03:51 PM
This Wednesday, after an eventful session flooded with challenges and propositions of all kinds, the plenary session of the House of Representatives resumes the discussion of the project you are looking for ban bullfighting in Colombia. The project is located in last debate and it is the first time, after 15 attempts, that he has managed to get that far.
In dialogue with EL COLOMBIANO, the representative Alejandro García, of the Green Alliance, talks about the details of the initiative, defends what it brings with it measures to advance economic reconversion of those who subsist on this practice and highlights that it also facilitates enhance the scenarios in which it is carried out.
However, he claims that “dirty plays” persist to avoid approval and that there are powerful interests involved. Therefore, he warns that there are those who “They are not going to stay still.”
To what do you attribute that a project of this caliber has managed to reach this legislative body? What are the keys to its success?
It is historic to reach the fourth and final debate. It is the first time that this has happened with a bill that prohibits bullfighting. With this, there are already 15 attempts for it. All the previous ones were failed and in this one there is a mix of things, among them, the way the issue has been handled.
For me it has been a pride to have the honor of being a speaker and responsible for approving this project in the House of Representatives. There has been citizen support and a renewed Congress that, we believe, can provide this discussion, despite the fact that it had recently collapsed. We have handled it in such a way that this can move forward.
Something very valuable about the project – and I think this is the key – is that it is limited, it allows for transition, economic and labor reconversion in a three-year transition period and urges the Ministry of Culture to make an investment to the transformation of underused scenarios where bullfights take place. Today they are only used one week a year and the objective is that they can be converted into cultural, artistic, sports or concert venues, as happens in Medellín.
What dialogues have you had with the different bullfighting and economic sectors that survive on behalf of the bullfights?
I consider that these aspects that I list about our project have managed to give some peace of mind, although I must admit that it has not been easy. This has been a very hard debate, very long and with many passions. The discussions have been even.
How are the charges in the plenary session of the House for the approval of this initiative? How do you think the debate will develop this Wednesday? Just on Tuesday there was an avalanche of proposals and challenges.
On Tuesday there were five hours, of the six and a half that we debated, that the bullfighters were practically listened to, as well as strategies to delay the discussion of the presentation and the articles. However, we managed to overcome them.
The first thing they tried to do was change the agenda. Then they wanted to postpone the discussion of the project. I have warned that if it is not approved before June 20, when this legislature ends, it will collapse. We managed to reject that preposition and subsequently there were two archival proposals presented and widely developed by two bullfighting people: representatives Christian Garcés (Democratic Center) and Ana Rogelia Monsalve. We also rejected them and managed to approve the presentation report.
This Wednesday will be the discussion of the articles after six or seven hours of debate. I hope that today we can give good news to the country. However, you have to have calmness and patience to bring this ship to safe port in the midst of storms. That is, they are going to try everything.
What other obstacles do you think could delay the discussion?
Just this Wednesday they notified us that they filed a protection in which they asked to suspend the debate on the project; However, the judge rejected it. It is normal, this issue arouses many passions and those who make a living from this, those who feel it is their own, those who have livestock, among others, are going to fight with everything they can. There are people for whom this is a point of honor, it is their religion.
So they resist really cultural transformation, to a country where there really is respect for all forms of life. I would like to tell Colombia that this is no longer a space of violence or abuse, but of inclusion of citizens, of art, culture and sports. I am responsible for making this happen and I am doing my best to make it happen.
Do you think the project will be approved this Wednesday or are you afraid that delays will continue today?
Today they are going to try to delay it, but I think that today we can approve it. I hope so.
What will the transition be like in the three years?
This project prohibits bullfighting and it turns out that they are the only activity that has legal support and that is regulated by a 20-year-old law, the National Bullfighting Statute or Regulation. In the face of economic and labor reconversion, it is proposed that DANE carry out a diagnosis to collect information from people who directly or indirectly derive their livelihood from these activities. Together with a committee, made up of the ministries of Labor, Interior, Culture, Environment and Agriculture, as well as the participation of the people involved, the idea is to define where the reconversion is going.
