Monitoring the Implementation of New Domestic Violence Laws

							Monitoring the Implementation of New
             Domestic Violence Laws

                            By Mirjana Dokmanovic,
                                            Serbia


    Regional Conference on Domestic Violence Legal
                                            Reform
                           Sofia, February 14, 2008
             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.)
    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.)
             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 (1:3 to 1:10)
   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 women’s
    groups
   But – used methodologies differ, women’s NGOs not always
    properly trained, no systematic research : data not comparable
            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
             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 €
     Proposals for improving the statistics /
                 data collecting
1.    Legal reform should be accompanied with the reform of the state
      statistics and data collecting
2.    Reform of monitoring and reporting mechanisms
3.    Identification of the criminality with high level of dark number
      needs implementation of additionally techniques (e.g. polls on
      victimisation, ethnographic multimethods)
4.    Developing unified methodologies for collecting data (including
      identifying institutions (research NGOs) as reporting units),
      developing instruments and clear definitions
5.    Regular polls on victimisations
6.    More frequent and periodical reporting (not only annually)
7.    Unified and linked systems of reporting of all the relevant actors
      (medical workers, social workers, police, shelters, SOS lines, etc.)
   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