A new life comes to earth, by planning or “Acts of God”. Whether a thorough evaluation has been made of the duties and obligations of begetting a human being or not, the Law contemplates a series of Rights that will protect the new being and thus delimits the normative framework and actions of the family.

Compliance adopts in every manifestation of human life the normative duties applicable to this expression of human conduct and builds, on these foundations, a series of pillars based on ethics, morality and integrity.

As a trend, compliance has historically served to delimit the actions of moral persons, and has failed to provoke a dialogue of compliance to which natural persons must adhere in one of the most intimate spheres, but which, as the genesis of society, concerns the present: the family.

In addition to this, the family only being able to avail itself of the means at its disposal, concentrates the focus of the present discussion on the State’s own capacity to comply.

Historically, the State has filled itself with regulations, vast in utopia (they would be the equivalent of “paper compliance programs”, i.e., debate on their practical usefulness): protecting life, the rights of children, penalizing discrimination, with half-hearted or insufficient attempts.

The National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) in Mexico establishes that “children are those under 12 years of age, and adolescents are those between 12 years of age and under 18 years of age”; granting, by the simple fact of being children, rights, which are the ideal ground for the questions of compliance that have as their objective: to comply.

Right to welfare conditions, healthy integral development and education?

The history of great criminal minds dates its origins to a deprived childhood, with no opportunities, starvation and no access to education. Joaquín Guzmán Loera (aka “El Chapo”), according to BBC data obtained from his statements in the US Court, “was born on April 4, 1957 in the ranchería of La Tuna, Badiraguato, a municipality in the mountains of Sinaloa, […] his parents were peasants, he helped his family and did not finish elementary school”.

Such a level of deprivation and need meant that the only means “available” to guarantee the right to survival was to ally with drug lords to “grow small quantities of these plants near his home in the mountains” from a very young age.

This argument should not be used as a justification of the unlawful conduct, but rather as a contribution to the conversation about the factors that contribute to its commission and trigger reflection on the active/passive role (to do or not to do) of our State and each one of us.

Freud, Lacan and Klein already said so:

En la infancia se gesta el futuro del individuo durante todas las etapas de la vida y la importancia que tiene esta para determinar la estructura de personalidad del ser humano, destacándose que la gran mayoría de los procesos psíquicos tienen su origen en la infancia.

Compliance as a genesis

In an ideal world, each conception of a new being would “comply” with the duties and obligations imposed by our Magna Carta and other legal systems. In this utopian universe, in turn, the State and its guarantor bodies would “comply” with their purpose, providing its citizens with optimal conditions for the development of their lives, thus reducing the probability of traumatic events that give rise to the next Chapo.

The number of abused infants would decrease drastically if their caregivers would fulfill their duty of welfare conditions (building defenses, including sex education).

The suicide rate would go down if as parents we respect the right to identity, a life free of violence, the right to personal integrity, as well as the freedom of ethical convictions, thought, conscience, religion and culture.

The likelihood of spawning the next big criminal would be minimal if he and his family were given the necessary means of education and sustenance.

How many children would not believe in themselves if we just “complied”, what kind of society would we be passing on to the next generations?

“We believe that the world is bad, because that is how we inherited it, so we think little of the responsibility that lies in us to break the chain of abuses. We read, identify ourselves and become the victim, renouncing the role we have in our hands to change the world”.

–Daniel Medina

Compliance and due control are very useful to mitigate the criminal liability of the legal entity for crimes committed in its name, for its benefit, through the means at its disposal or through its representatives.

This same compliance can be applied today in our lives, starting with the pillar of society: the family. Thus creating better worlds, not aiming at a utopia, but at the unceasing work that we have for the simple fact of living.


References

  • Jurídico, D. (s. f.). Familia. Diccionario Jurídico. Recuperado 12 de abril de 2021, de http://diccionariojuridico.mx/definicion/familia/
  • Diccionario de la Real Academia Española.
  • BBC News Mundo. (2019, 17 julio). «El Chapo» Guzmán: cómo pasó de ser un niño pobre al capo de la drogas más poderoso del mundo. https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-47221382
  • Medina, D. (2019, 17 mayo). Evolucionando el Compliance en México: Antecedentes internacionales. Foro Jurídico.
  • Acuña, E. A. (s. f.). La infancia desde la perspectiva del psicoanálisis: un breve recorrido por la obra clásica de Freud y Lacan; Klein y los vínculos objetales. BV Salud. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/tpsi/v50n1/v50n1a16.pdf