Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women

Ninety-second session

Summary record of the 2190th meeting*

Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on Tuesday, 10 February 2026, at 10 a.m.

Chair:Ms. Haidar

Contents

Consideration of reports submitted by States Parties under article 18 of the Convention (continued)

Eighth periodic report of Argentina

Consideration of reports submitted by States Parties under article 18 of the Convention (continued)

Eighth periodic report of Argentina (CEDAW/C/ARG/8; CEDAW/C/ARG/QPR/8)

At the invitation of the Chair, the delegation of Argentina joined the meeting.

A representative of Argentina said that, following years of interventionist policies that had systematically failed, the current Government had undertaken in-depth change and fulfilled the country’s international commitments in accordance with clear criteria, namely primacy of the Constitution, respect for reservations and interpretative declarations and equality before the law. It was tackling the most entrenched structural issues hampering universal access to rights: for example, the poverty rate had dropped from 52.9% at the start of its term to 26.9%, the lowest rate since 2018, and extreme poverty had fallen by nearly two thirds, thanks to the reduction of inflation, the recovery of real wages and the normalization of basic macroeconomic indicators.

Argentina had been a pioneer in making the equality of all human beings the foundational principle of its legal order. Discrimination on grounds of sex was prohibited under the law, including the Constitution, and the Convention had constitutional rank. After a decade of absence, Argentina was appearing before the Committee with a clear focus – equality before the law and results-oriented policies – not with lofty statements. In the 2024 Women, Business and the Law report issued by the World Bank, Argentina had scored 75% on the legal frameworks indicator. Argentina took the view that the real guarantee of women’s rights did not lie in positive discrimination or quotas but, rather, in the simple and fair rule that the only requirement for a post was aptitude. Temporary special measures, as enshrined in article 4 (1) of the Convention, tended to turn into a permanent advantage, altering the principle of equality. Moreover, quotas tended to perpetuate the unfair belief that women had obtained their post solely as a result of affirmative action rather than on the basis of their abilities and merit, and simply created a new form of discrimination. The correct approach was to ensure impartial rules, transparent competitions and genuine opportunities for all.

Argentina observed with concern the growing tendency to reinterpret article 15 (1) of the Convention along ideological lines which, by referring to structural discrimination and stereotypes, ultimately fostered unequal treatment before the law, the opposite of the purpose sought by the article.

Argentina wished to point out that there was no right to abortion under international law but, rather, a universal right to life and legal recognition without discrimination. The protection of women throughout their life, from conception to death, was enshrined at the constitutional level, through the ratification of the American Convention on Human Rights and the interpretative declaration regarding article 1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, whereby Argentina defined children as all human beings from conception to the age of 18 years. Women’s lives were protected, until their death, through specific, people-centred laws on support and palliative care by interdisciplinary teams and through ratification of the Inter-American Convention on Protecting the Human Rights of Older Persons.

Furthermore, Argentina actively defended the social importance of maternity through affirmative action measures, introduced in the Constitution, to create genuinely equal opportunities for women and thus protect children, especially from conception until school age. For example, Act No. 27.611 provided for special protection for mothers throughout pregnancy and their child’s first 1,000 days of life, through free medicine, immunization and food, the immediate identification of newborns through the establishment of the early warning system for births, and protection measures for vulnerable mothers with high-risk pregnancies or children with special needs. In addition, support was available for mothers who experienced a miscarriage. The State’s efforts in that domain were in line with articles 4 (2) and 11 of the Convention.

The right of everyone to an education and to access to quality instruction, without distinction on grounds of sex, was guaranteed. There was gender parity in enrolment, although there were slightly more boys than girls at the preschool and primary levels and more girls than boys at the secondary level. More than 36% of women reached the tertiary level compared to 29% of men.

There was no treaty obligation in the area of comprehensive sex education, and article 10 (h) referred only to women’s access to information to ensure the health and well-being of families. Moreover, with respect to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, Argentina had made an interpretative declaration whereby family planning matters were a non-delegable responsibility of parents, in keeping with ethical and moral principles, and the State’s obligation in that regard was limited to guiding them and providing training in responsible parenting. Women’s right to health was mentioned in the Convention in relation to poverty, family well-being, prenatal and postnatal care and occupational health and safety. It should be noted that, in Argentina, the leading causes of death among women were, in order of prevalence, heart disease, malignant tumours, respiratory disease, cerebrovascular disease and septicaemia. Accordingly, the Government avoided health policies that reduced women to their procreative role, focusing instead on evidence-based policies that ensured comprehensive healthcare for women. The role of the federal Ministry of Health was to define, coordinate and strengthen competencies at the provincial and municipal levels.

