Unidas para los derechos Humanos (Oacnudh), el cual será trasladado directamente a la relatora de ONU contra la violencia contra las mujeres, Rashida Manjoo.

El informe platea cambios importantes respecto al Código Penal explicó Lesbia Tebalán, asesora del procurador en temas de impunidad.

Explicó que en dos años apenas hubo 64 sentencias en base a esta ley (no todas condenatorias), y que las agencias del Ministerio Público especializadas en temas de femicidio tenían hasta el día de ayer y desde la aprobación d e la ley 395 investigaciones en marcha de las que solo 8 se tipifican como femicidio.

Tebalán explicó que los jueces y fiscales aplican en muchos casos el precepto de homicidio según establece el código penal, o el de asesinato, que contempla las mismas penas que el femicidio, sin embargo permite medidas sustitutivas y conmutabilidad de la pena, algo que no perite el delito de femicidio.

Entre las recomendaciones, está que el estado comprenda que el problema del femicidio “va más allá de la persecución penal hay que atacare una cultura que va contra la mujer, el femicidio demuestra odio contra la mujer”, dijo Morales. El procurador instó a que instituciones como el Ministerio de Educación o el de Cultura se involucren más en temas educativos y de concienciación para atajar el problema de la violencia contra la mujer. “Tiene mucho que hacer todo el estado”, apuntó.

El representante de la OACNUDH, Alberto Brunori, explicó que se enviará este documento a la relatora y según los procedimientos a seguir en estos casos posiblemente puede pedir al estado algún tipo de aclaración sobre las denuncias presentadas en el informe. Además señaló que servirá de insumo para la oficina y para realizar su informe anual acerca de la situación de los derechos humanos en el país.

http://www.prensalibre.com/noticias/justicia/Jueces-renuentes-aplicar-ley-Femicidio_0_301769908.html

Grupos presionan por el TPS

POR CRISTINA BONILLO

La Procuraduría de los Derechos Humanos (PDH) y organizaciones de migrantes instaron al Gobierno y población a seguir presionando por el TPS para los guatemaltecos indocumentados en EE. UU.

Representantes de organizaciones y de la PDH presionan por la concesión del TPS. Erick Avila

Representantes de organizaciones y de la PDH presionan por la concesión del TPS. Erick Avila

Lucía Muñoz, representante de la organización Red para la Paz y el Desarrollo para Guatemala, expresó que no es posible que este sea el único país centroamericano que no cuente con un Estatus de Protección Temporal (TPS, en inglés), y aseguró que hay poca voluntad del Gobierno para presionar por ese beneficio.

También anunció que se intenta organizar una marcha para presionar al Gobierno de EE. UU. a la concesión de la medida temporal.

Oswaldo Cardona, representante de la Unidad contra la Impunidad, de la PDH, recordó que tras los desastres naturales registrados en el país, el TPS es más necesario que nunca.

“Lo tienen salvadoreños, hondureños y nicaragüenses. Por alguna razón no ha sido otorgado a nuestros compatriotas, y eso nos pone en una situación de mayor vulnerabilidad con relación a otras naciones, en aquel país”, enfatizó.

“Creemos que es justo y humano que sea otorgado el TPS, independientemente de la reforma migratoria”, subrayó.

http://www.prensalibre.com/noticias/Grupos-presionan-TPS_0_297570263.html

Equal Rights for Women? Survey Says: Yes, but …

June 30, 2010 / By VICTORIA SHANNON

People around the world say they firmly support equal rights for men and women, but many still believe men should get preference when it comes to good jobs, higher education or even in some cases the simple right to work outside the home, according to a new survey of 22 nations.

The poll, conducted in April and May by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project in association with the International Herald Tribune, shows that in both developing countries and wealthy ones, there is a pronounced gap between a belief in the equality of the sexes and how that translates into reality.

In nations where equal rights are already mandated, women seem stymied by a lack of real progress, the poll found.