That is to say, this bill allows and anticipates something that is happening over time in Colombia, but that some continue to resist with their nails.
How do you seek to enhance the scenarios that are used today for bullfights?
It is an investment for the reconversion of the infrastructure and for its use. Today an elite enjoys these scenarios for a very short time, which end up underutilized. Bullfighting is permitted by the Constitutional Court in places where it has been an uninterrupted tradition and at times where it has occurred previously. These spaces could be much more useful for society in general and provide a cultural, artistic or sports service.
The bullfighters say that we are going to end the livelihood of a number of people. Tell me, what person selling corn cobs four or five days a year is going to be able to live off this all year? Here they disguise the discussion. If the squares are converted into stages for more activities, a person who sells corn cobs could do better.
To the extent that these centers have much more activity and the Government complies with what we are proposing in this project, we transform these spaces, we generate more opportunities and more dynamism around this cultural infrastructure.
How can we ensure that an issue that is even legally considered cultural ceases to be such?
I know it’s hard to leave traditions behind. I understand the roots that many feel. I am from Pereira, a neighbor of Manizales. But I think it is also important, in a country that wants to leave behind this culture of violence, that we say no more abuse. That we remove Colombia from that list of eight countries – along with Venezuela, Peru or Ecuador – allow bullfights today. Uruguay did it 100 years ago, the United Kingdom 200 years ago.
Congress must respond to this citizen cry. The last Datexco survey indicated that 85% of Colombians were against bullfights. It is time for Congress to rise to the occasion and we can finally give a message to the country about respect for all forms of life and no more violence. We must understand our environment and fauna is not for our service, but rather in coexistence with them. The thing is that here it is “a whole party” around the mistreatment and death of a living animal being. They feel pain, fear, suffering and stress.
There are many economic arguments here, an opportunity to transform scenarios, but above all it is a matter of compassion and animal welfare. I wish that for that reason alone we would approve it, but I know that it is not enough and we must counterargue.
Do you think that, even if it is approved by Congress, the project could be subject to judicial appeals or ‘little tricks’?
It is very possible that this will happen. Here we are stepping on the calluses of very powerful people. Don’t forget who are the ones who go to bullfights, they are not simple farmers who are raising the fighting bull. There are important ranches here, very wealthy families around this. Here there is a population with not only economic, but also political power, that will be affected.
They are going to resort to all kinds of strategies and steps that I would even question, such as the challenge they made against me or the guardianship they filed today. They are making dirty plays so that this does not go ahead. I wouldn’t be surprised if once approved it still happens, but we hope we can get through this. But they are certainly not going to stay still.
After the eventual approval of the project, what is next for the initiative?
Once approved, there must be a conciliation to review the text that was approved in the Senate and the one that is approved in the Chamber. To do this, a conciliation committee is confirmed, the final document is approved and it goes to presidential sanction. We would hope that the Government bodies are up to the task of guaranteeing families economic reconversion and the transformation of scenarios.
I want to ask you about a criticism that was heard during the debate and, although it is unrelated to the discussion, it is transversal. What do you think of the fact that the person presiding over the sessions is President Andrés Calle, today tarnished by alleged corruption?
So far there have been no problems with the project and the development of the plenary session. What was discussed and talked about is that this is not the first time that a scandal has arisen around Congress, unfortunately. As an institution that transcends people, Parliament must fulfill its function before Colombians to legislate
We must also respect the natural judge, not make prejudgments, respect due process and the presumption of innocence. Colombians are waiting for us to do our task: discuss this, which if it is not done before June 20 it will sink.
I ask not to continue delaying the discussion and to give it a try. They challenged me four times last year anonymously, a person with a bullfighting hobby, and the Ethics Commission delayed that challenge for four months, like they had never taken the time before.
Today they are filing guardianships, they are going to go to many things and they are going to look for anything they can grab to delay this. A year and a half of work would be lost.
