This week, The Special Commission that checks the Penal Code of Peru, integrated by Congress members, members of the Executive Power, of the Judicial Power, of the Attorney General’s office, of the Defense office of the People and of the Deans’ Meeting of the Attorney Associations; decided to modify the articles 114 to 120 of the penal code, agreeing to the decriminalization the abortions in the cases of resultant pregnancies of an act of sexual violation or when the fetus is affected by serious congenital malformations. In the first months of next year, these modifications will be envoys to the Presidency of the Congress, in order that it is decided if they go on to the plenary session for his discussion or to the Commission of Justice for his review.
Obviously the reactions in favor and against the penal modifications were immediately.
In one hand, statistics were remembered on violations, not wished pregnancies and clandestine abortions. Besides the public and Karen LLantoy’s unfortunate case, who at the age of 17 was obliged to continue with the pregnancy of a unencephalum girl, to sorrow that his physician had recommended that the correct thing was to fulfill a uterine cleanliness. The girl was born, was fed with milk of his mother and died after four days. The Council of Human rights of United Nations and the associations for the rights of the women think that it is an evident case of violation of Karen Llantoy’s rights.
In the other hand, there are many people who evoke the article 2 of the Political Constitution of Peru that refers to the human rights and that textually declares ” … The conceived one is a subject of right in all that favors him … “. Another group thinks that the life is over any rational criterion and his position departs that it is not possible to accept any polemic that includes the possibility of his interruption.
The national press has realized a great coverage of the details.
Personally, I think that the document is going to finish forgotten in a file, real or virtual, until somebody finds it and returns to approach the matter, from the beginning. But the problem is not in the document, the matter is that again we put in evidence our ignorance and lack of consensus on the real scopes of the principle of the human rights, in this case the reproductive ones. The topic is rational, but without prejudices; it is not only a matter of discussing to be protagonist or to try to impose beliefs using phrases of absolute transcendence.
The life is relative to the alive being, to his possibilities and limitations, to his time and to his space; and there are many human alive beings that are hoping that are established clear and definite positions on his reproductive rights, between other rights that till now only have been a matter of Commissions, reports and files.