“Women in the United States and Europe are shouldering major responsibilities at home and at work simultaneously, and this makes for stress and a low quality of life,” said Prof. Herminia Ibarra, co-author of the 2010 Corporate Gender Gap Report of the World Economic Forum.

The opinions of the French, in particular, are emblematic of the uneven drive for equality of the sexes.

One hundred percent of French women and 99 percent of French men backed the idea of equal rights. Yet 75 percent also said that men there had a better life, by far the highest percentage in any of the countries in which polling took place.

Why do people in France, which provides generous state care for new mothers and toddlers, feel so far from having achieved gender equality?

“Because they are, at least in terms of economic participation,” said Professor Ibarra, who teaches organizational behavior at Insead, the international business school based in Fontainebleau, France. “There are still very few women running large organizations, and business culture remains resolutely a boys’ club.”

Indeed, the United States and Germany reported an especially strong gap between the sexes on whether enough has been done to give women equality. Of those who believe in equal rights, many more American and German men believe their nations have made the right amount of changes for women, while many more women than men in those countries think more action is required.

“When you’re left out of the club, you know it,” said Prof. Jacqui True, an expert in gender relations and senior lecturer at the University of Auckland. “When you’re in the club, you don’t see what the problem is.”

The rising giants of China and India, together with Indonesia and Jordan, were the four other countries where a majority of equal-rights supporters think most of the adjustments necessary to establish equality have already been made.

In telephone and face-to-face interviews, the Pew Center found that equality of the sexes was by vast majorities a goal for men and women alike.

In 13 of the countries, more than 90 percent of the respondents said they supported equal rights; in every other country except Egypt, Jordan, Kenya, Indonesia and Nigeria, more than 75 percent backed gender equality. Nigeria, in fact, was the only surveyed country where more than half (54 percent) said women should not have equal rights; 45 percent of respondents favored equal rights.

In addition, only in Pakistan, Egypt and Jordan did fewer than 80 percent of the respondents say that women should be able to work outside the home. Even in those three countries, a majority said they supported women’s right to work.

Showing how widely accepted the notion of equality has become, even more men than women in Britain and Japan supported equal rights. (Scandinavian countries, which often score highest on gender equality, were not part of the survey.)

Yet few countries consider that equality achieved. Only in three countries did a majority of those surveyed say that women and men have achieved a comparable quality of life: Mexico (56 percent), Indonesia (55 percent) and Russia (52 percent). In six other countries, a sizable ratio — 40 to 50 percent — said they believed that men’s and women’s lives were equally good.

In Poland, by contrast, a majority (55 percent) said men had the upper hand. And in another five countries as diverse as India, Spain and Nigeria, 40 to 49 percent said men retained the higher quality of life. But France’s 75 percent led the list.

Only in South Korea (49 percent) and Japan (47 percent) did more people say women are better off than say men are, or that they are the same. It may be that men there “resent being married to their company, and also that there are fewer expectations of women,” Professor True said. “But that’s not equality.”

The variable assessment of gender equality suggests, according to the Pew Research Center report, that “while egalitarian sentiments are pervasive, they are less than robust.”

Most of the countries where people said men and women had equally good lives, Professor True said, “are only beginning to question and challenge gender discrimination and injustice, which have been taken for granted and seen as legitimate.”

“There is a lower consciousness of the gender differences there because men have always dominated,” she added. “Women have not had the opportunity to band together to challenge the power of men.”

Professor True, who is the author of five books on international relations and gender politics, is also head of the feminist theory and gender studies section of the International Studies Association, an organization of scholars and publisher of academic journals.

The surveys were conducted nationwide in all countries except China, India and Pakistan, where samples were disproportionately urban. Margins of sampling error are plus or minus three to five percentage points.

Although government mandates for equal education and job opportunities are frequently the means to gender equality, some nations that uphold the principle of equality also have sizable constituencies who would not give women the same rights to schooling and jobs.

Half or more of those asked in India, Pakistan and Egypt say a university education is more important for a boy; in China, Japan, Jordan, Poland and Nigeria, that number was at least one-third.

