In a concept sent to the Constitutional Court, the Attorney General of the Nation, Margarita Cabello, asked to declare the unconstitutionality of some expressions of Law 2089 of 2021, known as the ‘anti-cheating law’, which indicate that physical punishment against children does not will be grounds for loss of custody if these are unusual or affect the physical or mental health of the minor.
(You may be interested: Government asks the Court for adjustments to the law that prohibited physical punishment of minors)
In the document, which was sent within the framework of a lawsuit that the high court is studying against the ‘anti-cheating law’, the head of the Public Ministry stressed that limiting the possibility that the loss of parental authority occurs only when the abuse is habitual or serious to the point of affecting health ignores the constitutional mandates that impose on Congress the duty to sanction all types of physical and psychological violence in the family environment towards children.
This exception “prevents the legal operator in charge of deciding on parental authority, custody or emancipation from determining whether the imposition of physical punishment or the commission of a cruel or humiliating treatment it is a sufficient reason to limit or restrict certain family ties, “he says in the concept.
And he goes on to say that this requires, “unreasonably, that the conduct be repetitive or that it has the potential to affect the health of the victim.”
(You may be interested: Minsalud asks the Court to overturn the endorsement of child marriage)
Likewise, Cabello pointed out that for the Attorney It is worrying that normative expressions are being introduced into the legal system that go backwards in the protection of children and adolescents.
He also criticized the adoption of a regulation without taking into account the international commitments of the State, which advocate eliminating any type of child violence, including all kinds of physical punishment and cruel or humiliating treatment.
Finally, he recalled that in the past the Constitutional Court had already declared similar expressions unconstitutional.
Read other Justice notes
-The hearing date for loss of investiture against Gustavo Bolívar is set
-In an attack in Putumayo, an Army major was assassinated
-The judicial entanglement due to the review of sanctions issued by the Comptroller’s Office