Violence was addressed from the angle of the protection of women’s right to life and liberty, and combating all its forms was a State policy. Argentina had ratified the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention of Belém do Pará), which ranked above ordinary laws in the legal order, and was a member of the Follow-up Mechanism to that Convention. Furthermore, there were two national laws and 26 provincial laws on violence against women, and the judiciary operated support and shelter services at the community level.

The first measure taken in cases of violence against women was typically to issue a restraining order. Depending on the outcome of the risk assessment, additional measures could be ordered, including the provision of an alarm button, the assignment of police protection, confiscation of weapons, the provision of psychological support and treatment for both parties and, where necessary, admission to a shelter. Where appropriate, the criminal justice system might take further measures, such as the detention of the assailant.

Ministry of Justice Resolution No. 401 of 2025 established an extraordinary procedure for the assessment and updating of requests by the Acompañar Programme with a view to ensuring immediate assistance for persons who reported cases of gender-based violence. Pursuant to Act No. 27.452 (known as the Brisa Act), a programme had been set up to provide compensation to the children of victims of femicide in the form of a monthly stipend equivalent to two minimum pension payments and full coverage of physical and psychological treatment.

The review of social programmes and structures was being guided by the principle that enforcement of the law – not bureaucracy – was the effective way of combating violence. The goal of the review was to ensure that assistance reached those who genuinely needed it by rationalizing resources and streamlining procedures. Under previous administrations, murders of women had continued to grow despite the proliferation of portfolios, including the Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity, and of programmes and training. The current Government had, instead, strengthened the tools to investigate, prosecute and punish perpetrators of violent offences. For instance, a more flexible and modern Federal Code of Criminal Procedure aimed at ensuring fewer delays and greater efficiency had been adopted. Moreover, the separation of powers was fully respected and the authorities no longer turned a blind eye to scandals involving high-ranking politicians. Lower homicide rates, including of women, showed that placing the focus on tangible assistance and effective punishment had been the correct course of action.

Argentina was a signatory to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and had acceded to the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, as well as to other protocols supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. A number of legal cases had laid bare a new form of trafficking in persons, namely, surrogacy, which could constitute exploitation of women and a contemporary form of slavery. At least 65 cases of possible trafficking for the purpose of surrogacy had been identified, and there had been nearly 150 surrogacy cases between 2018 and 2024 involving vulnerable surrogate mothers carrying the child of parents in foreign countries with whom they had no prior relationship. The rise in registration of children born through surrogacy indicated the possible involvement of a transnational market. Argentina would continue to push for the inclusion, in international law, of language aimed at protecting the right to a life free from trafficking, violence and exploitation.

Articles 1–6

Ms. González Ferrer said that, while the State Party had adopted a considerable number of laws and policies with a view to strengthening substantive equality, preventing gender-based violence and improving access to rights, the Committee was concerned that, since 2024, the federal executive branch had shut down the Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity, reduced programmes for the prevention of gender-based violence and cut budgets, redistributed powers and centralized functions without regard for gender, thus eliminating specialized mechanisms that contributed to the implementation of article 2 of the Convention. Furthermore, pursuant to Decree No. 70 of 2023, regressive amendments had been made to key laws governing matters such as sexual and reproductive health rights and training for public officials in gender equality and violence against women.

In the light of the weakened institutional framework, she wished to know what steps had been taken to maintain the State’s ability to lead sustained campaigns, ensure interinstitutional coordination and mainstream the Convention across public actions, in particular those relating to the judiciary, the security forces, prosecutors and the provincial and municipal authorities. She also wished to know how the application of the Convention in judicial and administrative decisions was measured and what budgetary resources and lead agency had been assigned to mainstream the Convention.

Given that the national human rights institution had obtained A status from the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI) but remained without a director, which undermined its independence and hampered its ability to function fully and influence public policies, she wondered what urgent steps the State Party was taking to appoint a director and to ensure that the institution could function effectively as a complaint mechanism in cases of gender-based discrimination and violence, especially in provinces with poorer access to justice. In that regard, the Committee was concerned about the strong geographical disparities in access to specialized prosecution services and protection measures, which affected in particular rural, Indigenous and migrant women and women with disabilities, and about the reduction in guidance, counselling and complaint channels, particularly in the interior of the country and for low-income women. Therefore, she was curious to know what measures the State Party had taken to ensure that women victims of violence and discrimination had access to specialized legal assistance free of charge, immediate protection and reparation and that those services were homogenous across provinces, what budget was allocated to front-line assistance centres and how access was guaranteed in rural and Indigenous areas.

