The PSOE has claimed to be “the nation’s feminist occasion” to justify the vote in favor of its proposal to reform the “solely sure is sure” regulation that can be voted on this afternoon in Congress and that it’ll go forward with the “sure” of the PP and the vote in opposition to Podemos. “It’s not about who we vote for, however who we vote for,” declared Patxi López, spokesman for the socialist group.
The Socialists are attempting to take the iron out of taking it into consideration to go forward with the votes of the suitable. López needed to make it clear that in all this time he has not negotiated “something” with the PP in regard to the regulation. What’s extra, he asks Podemos a “reflection” on the that means of his vote and argues that what the Popular Party and Vox need is for the division within the Government to be mirrored within the voting panel. For the PSOE it’s “uncommon” to reject taking into account that it is just step one to open the parliamentary debate the place there is a chance to proceed negotiating and amending the textual content.
Patxi López asks those that vote in opposition to to elucidate why, whether it is as a result of they don’t consider there’s a drawback within the utility of the regulation or as a result of they don’t want an answer. The PSOE defends that the “solely potential answer” is to change probably the most emblematic undertaking of Irene Montero. “It is critical to behave”, he has emphasised him. And he has added that the remaining is “the denial of the issue”.
The spokesman justifies that “somebody who’s a feminist has to place the victims of sexual assaults above every other comfort.” In this sense, it has been reaffirmed that the Socialists don’t need to see how the aggressors see their sentences decreased. Since the regulation promoted by the Ministry of Equality got here into pressure, there have already been greater than 700 reductions.
He has additionally alluded to one of many recurring arguments of Podemos that the issue is that there’s a minority of judges who misapply the regulation. “If there are judges who interpret the regulation by reducing the sentences, it implies that this studying matches the norm,” stated Patxi López.