They investigate in Córdoba a man accused of filming sexual relations without consent

They investigate in Córdoba a man accused of filming sexual relations without consent

A man will have to answer before the Justice after his partner will denounce him for filming sexual intercourse without his consent that they kept The measure was ordered after the woman appealed and a new court revoked the first instance resolution taken by a Court of Corral de Bustos-Ifflinger, which had ordered the file of the case.

Provincial justice spokesmen detailed that the woman had denounced her partner for the crime of “gender violence” because the had recorded on video, surreptitiously and without their consent, sexual relations they had had.

The woman assured that this behavior was an act of “sexual violence” for her, because violated her privacy and her freedom of self-determination, since she was unaware that the man had set up a hidden camera to film.

Initially, the Court of First Instance Civil, Commercial, Conciliation, Family, Control, Childhood and Juvenile, Juvenile Criminal and Misdemeanors of the City of Corral de Bustos-Ifflinger concluded that “the facts denounced do not fit the assumptions provided by Law 9,283” of family violence, and ordered that the case be archived. In February of this year, the woman appealed that decision.

Now the Civil, Commercial, Family and Labor Chamber of the city of Marcos Juárez resolved to “repeal” the decision of first instance and ordered that the accused be investigated for alleged crimes framed in the Laws 9,283 and 10,400 on Family Violence and Law 10,401 on Gender Violence.

The judges of the court of appeals understood that the Court of first instance incurred in “disregard of the rights and guarantees established in article 1 of Law No. 10,401, related to the protection of physical, mental, sexual integrity, freedom and equal treatment, security and non-discrimination due to the condition of women”.

That judgment of first instance affected constitutional rights and guarantees by “ordering the file of a case, without even informing the complainant of the fact”added the resolution.

The magistrates considered that the archiving order “violates the 100 Rules of Brasilia” that aim to guarantee the conditions of effective access to justice for people in vulnerable conditions. Effective access to justice must be given “without any discrimination, encompassing the set of policies, measures, facilities and support that allow said people the full enjoyment of the services of the judicial system, recommending prioritizing actions aimed at facilitating access to justice. justice,” they warned.

The resolution ordered that the case be instructed to be issued on the potential injury to the right of a woman, which “requires an analysis and a judicial response from a gender perspectiveadopting the necessary measures”. That decision was supported by the Chamber Prosecutor’s Office.

Source: Pagina12

Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.