In some places where a boy’s education is favored, women had opinions far different from those of men. In Egypt, for instance, a solid 60 percent of men said boys were more entitled to that education, while an equally solid 60 percent of women disagreed. The gender gap was similar in Jordan and Pakistan.

“A lot of families are too poor to send all of their kids to school,” Professor Ibarra said. In India, for example, social groups are trying to organize day care for families so that daughters do not have to stay home and care for younger siblings while the sons go off to school.

Likewise, a strong core in several countries said men had more right to a job than women. More than 50 percent in 10 of the 22 countries said that when jobs are scarce, they should go to men. “If we think that it’s a growable pie, equality is fine,” Professor Ibarra commented. “If we think it’s a limited pie, it’s not.”

In India, Pakistan, Egypt, Indonesia and China, this belief was most widespread, while respondents in the United States, Britain, Spain, Germany and France most strongly disagreed that men should be preferred for jobs when they are hard to find.

Yet the belief that men should not have the edge does not translate into economic reality in many of the same countries. In France, Germany, Poland and India, at least 80 percent of those surveyed said men still got more opportunities than women for jobs that pay well, even when woman were as qualified.

What may be more surprising is that the respondents were not unanimous about men getting the good jobs. The inequity in well-paying jobs, Professor Ibarra said, “is absolutely true.”

“That’s not even an opinion,” the professor said. “You could find hard facts to support that anywhere you look.”

Professor True said it often took two generations before reality caught up with changes in attitudes.

“We’re entering the next phase in many of these countries,” she said. “We’re going to see much more frustration with gender inequality among both women and men before we get institutional change in developing countries.”

How the poll was conducted

The poll on gender equality was conducted by the Pew Research Center in association with the International Herald Tribune in 22 countries: Argentina, Brazil, Britain, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Poland, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Turkey and the United States. These questions are part of the larger 2010 Pew Global Attitudes Project.

Interviews were conducted either by telephone or in person in April and May. In most countries, samples of 700 to 1,300 people were representative of the adult population. In China, India and Pakistan, the samples included at least 2,000 adults and were disproportionately urban. In addition, areas of instability in Egypt and Lebanon and remote sectors of Indonesia, Russia and South Korea were not surveyed.

The margin of sampling error for each country was plus or minus three to five percentage points. In addition, the practical difficulties of conducting any survey of public opinion may introduce other sources of error into the poll. Translation of questions into the many languages involved, for example, may lead to somewhat differing results. Each survey was conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: July 1, 2010

An earlier version of this incorrectly reported a statistic on people’s attitude toward women and jobs in Pakistan, Egypt and Jordan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/world/01iht-poll.html

What is the Temporary Protected Status, TPS?

1. What is Temporary Protected Status?

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is a temporary immigration status granted to eligible nationals of designated countries or parts thereof.

During the period for which a country has been designated for TPS, TPS beneficiaries may remain in the United States and may obtain work authorization. However, TPS does not lead to permanent resident status (green card).

When the Secretary terminates a TPS designation, beneficiaries revert to the same immigration status they maintained before TPS (unless that status had since expired or been terminated) or to any other status they may have acquired while registered for TPS. Accordingly, if an immigrant did not have lawful status prior to receiving TPS and did not obtain any other lawful status during the TPS designation, the immigrant reverts to unlawful status upon the termination of that TPS designation.

TPS is not granted to persons that try to register after the first registration period ends, so if a person of a country that is currently under TPS did not register the first time TPS was assigned, then that person does not qualify for TPS.

2. Who is eligible to apply for Temporary Protected Status?

You may be eligible to apply for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) if:

• You are a national of a country designated by the Attorney General for TPS. You may also be eligible if you are a person who has no nationality but last habitually resided in a designated country

• You apply for TPS during the specified registration period. The registration period is stated in the Federal Register notices of designation and is also generally noted in USCIS press releases

• You have been continuously physically present in the U.S. since the TPS designation began, or since the effective date of the most recent re-designation

• You are admissible as an immigrant and are not otherwise ineligible for TPS

• You have continuously resided in the U.S. since a date specified by the Attorney General

Note: This date is listed in the Federal Register notice of designation and may be different than the date TPS became effective.

