Pursuant to ruling C-197 of 2023, the provision of Article 9 of Law 797 of 2003 requiring women to contribute 1,300 weeks to obtain an old-age pension under the average premium regime was declared unconstitutional.
This decision was made with the aim of correcting the inequities that hundreds of Colombian women face daily regarding old-age pensions. However, the effects of the ruling will not be immediately applicable, as it will take effect as of January 1, 2026, from which date the number of weeks will gradually decrease year by year until reaching 1,000 weeks.
Now, the Congress of the Republic, in coordination with the National Government, is responsible for adopting differentiated measures that make gender equity effective in the average premium pension regime to guarantee women's access to the right to an old-age pension, especially for those who are heads of household.
It should be noted that the gradual reduction is made to respect the principle of financial sustainability of the pension system. Therefore, as of January 1, 2026, 50 contribution weeks will be reduced, and from then on, 25 additional weeks will be reduced each year. Thus, the outlook would be as follows:
| YEAR | WEEKS REQUIRED TO ACQUIRE PENSION RIGHTS FOR WOMEN |
| 2026 | 1250 |
| 2027 | 1225 |
| 2028 | 1200 |
| 2029 | 1175 |
| 2030 | 1150 |
| 2031 | 1125 |
| 2032 | 1100 |
| 2033 | 1075 |
| 2034 | 1050 |
| 2035 | 1025 |
| 2036 | 1000 |
Now, delving a little into the reasons the Constitutional Court considered to declare the unconstitutionality of said provision, it is mentioned that the difference in pension age between men and women is currently insufficient to overcome gender-based discrimination, since women are even required to contribute the same number of weeks as men, but in a shorter time.
Therefore, applying identical treatment between men and women, despite each group facing different conditions in the labor and social security spheres, results in the provision setting contribution weeks lacking the gender perspective that is constitutionally demanded today. In this sense, the challenged provision generates a disproportionate sacrifice of women's rights, particularly regarding human dignity, equality, social security, pension, minimum vital income, and obtaining special protection in the labor and social security fields.