Page 355 - Pleno Jurisdiccional Nacional Sobre Violencia Contra la Mujer

Finalmente, el artículo sostiene que cuando se advierta que la probation resulta
procedente, el operador judicial debe focalizar en las condiciones para su otorgamiento
y la estricta vigilancia de su cumplimiento. Y es en esta dirección, que se estima
indispensable, entre otras medidas, que dicho instituto reciba acogida urgente en el
Código Procesal Penal de la Provincia, en el entendimiento de que derecho sustantivo y
adjetivo no pueden transitar por caminos diferentes en temas concernientes a principios,
derechos y garantías constitucionales como los que involucra la suspensión.

Palabras claves:
Góngora, suspensión del juicio a prueba, violencia contra la mujer, Convención de
Belem do Pará, procedencia.

Abstract

This essay offers an analysis of the viability of probation in criminal cases dealing with
violence against women. To this end, it assesses the Sentence of the Supreme Court of
Justice of Argentina in the case “Góngora, Gabriel Arnaldo / Nº 14.092”, dated April
,
23 2013. This analysis considers five relevant topics: violence against women as a
problem in itself, the Argentinian normative framework, the reality of the judicial
system, and the interests of both the victim and the imputed.
The main argument in the Court’s sentence departs from the premise that recourse to
probation is incompatible with the purpose of the Inter-American Convention on the
Prevention, Sanction and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention Belem
do Pará). This is so because it is considered to neglect the compromise assumed by the
State to “sanction” the relevant offenses by means of a “fair and efective legal
procedure” (article 7, b and f of the Convention). In addition to this, the sentence claims
that this would be inconsistent with the Interpretation Guidelines of the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaty.
In contrast to this view, this article argues that there is no prima facie legal impediment
to proceed with probation in cases involving violence against women. To the contrary,
this option may find support in a systemic analysis of Argentinian law. Furthermore, it
maintains that trial and punishment may not constitute the most efficient response
neither from the perspective of the criminal system, nor from the perspective of the
victim. Parallel to this, it suggests that there are reasons to think that, depending on the
case, suspension may turn out to be beneficial both for judicial administration and for
those involved.
Finally, the article motivates the claim that recourse to probation in cases involving
violence against women must be evaluated in a case-by-case analysis. When regarded as
pertinent, judicial operators must focus in the conditions for its admission and in the
strict vigilance of its execution. As a result of this, it becomes imperative that probation
receives regulation in the Criminal Procedure Code as long as substantive rights,
judicial principles, rights and constitucional warranties constitute normative dimensions
that should not be severed from each other.

27