Opposition left the Senate Judiciary Committee to begin reviewing a sexual assault bill that includes provisions for women’s consent, the result of a bipartisan agreement with input from Giorgia Meloni and Elly Schlein.
Therefore, they protested the request for a more in-depth analysis of the laws requested by the League, which relate to Fratelli d’Italia and Forza Italia. also requested an audience. Already at the group’s leaders’ conference, the opposition has requested an immediate vote in the House of Representatives today to make the vote coincide with the international day against violence against women which falls today. And the Senate president, Ignazio La Russa, has joined.
ANSA Agency Sprint in the Chamber for the crime of femicide. Meloni: ‘Violence against women is an act that violates everyone’s freedom’ – News – Ansa.it We seek bipartisan agreement to file a separate legal case (ANSA) “After voting unanimously for legislation that promotes free and up-to-date consent in sexual assault cases, today the majority decided to block it in the Senate. They postponed the vote and suspended hearings in the Commission sine die. majority turnaround it is clear that trust in the government is lacking”. He stated this Maria Elena Boschiannounced that no reformulation of the femicide decision agenda will be accepted again.
“After the serious commitments made here in the House by all political forces, including the majority, Roccella has the task of explaining why the Senate went back on its word. We – he explained – had doubts, we had amendments, but we withdrew those amendments to guarantee unanimity for the country. We acted seriously because we wanted to send a strong, transversal, cultural signal, even before there was legislation. To find that the same majority rejected the statutory agreement on consent is a very bad signal. For this relationship between the majority and the opposition, however – he concluded – especially for the citizens who asked for it certainty, not a political game against women.”
“An inexplicable and very serious change concerns the right to consent law and, once again, women will suffer the consequences.” As their representative Michela Di Biase, rapporteur on terms of agreement at the Chambercommented on what happened in the Senate on the text that was unanimously approved by the House last week.
“It would be very serious if the measure, which was approved unanimously less than a week ago in the Council, was now called into question. Such a step back would also represent a clear signal to the Prime Minister, who is working with Minister Schlein to push for the widest possible convergence, and an incomprehensible retreat from the same government parties who have expressed their unanimous vote in favor in the Council. We are faced with an important paradigm shift that introduces a simple and basic principle into our criminal system: if there is no consent, there is no consent. It would be rape. It would be very serious if controversy and criticism from the majority – or actual political messages, all of which constitute the right – prevent our country from taking important steps towards protecting the rights and dignity of women.”
“I will hold a series of focused, short hearings on some of the technical aspects that were reported and then we will move on. Having come to the commission today, it would be wrong and misleading to say that there is a delay. The action will certainly continue.” This is the certainty provided by Giulia Bongiorno, rapporteur of the bill on sexual violence and consentas well as the president of the Senate Judiciary Committee against which the action was directed.
And he added: “Tomorrow I will receive an audition request. He will try to shorten the time, I want to finish it in a few weeks”. Bongiorno, who was elected from the League, explained the process that has been followed so far. “The text (approved unanimously in the House last week, ed.) arrived in committee today. I had to ask if there was a unanimous vote to refrain from submitting amendments because procedurally I can send the measure, without giving a deadline for amendments, only if there is a unanimous vote. But that’s not because the center-right said that they wanted to make a correction by proposing, first, to hold several hearings.”
Bongiorno later confirmed that the doubts were related to the paragraph governing ‘less serious’ cases in which center-right senators were asked to explain specifically what was meant by less serious. But he reiterated that this is “a very important and useful provision because it is as if in Italy a jurisprudence upholds consensus and then each judge adheres to the text of the regulations. Homogeneity must therefore be guaranteed”.
Reproduction protected by law © Copyright ANSA