Lastly, she was interested in hearing about institutional, budgetary and coordination mechanisms enabling the effective participation of civil society in the development, implementation and monitoring of equality policies, about steps taken to prevent violence, including online, against women human rights defenders, journalists and social leaders and their criminalization and about efforts to ensure that the judicial measures taken with regard to community-based basic services, such as neighbourhood canteens, did not breach the right to food of the most vulnerable populations or amount to collective punishment.

A representative of Argentina said that, in line with its focus on efficiency and effectiveness, the Government was reviewing all the changes that needed to be made so as to ensure that women enjoyed their rights under equal conditions. Argentina was a federal State, and it was important not to undermine that structure in striving to comply with international standards. In other words, respect for the principles of equality and non-discrimination was contingent on the normal functioning of the constitutional system as a whole. Accordingly, there were intersectoral committees on myriad issues related to women, including violence and Act 27.499 (known as the Micaela Act), as well as periodic meetings on cross-cutting issues between civil society and the judiciary. A few months earlier, she had attended, alongside judges from the highest bodies of the Inter-American justice system, a meeting on eligibility for judicial positions. In sum, the defence of women’s rights and equality was a central topic, and the various levels of government were in constant contact on those issues to ensure exchange and alignment of practices, while taking into account the diverse circumstances in the different areas of the country.

Argentina had excellent initiatives in the area of access to justice and the protection of women’s rights. Indeed, some entities had been abolished or were being reviewed, but other, more efficient ones would replace them to provide more effective and consistent results. Responsibility for preventing and addressing violence against women and providing them with assistance had been transferred to the Ministry of Justice. No substantive functions had been eliminated as a result; they had merely been reassigned and brought under a different institutional structure designed to improve continuity, coordination, access to justice and accountability.

All the provinces, as well as the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, had mechanisms for the promotion and protection of women’s rights, with a focus on community-based services, as distance from services had a disproportionate impact on women. To avoid burdensome inefficiencies, subnational bodies coordinated their actions with national programmes. For example, in Chaco Province, an Indigenous coordination unit had been established, led by a Wichi woman community leader and composed of representatives of various Indigenous communities, to promote more effective responses by the judicial authorities. In addition, a register of Wichi, Moqoit and Qom translators and interpreters had been created. Chaco Province had also established the first system for trial by Indigenous juries; access to justice systems for and by Indigenous Peoples had also been set up in nine other provinces. Furthermore, a number of provinces had launched community-based or mobile justice services to improve access in remote areas. One such service also included a cultural translator who could not only translate the language but also convey the meaning of the law. Some provinces had even set up justice mechanisms accessible via chatbots or mobile applications. All provinces had free mediation services, while some also offered free conciliation and arbitration services.

Simplified information on access to justice was available online and in accessible formats for women with disabilities. The Domestic Violence Office had specific training for Indigenous women, women of African descent, women deprived of their liberty and women with disabilities and provided interdisciplinary services around the clock. The responsibilities of the National Directorate for Assistance and Protection of the Ministry of Justice included the implementation of the Micaela Act, the preparation of technical reports under the Brisa Act, the implementation of the Acompañar Programme and the conduct of interdisciplinary assessments at the Dr. Fernando Ulloa Assistance Centre for Victims of Human Rights Violations. All those activities were carried out in collaboration with the relevant authorities at all levels of government.

General action principles had been developed pursuant to the recommendations issued by the Committee in connection with the case of Díaz v. Argentina(CEDAW/C/86/D/127/2018). Victims of violence had access to a range of free services, including legal assistance, provided by public and private entities. Most victims who reported their case to the Domestic Violence Office received a response within 24 hours, including, where appropriate, immediate protection measures. Some provinces, especially where domestic violence rates were higher, had specialized courts for such matters. Over 80% of the cases dealt with by the Office in 2024 had been reported by women and more than 70% involved former intimate partners.