3. Who is ineligible to apply for Temporary Protected Status?

You are ineligible for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) if you:

• Have been convicted of any felony or two or more misdemeanors committed in the U.S.

• Are a persecutor, terrorist or otherwise subject to one of the bars to asylum

• Are subject to one of several criminal-related grounds of inadmissibility for which a waiver is not available

For a Spanish version, see this link.

La ola de ‘feminicidios’ de Ciudad Juárez se extiende por Centroamérica

ANNA-MARIA HOLLAIN | Madrid | www.elpais.com

Walda Barrios-Klee, ayer en Madrid- CRISTÓBAL MANUEL

Walda Barrios-Klee, ayer en Madrid- CRISTÓBAL MANUEL

WALDA BARRIOS-KLEE Activista a favor de la mujer en Guatemala

Sólo durante 2009, en Guatemala fueron asesinadas 847 mujeres. En los últimos 10 años, han muerto de manera violenta 5.027 guatemaltecas. Y en lo que va de año, ya suman 160. No se trata de violencia doméstica a puerta cerrada, sino de mujeres que son torturadas y asesinadas en lugares públicos, casi siempre por desconocidos. Walda Barrios-Klee (1951, Ciudad de Guatemala), consejera asesora de la Unión Nacional de Mujeres Guatemaltecas, constata una realidad preocupante en una entrevista concedida a EL PAÍS en el marco de un seminario internacional sobre feminicidios en Guatemala y México, celebrado ayer en la Casa de América de Madrid. “¿Por qué fue famoso el caso de Ciudad Juárez? Porque allí empezaron. Pero de allí comienza a pasar en toda Centroamérica y en toda la región. Ya es una patología social”, asegura.

Desde 2008, la legislación del país centroamericano reconoce el delito del feminicidio: el asesinato de mujeres por el simple hecho de serlo, motivado por el odio y la misoginia. “Los feminicidios están considerados como crímenes impersonales. El que mata a la mujer no tiene ninguna relación con ella. Es un crimen anónimo. El que asesina no conoce a la víctima y la mata por el hecho de ser mujer. Es lo nuevo del fenómeno”, resalta Barrios.

Otro factor distintivo es la brutalidad empleada antes y después de la muerte de la víctima. “No se mata únicamente, sino que se persigue todo un ritual en el asesinato: tortura, mutilación y violación. Hay violación siempre, acompañada por un sadismo excesivo”, precisa. Los cadáveres aparecen a menudo descuartizados, con las uñas arrancadas y la cara desfigurada.

La consejera, que fue candidata a la vicepresidencia de Guatemala en 2007, subraya que la ley contra los feminicidios “ha servido para que aumenten las denuncias ?porque las mujeres pierden un poco el miedo?, pero no la penalización”. Y tampoco ha conseguido frenar las agresiones. “La ley fue aprobada en marzo de 2008. Y en marzo de 2009, en lugar de bajar, aumentaron los crímenes”.

Para Barrios, se trata de un fallo institucional. “La ley es una contribución al cambio cultural. No obstante, si el sistema de justicia no funciona bien, aunque haya ley, las cosas no van a cambiar mucho”.

El llamado triángulo de la violencia [Guatemala, El Salvador y Honduras, según la descripción acuñada por Naciones Unidas, ya que tienen las tasas de feminicidios más altas de la región] ilustra un problema que va más allá de los conflictos armados, que acecharon en el pasado a El Salvador y Guatemala, y en los que la violación se usó como arma de guerra.

El primer puesto respecto al asesinato de mujeres, en los últimos años, lo solía ocupar Guatemala. “Ahora, Honduras tiene el primero, El Salvador el segundo, y Guatemala el tercero”, afirma la defensora de los derechos de las mujeres. Y explica que esta situación se da no porque haya bajado la cifra en Guatemala, sino porque ha subido en Honduras.

