Monitoring the Implementation of New Domestic Violence Laws

1
Monitoring the Implementation of New Domestic
Violence Laws

• By Mirjana Dokmanovic,
• Serbia
• Regional Conference on Domestic Violence Legal
  Reform
• Sofia, February 14, 2008

2
Does the government care?

• The governments have made an evident progress in
  drafting and adopting DV laws
• BUT
• How are these laws implemented?
• What is their impact?
• Are they effective in protecting victims,
  providing access to justice, providing special
  care for children, preventing DV?
• How to review / strengthen / enforce / amend
  them?
• Gaps?
• Achievements?
• What data the governments have ?
• (needed to have clear picture about the nature,
  prevalence, forms of DV for identifying the most
  effective responses and resources to combating
  DV, review/amend laws, etc.)

3
International directions related to monitoring

• The actual effectiveness of the measures must be
  continuously reviewed so that modifications can
  take place if necessary (CEDAW, DVAW)
• A review of existing national laws and
  comprehensive research is necessary (rec.1582
  (2002))
• Monitor the efficacy of the measures taken to
  protect the victim and the behaviour of the
  violent man (Recommendations of the Expert
  Forums)
• Promote research, collect data and compile
  statistics, relating to the prevalence of
  different forms of VAW (CEDAW)
• Improve statistics on DV, and with this in mind
  to develop a clear picture of its nature and
  prevalence (rec.1582 (2002) rec.(2002)5.)

4
Does the government care?

• Reg. report on implementation of int. standards
  related to DV in W. Balkans State monitoring
  does not exist at all
• Data collecting mostly done partially and
  sporadically, without a clear and uniform
  approach
• State statistics limited it is more indicator of
  the work of courts, prosecutors offices and
  other criminal institutions, rather than it is
  the indicator of the real level of criminality /
  DV
• Dark number of DV unknown, estimated to be very
  high (13 to 110)
• Statistics oriented towards perpetrators
• Scarce data about victims (age,
  employed/unemployed, disability, nationality,
  refugee and other status) and their relations
  with perpetrators
• No clear indicators for victims identification
  and unified methodology on collecting data
• Monitoring / research / collecting data
  predominantly by womens groups
• But used methodologies differ, womens NGOs not
  always properly trained, no systematic research
  data not comparable

5
Does the government care?

• Gaps
• 1. Effects of laws on victims belonging to
  vulnerable groups (Roma, with disabilities,
  rural, refugees etc.)
• 2. Usage of firearms and dangerous weapons in
  incidents of DV
• - almost no data, no statistics, no research
  until recently
• - no unified record at health care and social
  care institutions
• - no data of incidents of DV committed by
  policemen, prosecutors, and other officials who
  are entitled to carry and possess firearms by
  their professions
• - impact of the presence of guns in households
  on reporting DV
• 3. DV in post-conflict situations / guns as risk
  factor

6
Does the government care?

• Gaps
• 4. Budgetary implications of DV
• - How much DV costs
• - the victim
• - the family
• - the society / the State (health care, social
  care, shelters, services, police, judicial
  system, rehabilitation, lost working hours, etc.)
• - The Netherlands total costs estimated at 151
  million / year (psychological support 62
  million , judicial system 31 million , medical
  leave 13 million ) calculation based only on
  reported cases
• - At level of the CoE total costs at least 33
  billion

7
Proposals for improving the statistics / data
collecting

• Legal reform should be accompanied with the
  reform of the state statistics and data
  collecting
• Reform of monitoring and reporting mechanisms
• Identification of the criminality with high level
  of dark number needs implementation of
  additionally techniques (e.g. polls on
  victimisation, ethnographic multimethods)
• Developing unified methodologies for collecting
  data (including identifying institutions
  (research NGOs) as reporting units), developing
  instruments and clear definitions
• Regular polls on victimisations
• More frequent and periodical reporting (not only
  annually)
• Unified and linked systems of reporting of all
  the relevant actors (medical workers, social
  workers, police, shelters, SOS lines, etc.)

8
Proposals for improving the statistics / data
collecting

• 8. Strong collaboration / partnership with the
  civil sector (research NGOs, institutions, etc.)
• 9. State support of the systematic research
• 10. The state should identify / mandate
  monitoring state bodies/institutions
• 11. Development of unified methodology that would
  enable international cooperation
• 12. Regular reporting of monitoring bodies to the
  government on the extent, nature and
  consequences of DV, and on the impact and
  effectiveness of laws, policies and programmes
  for combating DV
• 13. Reform of the structure / the coordination of
  all the institutions involved in combating DV,
  particularly in the areas of prevention and
  protection link their system of collecting data
• 14. Regular information of the public