Data collection was vital for the design of public policies, especially given the Government’s attachment to the principle of efficiency. In addition to the specific assessments carried out at the provincial level, the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses was currently processing the latest national census, which would shed light on specific vulnerabilities that might need to be addressed, such as living conditions, household composition and hours spent on care tasks. The data showed, for instance, that the feminization of poverty worsened when families were fragmented and women were left with sole responsibility for childcare and that families fared better with both parents present, hence a new focus on shared responsibility between spouses. The concept of intersectionality, which was a disputed concept in international law, was a challenge for Argentina, as it was impossible to capture all the reasons why a woman might be discriminated against since many were contextual and personal. The approach of Argentina was to detect vulnerabilities through concrete data rather than rely on categories that might exclude certain people. Nevertheless, Argentina welcomed the opportunity inherent in the Committee’s question to explore further the impact of the composition of families on women and society as a whole.

There had been no shortage of training on women’s issues, to the point of overwhelming training providers. Moreover, the fact that violence against women, including femicide, had increased despite the amount of primary prevention activities begged the question as to the appropriateness of their design. All but the newest members of the judiciary had completed the required training. Training in the Micaela Act was held annually at the provincial level. In 2024, nearly 5,200 public officials had received the training and, in 2025, some 1,770 people, mostly the general public, had taken the self-paced online training course on the Micaela Act. Notwithstanding the difficulty in measuring the impact of prevention efforts and questions as to the effectiveness of the training provided, there was no doubt that primary prevention was the most effective approach and Argentina had received recommendations in that regard from the Spotlight Initiative.

Ms. González Ferrer said that, while decentralization was important, the central Government also had a key role to play, including in monitoring. The Committee was interested in hearing to what extent civil society was involved in the State Party’s efforts to implement the Convention and what budget was allocated to those efforts. While there might be differing conceptual approaches to the issue of intersectionality, the fact remained that it was the State’s responsibility to protect women and girls and ensure that they enjoyed their rights irrespective of how or why they were experiencing discrimination.

Ms. Akia said that the Committee was eager to know what institutional mechanism had replaced the Ministry of Women, Gender and Diversity and what specific steps the State Party was taking to ensure increased human, technical and financial resources at all levels to implement, coordinate and monitor the implementation of the laws, policies and programmes for the advancement of women and girls and the promotion of gender equality. Notwithstanding the State Party’s stated position on temporary special measures, she wondered whether it would consider adopting such measures to correct the continued underrepresentation and disadvantage of women and girls, including those facing intersecting forms of discrimination, in a range of areas, including the labour market, justice, foreign policy, social programmes and political and public life. She would welcome information on the steps taken to monitor compliance with and assess the impact of existing measures to increase the representation of women and girls, as well as data, disaggregated by age, sex and disability, on the number of women benefiting from those measures. It would be interesting to know how the State Party was engaging with civil society organizations, academia and individual women and girls to promote substantive equality of women, in both law and practice, including through timely access to public information, and to support the State Party in monitoring and evaluating the legal framework and programmes on gender equality.

A representative of Argentina said that equality of all persons, including women, remained a primary concern – and a motto – of Argentina and of the current Government. While the Ministry of Women had been dissolved, its powers had not. The decision had been taken in part because many of the Ministry’s programmes had not been fulfilling their purpose. The main budget heading related to women’s issues was Programme 43 on justice, which had received a total of 52.3 billion pesos (Arg$) and was designed to facilitate and strengthen access to justice by vulnerable persons, with a special emphasis on victims of violence against women. Under the Programme, victims received immediate assistance, protection and comprehensive support through local mechanisms, including the network of Access to Justice Centres and specialized helplines. For instance, 60,000 people had received assistance through the toll-free 144 number, which, contrary to the Committee’s statement, remained in operation. The Programme also included guidance and counselling services for victims of domestic violence and offences against sexual integrity, as well as training in preventing and handling cases of sexual or domestic violence, which some 113,000 people had completed. The largest line item under the Programme was victim protection, with an allocation of nearly Arg$ 49 billion, demonstrating the prioritization of direct specialized assistance.

In addition, Programme 26 on the promotion and defence of human rights included training activities and Arg$ 14.5 billion to support policies on assistance, including for victims of violence against women. Programme 46 on the crime policy had a budget of Arg$ 8.4 billion for the rescue of and provision of assistance and comprehensive reparation to victims of trafficking in persons, who were primarily women and girls. Cases of trafficking could be reported through the 145 helpline. Taken together, the 2026 budget for the Ministry of Justice showed specific, sustained funding for policies on access to justice, comprehensive assistance, protection and reparation for women victims of violence through structured programmes, with measurable targets and scheduled assessments. The number of shelters had grown, not fallen.