“¿Qué tienen en común Guatemala y El Salvador? Las guerras internas. Honduras, no. Pero Honduras salta después del golpe de Estado. Es lo que cambia la situación allí. El problema tiene que ver con el papel del Estado y el debilitamiento de las estructuras estatales, algo que afecta a toda América Latina”, añade la activista.

Es cierto que en el caso particular de Guatemala pesa también la herencia de una guerra fratricida de casi cuatro décadas, ?el acuerdo de paz se firmó en 1996?, que dejó más de 200.000 muertos o desaparecidos, sin que se haya juzgado jamás a los verdugos. “Hemos tenido 36 años de conflicto armado durante los cuales el aparato de Estado se usó para la represión. Toda la estructura estatal quedó en manos de gente que tenía esa mentalidad del enemigo interno, que así se llamaba a la gente que quería una Guatemala distinta. Eso no se desmontó con la firma de la paz. La estructura del Estado quedó como era, con las mismas personas de la guerra. Por eso, no piensan en la justicia”, explica Barrios.

A ese clima de impunidad generalizada se une un cambio de perspectiva. Ahora, las mujeres encarnan al enemigo interno, sostiene la activista, “porque empezamos a salir a la calle, a trabajar, a ser autónomas, a tener ingresos propios, a reivindicar espacios públicos y cuotas de poder. A medida que hay más participación política y más mujeres buscando cargos públicos, hay más asesinatos. El mensaje social parece ser que la mujer que sale de casa corre más peligro que la que se queda encerrada, aunque esto sea un mito. Porque incluso los maridos que te golpean y pegan en las casas no te matan como te matan en la calle. Es una forma de terrorismo”.

ProReforma ignora a las guatemaltecas

Irma Alicia Velásquez Nimatuj

Guatemala, 16 Sep (Cerigua).- La propuesta de ProReforma no sólo discrimina a los pueblos indígenas y a los jóvenes, sino además ignora a quienes conforman más de la mitad de la población del país, las mujeres, indicó Irma Alicia Velásquez Nimatuj.

A decir de Velásquez, en su columna “ProReforma X”, las mujeres son tan diversas, provienen de distintos pueblos, de distintas clases sociales, con diferentes intereses y tendencias ideológicas y han sido actoras económicas y políticas invisibilizadas en el país.

De acuerdo con la columnista, después de leer la propuesta se evidencia que la población femenina no es incluida, ni se respetan sus múltiples capacidades, aportes y necesidades en la construcción de un pacto político cultural.

Según la lideresa indígena, las guatemaltecas terminan oscurecidas y diluidas bajo argumentos superados en otras sociedades, los que son presentados como la panacea para que “Guatemala se afiance de un genuino régimen”.

La exclusión de las mujeres se esconde detrás de una defensa acérrima y conservadora de los principios de igualdad y de libertad, especialmente cuando se apela a lo largo del documento a no ser discriminatorios, a no conceder explícita o implícitamente prerrogativas, privilegios o beneficios que puedan disfrutar todas las personas, subraya la profesional.

Velásquez enfatizó que los ponentes, en su mayoría hombres, no se percatan, ni reflexionan que ellos individual y colectivamente poseen significativas cuotas de poder, no por esfuerzo propios, sino en buena medida heredados y asignados únicamente por ser hombres.

Las propuestas presentadas por ProReforma esconden posiciones conservadoras que buscan perpetuar la exclusión de las mujeres en los tres poderes del Estado, indicó la columnista.

