"By prohibiting inclusive language in the State, the Argentine government violates the Gender Identity Law."
Trans activist and former public official Alba Rueda provides legal and international treaty data to argue why the government's decision violates human rights.
Share
The Argentine government's announcement to ban inclusive language and gender perspectives in public administration follows what happened last week with the announcement of the closure of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Racism (INADI) . It also follows a resolution issued by the Minister of Defense prohibiting inclusive language and gender perspectives within the use of language. It states that it only ratifies the position of the RAE (Royal Academy of Spanish) as the sole competent authority on the use of language. Of course, the RAE does not represent the language uses of all Spanish-speaking countries. It represents their position, so the citation of authority is also questionable.
Among other issues, this position by the Minister of Defense strongly reeks of a colonial stance on the use of language. On the one hand, that. On the other hand, what does today's announcement mean? It's a prohibition on state instruments taking into account inclusive language or language with a gender perspective. But it's also a denial of a citizenship that is already recognized in Argentina and that the state itself recognizes with the Gender Identity Law . The recognition of non-binary identities is something contained in the Gender Identity Law. But it also reflects the position of rulings that the courts have recognized since 2016.
A direct path to discrimination
So, on the one hand, there is already recognition of non-binary identities by the justice system. Furthermore, on the part of the National Executive, there is a decree that is still in force, number 476 of 2021, which recognizes non-binary identities. This decree also refers to the use of the X for people who do not want to declare their gender to the State or who are gender fluid. So, one of the serious problems when denying the use of inclusive language is that the Executive ratifies a binary position and also selects what type of citizens it is referring to and who it leaves out not only from the use of language but also from access to services. Because if you don't name them, what you do is restrict the use of goods, services, and products that the State generates for that population group.
This is not only a position that denies gender diversity and the expressions of our genders, but it also denies the use of citizenship by exclusively selecting citizens who register as binary . This clearly violates the Gender Identity Law, a current decree, 476 of 2021, and many international treaties that rightly recognize gender identity and its expressions as among the most fundamental human rights.
Prohibition of the exercise of citizenship for the tribune
In this regard, not only have the Yogyakarta Principles already referred to the importance of recognizing gender expression, but so have other international instruments that recognize identity.
The serious thing about Argentina's position is that, in addition to being a setback for human rights, it also prohibits the exercise of citizenship. When you remove certain citizens from the nomination, what you are doing is restricting them, and this is the current position of the national government, which clearly conflicts with the position on gender and diversity.
I think this position of human rights violations is fueled by the social media echoes that a portion of the population celebrates. But human rights cannot be targeted by likes, and this is a clear violation of human rights.
Take action from the Justice system
The judicial system needs to speak out and legal action be initiated against non-compliance with current decrees and regulations. also believe that human rights organizations as a whole must express their condemnation of such a position. It's not just a use of language but also the creation or recognition of citizenship.
The announcement of the closure of INADI only exacerbates this situation. Among other things, because the State's own oversight body must be an autonomous institution, an autonomous body like INADI, something that the Ministry of Justice, to which those functions were supposedly transferred, fails to comply.
This is further proof that when an autonomous institute is closed, there's no way to defend people's rights autonomously, without complicity. Because Milei's employee, the Minister of Justice, is the one who should be investigating his boss or denouncing him. And that's not going to happen. So, transparency and autonomy in human rights matters are broken.
It is crystal clear that Milei's project is not a libertarian project but a conservative, repressive one that nullifies people's citizenship. True freedom does not violate human rights, and this is a fundamental fact.
Here it is also demonstrated that the cultural battle over the Milei language is nothing more than an attack on people's rights.
Alba Rueda is a trans activist and former civil servant. She served as Undersecretary of Diversity Policies at the Ministry of Women and Diversity, as well as Special LGBTI+ Representative at the Foreign Ministry during Alberto Fernández's administration.
We are Present
We are committed to a type of journalism that delves deeply into the realm of the world and offers in-depth research, combined with new technologies and narrative formats. We want the protagonists, their stories, and their struggles to be present.
SUPPORT US
FOLLOW US
Related Notes
We Are Present
This and other stories don't usually make the media's attention. Together, we can make them known.