The 144 toll-free hotline offered round-the-clock support for women affected by any form of violence addressed under Act No. 26.485 on the comprehensive protection of women against violence. It had handled close to 38,000 calls in 2024 and approximately 22,500 in the first nine months of 2025, with follow-up support being provided in over 50,000 cases. The 2025 annual report on the hotline was at the Committee’s disposal should it require further information.

The work carried out by both governmental and non-governmental institutions often went unrecognized but there had certainly been no decline in resources or activity across any of the three branches of government. There was always room for improvement, but many provinces now had special courts, 24-hour shelters were available, capacity-building was ongoing and the number of programmes running continued to grow. Recognizing that, in some cases of femicide there had been no prior reports of violence, the Government was working to improve prevention and risk identification mechanisms in particular. In addition, the justice and social protection systems were working to ensure the support necessary to discourage women victims of violence from withdrawing their testimonies before the case went to court.

Since temporary special measures could have the opposite effect to that intended if they were unduly prolonged, generating new inequalities and perpetuating stereotypes, the Government monitored their impact closely to ensure that they were withdrawn as soon as the objective was achieved. Some special measures remained in place, including quotas for female candidates in legislative elections and for positions in the judiciary, but, as some commentators considered them to undermine the principle of gender equality, debate as to their desirability continued. The importance of protecting maternity rights was not questioned, and various affirmative action measures were in place to ensure that women could choose to start a family without social stigmatization and without impact on their right to equal pay for equal work. Women’s right to equality of opportunity and treatment and to special protection during pregnancy and breastfeeding was expressly recognized in article 75 (23) of the Constitution.

In line with the foregoing, extensive support was available for women, children and the family, including a universal child allowance, which, according to the latest quarterly report published by the General Directorate of Planning, Research and Statistics of the National Social Security Administration, had benefited over 4 million children and had been distributed to over 2 million women in 2025. The allowance had been worth Arg$ 100 at the end of 2025, with 43% of beneficiaries being aged between 25 and 43 years old, 31% between 35 and 44 and 13% aged 45 or over. Women also received a pregnancy allowance, which, in June 2025, had been worth Arg$ 109 and had been paid to over 66,000 women. Additional support for women with children up to the age of 3 years was provided under the 1,000 Days Plan.

Ms. Akia asked how the State Party engaged with civil society, stakeholders, academia and women themselves to monitor the impact of the programmes mentioned and assess which measures were beneficial and which were not.

Ms. González Ferrer said that she would appreciate answers to her earlier questions regarding the national human rights institution and the Ombudsman’s Office, given their importance as mechanisms for reporting gender-based discrimination and violence. She would be interested to know whether 81 Access to Justice Centres had indeed been closed, as had been reported, and, if so, how those closures could be explained at a time when the State Party claimed to be prioritizing access to essential judicial services. She would also welcome the delegation’s comments on reports of a dramatic decline in capacity-building for public servants: it appeared that, whereas 200,000 officials had participated in training in the period 2020–2023, there had been no activities in 2024 and fewer than 400 training certificates had been issued to government employees in 2025.

The Chair said that, while respecting the State Party’s views, in the light of historical injustices, she urged it to reconsider the role of temporary special measures. Their use was essential because gender inequality would take decades to allay if left to natural progress. She also encouraged the State Party to examine and address the impact of intersectional discrimination more closely.

A representative of Argentina said that, under the revised Constitution, candidates for the position of Ombudsman were nominated by a congressional committee, and a majority of at least two thirds of the members of both parliamentary chambers was required to secure his or her appointment. That provision posed a problem, given the consensus between different political parties that it necessarily required. As the current Government did not have a broad majority, it had not been possible to achieve a consensus for the appointment of an ombudsman, or, moreover, an attorney general or a Supreme Court president. Since the Ombudsman’s Office was under the de facto leadership of the Under-Secretary-General, its operations were not affected by the lack of a duly elected incumbent, but the difficulty of achieving political agreement did create challenges.

A representative of Argentina said that, when assessing whether the Government was fulfilling its commitments, the key question to consider was whether rights were effectively protected, not the means by which that goal was achieved. The fact that GANHRI had confirmed the A grade accreditation of the Ombudsman’s Office in 2023, despite it having been without a director since 2009, showed that the institution continued to fulfil its mandate effectively. Similarly, it was not necessary for the Government to maintain or increase the number of Access to Justice Centres to fulfil its commitment to ensuring access to justice for women; what was necessary was outreach, to take justice to the victims. Thus, instead of requiring victims to travel to a centre, the Government was prioritizing the establishment of mobile justice teams that were able to relate, culturally and linguistically, to women living in remote rural areas, providing free legal assistance and other services through multipurpose offices open 24 hours a day. The Government’s aim was to identify the most appropriate means to uphold rights, and it was constantly seeking ways to improve.