Finalmente, Velásquez lamentó que mientras el mundo camine hacia la eliminación de construcciones con resabios sexistas, racistas, clasistas y discriminatorios, esta asociación impulse todo lo contrario, en un país como plural como Guatemala.

http://cerigua.info/portal/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13968&Itemid=1

Canary Institute Guatemalan News Summary ~ July 29 – August 4, 2009

Compiled by Patricia Anderson and Santos Tale Tax

Migration

The two initial bills were presented to Congress last week by the Guatemalan Migrant Commission. The bills seek to reform the Law of Migration and create a new decentralized entity to oversee migration: the Guatemalan Institute of Migration (IGM). The proposed IGM would have its own director and resources which would be dedicated to better controlling entrances and exits out of Guatemala. The bills also include an initiative that would create electronic visas for foreigners entering the country. These bills are separate from the one that was presented last week by the National Board of Migration which focused more on the protection migrant rights.

The airport is currently undergoing massive remodeling set to be completed within two years. Included in the plans is a special area for receiving Guatemalans who have been deported from the United States.

15,570 Guatemalans have been deported from the United States this year. Most of the deportees come from the departments of San Marcos, Huehuetenango and Retalhulea.

One Guatemalan citizen along with 96 Mexican citizens were detained in the United States after being found in a freight truck in Arizona. The group was traveling among crates of fruit being transported at 34 degrees Fahrenheit. The group was largely comprised of women and children ages 9-12.

In response to North American bishops decision to call on President Obama for migration reform, Central American bishops gathered last week to make the same call to the US president in the form of letters and calls to their parishioners on both sides of the border.

In an effort to tighten security along the Mexico-Guatemala border, stricter documentation requirements are being asked of Guatemalan citizens. Rather than using local passes, as border residents were allowed before, citizens residing in border departments are required to apply for a formal migration visa. All other Guatemalan residents must have their passport. These new requirements have hurt Chiapas economy as tourism from Guatemala has been down substantially since the requirements were enacted.

Health

Thirty one new cases of H1N1 (gripe A) were identified last week, bringing the national H1N1 count to 528 cases. The death of a one year old boy brings the flu’s death toll to 10. There are now 30,000 doses of Tamiflu in the country, though the Ministry of Health has declined to comment on the possibility of a much larger outbreak, as there has been in the countries Mexico and El Salvador.

Honduras

Regional commerce has fallen 17 percent since the Honduran coup. Part of this drop has been attributed to the difficultly trucks have had crossing the Honduran border. But the European Union has announced that it will restart commerce with Central America, minus Honduras, in September.

Climate Change

El Niño has begun to form over the Pacific Ocean. The weather phenomenon is expected to bring storms, floods and drought. The upside of El Niño is that its presence lowers the frequency of hurricanes, say experts. The effects of El Niño will likely not been seen until late October. Agricultural production will be severely affected by the droughts and floods produced by El Niño.

Community Consultation

The population of Churrancho in the department Guatemala voted 87.2 percent against the construction of a hydroelectric dam in a nearby river. Residents believe the dam will negatively impact their community and leave them with no water. Generdora Nacional, the owner of the proposed dam, complains that they were notified only two weeks before that the consult was going to take place. Generador Nacional already has the permission of the Ministry of Environment to construct the dam as the company has already turned in its required environmental impact study.

Food and Nutrition

The Canadian activist group Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC) warns that Guatemala and other countries like it are in danger of losing their native corn plants to genetically-modified super breeds. Guatemala has come under a lot of pressure to completely switch to genetically-modified seed since the largest seed was bought out by transnational company Monsanto’s Seed last year. ETC says genetically-altered crops and use of petrochemicals is a false solution to the food shortages caused by global warming. Agroindustry consumes 14 percent of the world’s fuel consumption, the same amount as cars and other forms transportation.

Mining

The Ministry of the Environment prohibited the mining company Montana Exploradora from importing cyanide as it has failed to pay proper import taxes for the last two years. Montana has been paying 3 Quetzales per kilogram where the tax is at 5 Q/kg. The Ministry has banned Montana from importing the chemical until it pays the difference. A Montana spokesperson has said that the company is preparing its lawyers for legal countermeasures.

