Taking advantage of the proximity of the anniversary in which International Women's Day is celebrated, I would like to make a few brief reflections on the right to equality and the responsibility that public authorities and society as a whole have to ensure that rights are real and effective and not merely illusory.
In the specific case of the role of women in our society, it is true that progress has been made and, at least in terms of the formal aspect of the law, today we do enjoy formal equality, although there is still much to be done.
If we take a historical look at the achievements made, we could point to the achievement of women's suffrage in our country, barely less than a century ago, as a turning point in the achievement of the recognition of women's rights.
We have to go back to the Second Republic, to the historic debate in the Cortes on women's suffrage on October 1, 193 between Victoria Kent and Clara Campoamor. Two politicians and defenders of women's rights.
As is well known, Kent is considered by many to be the first female lawyer in Spain and a pioneer in criminal and penitentiary matters, an area in which she particularly excelled, and to this day she remains a benchmark. She defended the position against women's suffrage based on certain prejudices and short-sighted views, let's put it that way, without detracting from the figure of the character and her great contribution to our history.
At the other extreme, with a vision beyond the partisan context, we have the distinguished figure of Clara Campoamor, who defended with full conviction that above the interests of the State was the principle of equality and that women should achieve the right to vote immediately, without any postponement.
We would have to wait almost 40 years, the long night as the Franco period has been called by many, to set the right to equality at the highest level of recognition and protection in the Transition.
The Magna Carta, in a multitude of precepts refers to it, the most important references being articles 1.1, article 9.2 and the renowned article 14, among others impossible to enumerate in these lines.
Our Constitution, apart from recognizing equality jointly with freedom, justice and political pluralism, as superior values of the legal system, recognizes the two aspects of the right to equality. The formal aspect or equality before the law and material equality. Although it is also true that it includes the unfortunate and unjustifiable precedence of the male over the female in the succession to the throne in article 57, an aspect in which the Constitution itself incurs in "unconstitutionality" and should be subject to correction in future reforms of the text.
Here, in terms of material equality, is where we still have a long way to go; what distinguished constitutionalists such as Elisa Pérez Vera, the first woman to head a Spanish university, the UNED in 1982, call "breaking the glass ceiling".
The capital importance of article 9.2 of our Constitution is beyond any doubt. "It is the responsibility of the public authorities to promote the conditions for freedom and equality of the individual and of the groups to which he belongs to be real and effective; to remove the obstacles that prevent or hinder their fullness and to facilitate the participation of all citizens in political, economic, cultural and social life."
Based on this, we must continue to face the challenges in which our society is immersed. Legally and, even more so in a society that avoids a thoughtful reflection on important issues at the stroke of Twitter even more, it is very difficult to have a serious debate about the limits and counterweights that should exist between the tension of the right to equality, as formal equality, and the necessary action of public authorities to remove the starting conditions, for whatever reason, of women or any other group susceptible to discrimination in our society in order to achieve real equality.
As a society we must address certain key issues in order to achieve real equality. I am concerned about the harmful effect of equating the supplement to pensions for working mothers, especially those of generations close to retirement age, an aspect recently reformed by an unfortunate interpretation of the right to equality that is excessively formalistic on the part of the CJEU[1] in a judgment that I abide by but do not share.
Family and work balance still does not reach European standards. There are many loose ends to achieve equal rights between both sexes in terms of obligations and rights in case of family breakdown. In the tax field, a serious debate should be addressed about the usefulness, or not, of the joint income tax return model in order not to perpetuate roles in couples. These issues are just some examples in which the right to equality comes into tension between its two aspects and that we must face.
Congratulations to all working women for their effort and to continue moving forward, making us advance as a society.
Salvador Martínez Rompeltien, member of the Popular Party
[1] ECJ Judgment of 12 December 2019 (C-450/18)