The Government was not against temporary special measures. They were provided for in the Constitution and other legislation and were used when deemed necessary; for example, there was a 50% quota for women on political parties’ candidate lists and a 30% quota for women candidates for trade union positions. However, to prevent persistent stereotypes holding that women advanced not because of merit but because of quotas, exit strategies were also important. If introduced or maintained when not necessary, temporary special measures could prevent progress, and true progress, in terms of women’s rights, meant effecting the structural changes necessary to ensure that women could access all positions and all training opportunities on equal terms and based on merit. Moreover, statistics confirmed that quotas were not needed in many sectors in Argentina, including the judiciary, since women were securing high-level positions without them.

The Chair said that, while the Committee agreed that temporary special measures should be objective-driven and time-bound, there was no doubt that they were sometimes needed to prevent competent and qualified women from being overlooked.

Ms. González Ferrer, noting that the Supreme Court was apparently refusing to recognize the legitimacy of representatives of the Ombudsman’s Office in legal proceedings because the position of Ombudsman was vacant, said that that situation seemed at odds with the delegation’s assurances that the lack of an office holder was not affecting operations. She wondered how cases of discrimination against women and children could be taken to court if that was indeed the case.

A representative of Argentina said that all data in the delegation’s possession indicated that the Ombudsman’s Office was working very well; GANHRI would not have confirmed the Office’s A status if it had had doubts. The delegation would provide additional information about the Office’s operations in due course.

Civil society remained very active in Argentina. The Office of the Undersecretary for Human Rights received access-to-information requests from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on a daily basis, and its doors were always open for constructive dialogue. While NGOs sometimes held positions that ran counter to the political agenda, absolute freedom of expression and access to public information was guaranteed and suggestions received were duly considered.

Although the Committee attached great importance to intersectionality, it was not a concept enshrined in the Convention; rather, it was a theoretical framework that had been developed subsequently. The Argentine authorities believed that intersectional approaches could be limiting in their effect. Owing to their focus on multiple forms of discrimination, there was a risk of such approaches downplaying the discrimination faced by certain categories of women, such as women of African descent, causing fragmentation and obscuring the wider picture. The Government feared that, rather than bringing victims closer, such approaches increased the distance. In seeking to leave no one behind, it preferred to take an all-encompassing approach that did not categorize and viewed all persons as potentially vulnerable.

The Chair said that the Convention was a living instrument that should be interpreted in a manner consistent with the current lived reality of women. For that reason, the Committee’s recommendations sometimes extended to issues that were not in the text per se. While she respected the State Party’s point of view, she would like to understand how more grounds of discrimination, which affected different women in different ways, might be addressed.

Ms. Toledo Vásquez said that, while she recognized the legislative headway made towards eliminating gender-based discrimination and violence, she would like to hear more about the practical mechanisms being used to break down stereotypes and improve institutional responses at a time when training, particularly training on how to combat digital violence, was reported to be less than adequate.

Since the 144 hotline had apparently lost around half of its staff and two-thirds of its budget and was no longer accessible for deaf women, she would like to know what measures were being adopted to ensure accessibility and quality of service. Given that the resources assigned to the Acompañar Programme had also apparently been reduced, she wondered how the cutbacks had affected access to protection for women and their children.

In view of the number of femicides recorded, which pointed to inefficient protection measures, she wondered whether any multisectoral reviews were planned to identify institutional failings and improve the State response. Since femicides sometimes occurred within the context of organized crime, the delegation’s comments on reports that the arms control system had been weakened and the National Agency for Controlled Materials had been dismantled would be helpful. She would also like to hear about measures adopted to address the alarmingly high number of femicides of transgender and transvestite women and about measures to protect women deprived of liberty, who were reportedly subjected to persistent physical and psychological violence as well as degrading searches.

She would like to know what was being done to enforce the provisions of the Brisa Act and what measures were in place to ensure reparations for women who lost children as a result of gender-based violence. She would welcome an update on the Integrated System for Cases of Gender-based Violence, including statistics for the percentage of cases involving gender-based or sexual violence against women that had resulted in convictions and the percentage in which protection measures had been granted. Lastly, she asked when the national action plan envisaged under Act No. 26.485 would be adopted, and how cross-cutting multisectoral coordination of gender policy was ensured in the absence of a ministry for women’s affairs.