Montana Exploradora S.A. Guatemala is a wholly-owned subsidiary of GoldCorp, a Canadian company that mines precious metals. Montana currently has several projects active in the Western highlands of Guatemala. It’s most notorious project is the Marlin mine in the department San Marcos. The Marlin mine has been opposed by local communities since its inception in 2005. Several community members have been jailed and threatened over the course of the mine’s operation and several protests of the mine have turn brutally violent. Montana is currently the largest bidder for exploration licenses in another region of San Marcos, which has sparked protests, marches and roadblocks nationwide.

The Pastoral Commission of Peace and Ecology (Copae) of the Catholic diocese of San Macos recently undertook a study of five rivers around the Marlin Mine. Copea, using its own equipment and laboratory, found large concentrations of metals near mining disposal sites.

The Mining Guild denounced Copea’s methods unscientific and declared its finding unreliable. Montana Exploradora assured the press the rivers near Marlin mine are not contaminated.

Bishop Álvaro Ramazzini of San Marcos diocese said he hopes the study serves an alert to environmental authorities and that it moves authorities to conduct more extensive environmental impact studies. Bishop Ramazzini has spoken out against the mine both from the pulpit and in public forums since the mine’s beginning, for which he has received death threats and law suits for ‘provoking violence among peasants toward mining activity.’

Please take a moment to join Canary Institute on Google Groups.   If you want us to add you manually, just zip an email  to gkuecker@gmail.com
.


Esa vieja esclavitud

EL QUINTO PATIO: Carolina Vásquez Araya

Guatemala es uno de esos países donde aún existe el servicio doméstico, casi como un derecho adquirido, sin regulación legal alguna, fuente de explotación laboral y de abuso físico y económico contra las mujeres cuya situación les impide tener acceso a otras fuentes de trabajo, principalmente porque jamás tuvieron acceso a la educación.

El tema de las regulaciones legales del trabajo doméstico, en Guatemala, es casi como discutir la legalización del aborto en una asamblea de fundamentalistas religiosos: casi imposible. Existe una resistencia atávica de un fuerte sector de la población cuyos ingresos les permiten conservar el privilegio de tener una empleada trabajando a tiempo completo por un sueldo de miseria, y no será fácil cambiar su visión de las cosas.

Uno de los mayores obstáculos lo constituye la grada socioeconómica entre patrones y empleadas, con toda la carga de menosprecio y discriminación que ello involucra. La mayoría de las mujeres trabajadoras en casas particulares pertenecen a la población indígena. Son jóvenes que emigraron hacia las ciudades, en búsqueda de mejores oportunidades para ganarse la vida, y se encontraron, la mayoría de las veces, enfrentadas a una situación de dependencia y explotación fomentada por los altos índices de desempleo y la enorme competencia por encontrar una fuente de ingresos.

Obligadas a iniciar el día durante las primeras horas del alba y a mantenerse atenta a servir hasta que el último miembro de la familia decida lo contrario a avanzadas horas de la noche, la mayoría de trabajadoras recibe a cambio un sueldo inferior al mínimo fijado por ley.

Mantenido a capricho de la sociedad como una actividad informal, el servicio doméstico se ha convertido en una de las más humillantes formas de esclavitud para miles de mujeres cuyas limitadas opciones de supervivencia las someten a la aceptación forzada de unas condiciones de vida tan precarias como humillantes.

En este contexto, el maltrato contra la mujer toma una forma de convivencia natural e indiscutible. So pretexto de proporcionarles trabajo, casa y comida, sus patrones tranquilizan su conciencia ante las variadas forma de abuso a las cuales las someten de manera consuetudinaria.