Ms. Tisheva, noting the structural obstacles that continued to hamper the identification and effective protection of women victims of trafficking, said that she would like to know what steps were being taken to harmonize provincial and municipal legislation with federal regulations on trafficking and the exploitation of prostitution; what mechanisms were in place to ensure gender-sensitive identification and referrals; and how many women and girls had been identified as victims in the period 2023–2025. Accompanying data showing the number of investigations, prosecutions and convictions in the same period, disaggregated by type of exploitation – sexual, labour or child – and province, would be helpful. She wondered whether investigation and prosecution procedures recognized those women’s status as vulnerable victims and whether the State Party envisaged action to alleviate the situation of migrant women subject to the restrictions introduced by Decree No. 366 and instead improve risk assessment procedures and identification mechanisms.

She would like to know what measures were planned or in place to prevent trafficking or exploitation and investigate and punish public officials who were complicit in those offences; how many such cases had been opened and adjudicated in the past two years; and what specific measures were being implemented to prevent the prostitution and sexual exploitation of girls.

A representative of Argentina said that the Argentine authorities preferred to refer to discrimination and violence against women rather than gender-based discrimination and violence. The latter forms could contribute to symbolic discrimination and the Convention protected women’s rights, not gender rights. The Government took stereotypes, biases and all violence against women very seriously. At the grassroots level, the strength of the “Not One Less” (Ni una menos) movement, initiated after a young woman, Chiara Páez, had been murdered by her boyfriend for refusing to undergo an abortion, attested to the commitment and the importance attached to eliminating violence against women in Argentina. The Government complied with all reporting requirements under the Convention of Belém do Pará, had established mechanisms for combating violence against women in every judicial district, had concluded agreements with relevant NGOs and ran awareness-raising sessions in various educational forums.

Because violence against women could generally be categorized as one of two forms, namely violence in family settings and violence based on the victim’s status as a woman, separate procedures and mechanisms had been established for each. Violence in family settings was dealt with by the Domestic Violence Office, based in Buenos Aires and supported by provincial branch offices. Other forms of violence against women were dealt with under Act 26.485. While reporting channels differed by province, initial protection measures invariably entailed restraining orders for the abuser and the provision of panic buttons and emergency numbers giving the victim direct access to the police. If necessary, victims were admitted to shelters. If they had suffered injury, the assailant might be detained.

The complexity of the system made it impossible to measure the exact budget allocated to combating violence against women: in addition to the national budget, there were private initiatives, public initiatives at the municipal and provincial levels and civil society initiatives. While the authorities had tried in the past to draw up a map encompassing all mechanisms, they had found it impossible to keep up to date with the different approaches and partnerships. The two focuses – prevention and support – were equally complex, especially as women were often reluctant to accept assistance. Statistical data were used to identify risks – they had, for example, revealed that frequent violence was associated with multiple factors, including drug consumption – and enhance efficiency. An evaluation of current measures – including the Acompañar Programme and the Integrated System for Cases of Gender-based Violence – and the follow-up that reports of violence against women received had been initiated in application of Ministry of Justice Resolution No. 401/2025, resulting in operational adjustments to guarantee immediate assistance and administrative traceability.

Under the Brisa Act, all children whose mothers had been victims of violence were entitled to reparation. The National Secretariat for Children, Adolescents and the Family worked with the National Social Security Administration to implement the legislation and eligible children received a monthly allowance in addition to free, comprehensive medical and psychological care. In June 2025, over 1,300 minors were registered as beneficiaries of the allowance, representing an increase of 9.5% over the mid-2024 figure.

Specialist units had been established in various jurisdictions to address digital violence, which was recognized as an offence under Act No. 27.736, referred to as the Olimpia Act. An online reporting system was available for such offences, guaranteeing an immediate response and the prompt removal of offensive content. A cybersecurity unit had been established within the federal police, and there were specialized prosecution units dealing with extortion and intimidation associated with the publication of images without the subject’s consent. Argentina had signed both the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime and the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime.

Women deprived of liberty accounted for less than 4% of the prison population, and most were serving short sentences for drug-related non-violent offences. Act No. 24.660, on sentence enforcement, contained provisions specific to their detention, for example, permitting house arrest for women who were pregnant or caring for children under the age of 5 years old. When the conditions for house arrest were not met, the prison services endeavoured to ensure appropriate conditions for women caring for children, including separate wings, play spaces and child-friendly recreational areas. A special programme for women inmates had recently been launched with the aim of ensuring respectful and dignified treatment, access to all levels of education, primary healthcare with a focus on mental health, measures to ensure accessibility for women with disabilities, differentiated treatment programmes for older women and other subgroups, and timely referrals to external facilities. There were also programmes aimed at preventing and addressing violence, which provided for an interdisciplinary approach and specialized therapeutic responses with a focus on human dignity.