Por supuesto, las excepciones existen y eso hace la regla. Sin embargo, el solo hecho de comenzar a discutir recién en el siglo XXI el tema de las regulaciones laborales para este numeroso contingente de trabajadoras, demuestra lo poco que se las valora en el ámbito de la productividad y la generación de riqueza. En estos tiempos de búsqueda de la justicia y la equidad de género, es imperioso enderezar estos entuertos, resabios de la época colonial, y eliminar esta degradante forma de discriminación.

elquintopatio@gmail.com

http://www.prensalibre.com/pl/2009/agosto/10/330789.html

DC Crime Bill May Hurt Victims of Sex Trafficking – Please Take Action

Washington DC: Take Action on the DC Crime BIll

Sex trafficking is horrific crime whereby a person is forced or coerced to take part in sexual acts in exchange for something of value. In Washington D.C. such abuse of women and children is not uncommon. Unfortunately, in many cases a person who is sex trafficked is treated as a criminal rather than a victim who is unable to escape the physical abuse and psychological coercion to which she is subjected. Now, the D.C. Council is poised to vote on legislation, entitled the Omnibus Crime Bill 18-151, which includes a provision that will make a third arrest of a prostituted person a felony level crime. These penalties are far too stiff for the prostituted person, will do little to address the instances of prostitution or sex trafficking in D.C., and may cause further damage to trafficking victims.

Polaris Project serves clients throughout the D.C. metro area, as well as in NJ, who have been forced or coerced into prostitution. In many of these cases the victim, even at the age of just 18, will have a litany of arrests or convictions for prostitution both in DC and other jurisdictions. This demonstrates the transient nature of the pimps’ operations. Arresting the prostituted person does little to deter the trafficker/pimp or provide relief or rescue for the prostituted person. In fact, if enacted, this provision may cause further victimization as well as present increased obstacles as a woman with a felony conviction attempts to rebuild her shattered life.

Sex traffickers and pimps are motivated only by money, and the people they prostitute are easily movable, disposable and replaceable. Therefore we urge you to join with us and ask the D.C. Council to oppose the overreaching penalties for prostituted persons, and consider focusing their attention on the pimps and purchasers of sex or “johns”.

Polaris Project strongly supports the increased penalties for johns proposed in this bill. Johns exercise meaningful choice when they engage in commercial sex transactions, so efforts to deter their activity will have a greater impact in reducing prostitution and sex trafficking, which are inextricably intertwined.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

The crime bill was passed by the DC Council on July 30th and the bill now moves to the Mayor. Your quick action is imperative to helping victims of sex trafficking in DC!

1. Please take a moment to call AND email Mayor Fenty and urge him to send the DC Crime bill back to the Council and recommending that they remove the increased penalties for prostituted persons.   Contact Mayor Fenty here.  In your call you can simply say:  

”My name is …. And I live at…. I am calling to urge Mayor Fenty to send the DC Crime Bill (18-151) back to the Council to remove the increased penalties for prostituted persons.”

2. Be sure to follow up with a quick email.

Additional Talking Points:

• The proposed penalties are far too stiff for the prostituted person – up to 2-5 years in prison and or up to $4,000 to $10,000 in fines. These fines will simply result in the re-victimization of the prostituted person or trafficking victim, and there’s no evidence that this approach will decrease prostitution in the District.

• Victims of prostitution and sex trafficking commonly have many arrests or convictions for prostitution because pimps and traffickers are constantly moving them around to different areas to profit off of them [we never call this work]. Increasing penalties for the victim will do little to deter the trafficker/pimp or provide relief or rescue to the prostituted person.

• Greater penalties for prostituted persons may cause further victimization as well as present increased obstacles as a woman with a felony conviction attempts to rebuild her shattered life.

• The vast majority of states retain the misdemeanor penalty for subsequent convictions of the prostituted person. In the handful of states which make subsequent convictions a felony for the prostituted person, there is no correlation between these higher penalties and a decrease in prostitution and the closely related activity of sex trafficking. This is likely due to the fact that traffickers and pimps are motivated only by money, and the people they prostitute are easily movable, disposable and replaceable.

• Studies have shown that focusing criminal prosecution on the purchasers of commercial sex will have an immediate and long-term effect in curbing the demand for prostitution.

http://actioncenter.polarisproject.org/component/content/article/35-action/618-crime-bill-proposes-third-time-arrest-be-a-felony