While figures for the number of femicides were systematically compiled in Argentina, vicarious violence, where children were used as a means of exercising violence or control over women, was not a concept expressly recognized in the legal system or directly addressed in legislation. Nonetheless, the authorities recognized the seriousness of such situations. Cases were handled through the family courts, applying the principles enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The legal framework for preventing and punishing trafficking in persons was set forth in Acts No. 26.364 and No. 26.842. Notably, the latter eliminated the relevance of victim consent in the State’s response. The framework’s implementation was overseen by the Federal Council on Combating the Trafficking and Exploitation of Persons, which brought together national and provincial authorities, including representatives of the judiciary, law enforcement and the Ministry of Human Capital. The victim identification and support process prioritized protection and social and labour reintegration, particularly in the case of women trafficked for sexual exploitation purposes. Seized proceeds of trafficking were used to fund services and provide reparation for victims.

A specialized unit, known by the acronym PROTEX and staffed by highly trained investigators, had been established within the prosecution service to ensure that traffickers and any persons, including public officials, who were complicit in trafficking offences were brought to justice. The unit worked closely with the National Migration Department, airport security and dedicated anti-trafficking programmes to ensure early detection. Airport workers were specifically trained to recognize signs of trafficking.

Exploitation for reproductive purposes was one of the newer forms of trafficking receiving the prosecution service’s attention, and at least 65 cases were currently being investigated. In one case, which had been detected by the authorities in the country of destination, a child had been sold abroad for €50,000. The 145 anti-trafficking hotline had reported a significant increase in reports of exploitation of that type and two large-scale investigations were currently under way.

Articles 7–9

Ms. Barriteau said that, despite the Government’s commendable legislative efforts to guarantee parity in public office, the reality on the ground often did not reflect the legal provisions: for example, only 30% of ministries were headed by women and women occupied only 30% of high-level judicial positions. She urged the State Party to refer to the Committee’s general recommendation No. 40 (2024) on the equal and inclusive representation of women in decision-making systems, with a view to taking action to address obstacles to women’s participation, including political harassment and inadequate childcare. She would particularly like to know what measures would be taken to ensure effective compliance with parity requirements in provincial and municipal administrations; what national policies were in place to prevent, investigate and punish political violence against women and what, if any, official data on that issue were published annually; why Resolution No. 20/2023, which had established parity and diversity criteria for the nomination of candidates for positions in international organizations, had been repealed in 2025; why those criteria had been excluded from its replacement, namely Resolution No. 143/2025; what percentage of ambassadorial and senior consular positions were held by women; how the State Party channelled financial support and training for women candidates, particularly Indigenous, rural and migrant women and women with disabilities; what progress had been made in implementing Act No. 25.674, which established quotas for women in trade unions; and what was being done to increase women’s representation in the executive branch and other decision-making positions.

Ms. Reddock said that she was concerned about the changes made in 2018 and 2025 to the State Party’s formerly progressive nationality laws, the apparently onerous civil registration process and the fact that many Indigenous women did not have national identity documents and therefore could not access assistance programmes. She wished to know what action was envisaged to make it easier for Indigenous, low-income and rural women to access national identity documents and register the births of their children; whether the State Party might reconsider recent restrictions on access to social protection for all women and their children and establish more efficient and timely residency requirements for access to non‑contributory allowances, disability support and old-age pensions; and whether it planned to eliminate the requirement to hold a national identity card in order to access public health services and education.

Ms. Toledo Vásquez suggested that, given the complexity of gender-based violence, the State Party might consider conducting multisectoral reviews of past femicides to try to identify which elements of the multisectoral response system might need to be strengthened in order to prevent future occurrences.

Ms. Tisheva said that she would like to receive in writing the figures she had requested earlier. She would appreciate more detailed responses to the questions concerning violence, exploitation and threats against women, including the delegation’s comments on reports that the arms sector had been deregulated, that the minimum age for holding a firearms permit had been reduced from 21 to 18 years and that the licensing of, and civilian access to, semi-automatic weapons had been simplified. She wondered how those changes would affect the fight against violence, exploitation, trafficking and femicide.

The meeting rose at 1 p.m.