1
Stop Violence against Women
Violence against women is still rampant today despite the existence of international agreements, declarations and goals aimed at reversing this social ill.
Perpetrators still often go unpunished. In pockets of communities around the world, traditional attitudes that regard women as subordinate to men still turn a blind eye to the violence inflicted on women. According to a 2002 UNIFEM-commissioned independent report: “With few exceptions, those who commit heinous crimes against women in war are not punished, nor are women granted redress.”[1].
Effective laws and effective enforcement are clearly the starting point to stop this rampant violation of women’s human right to be free of all kinds of gender-based violence, whether it is rape perpetrated as a weapon of war or sexual harassment at the workplace.
But to stem violence against women more completely, varied initiatives are needed to attack the problem from all fronts. We need to take a holistic approach that uses legal strategies together with public education and support services. Only when such an all-round approach is taken, can we, for example, remove deep-seated traditional attitudes that perpetuate violence against women.
Legal Strategies:
Enacting necessary laws and enforcing them effectively will send a clear message that violence against women will not be tolerated. While this holds true for all forms of violence, we will deal specifically with legislation for domestic violence as it is one of the most insidious form of violence against women that plagues every society in every nation on a considerable scale.
According to the 2002 World Report on Violence and Health by the World Health Organisation (WHO), 10% to 69% of women in 48 population-based surveys from around the world reported being physically assaulted by an intimate male partner at some point of their lives[2]. 40% to 70% of female murder victims were killed by their husbands or boyfriends, often during an ongoing abusive relationship.[3]
In a parallel assessment, the UNIFEM-commissioned report stated that only 45 countries have legislation protecting women against domestic violence, of which many are not regularly enforced especially during periods of conflict.[4]
Considering these numbers, I think there is clearly a strong need to speed up the implementation of national laws that adequately protect women in all countries from domestic violence. And where adequate laws are already in place, steps must be taken to ensure that these laws can be used effectively by women to protect themselves from abuse.
In moving legal reform, consideration should be given to implementing laws and procedures that provide for protection orders with simple procedures to obtain them and to enforce them if the orders are breached. Legal and procedural rules should also make it easy for a victim to file a police report and get a medical examination for injuries.
These suggestions have to a great extent been in operation at a one-stop counter run by the Family Court of Singapore, a District Court established in 1995 that deals with family disputes. The Court set up the counter to manage family violence. It receives applications for protection orders, provides professional counselling, links applicants to services such as free legal advice and free medical examination, and makes referrals to crisis shelters and welfare agencies in the community.
This is just one example from which I think other countries might draw on Singapore’s experience. The 1996 amendments to Singapore’s Women’s Charter are also instructive. (Singapore’s legal provisions on domestic violence are found mainly in the Women’s Charter, although all cases of domestic violence where hurt is caused or threats are uttered are also criminalised under the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code).
(i)Singapore’s Legislation on Domestic Violence.
The amended Women’s Charter came into operation in 1997 to provide wider coverage of protection to victims of domestic violence. For example, the definition of family violence has been expanded to include intimidation, continual harassment, or restraint against one's will. Also, unlike before the amendment, former spouses can now apply for protection orders, which are less costly than injunction proceedings.
In addition, the new Section 65 continues to give power to the Court to issue a Personal Protection Order (PPO) – an order stopping a family member from committing family violence against the protected person – on the principle of “balance of probability” rather than the principle of proving one’s case “beyond reasonable doubt” that “family violence has occurred or is likely to occur”. This is a lower standard of proof and makes it less difficult for a complainant to secure protection.
Under the new Section 65(5), when making a PPO, the Court can also order the perpetrator, victim and/or family members of a victim to attend counselling or any other related programme such as rehabilitation or recovery programme for perpetrators or victims in trauma. Attendance is compulsory and non-compliance can constitute a contempt of Court. Project SAVE (Substance Abuse Violence Elimination), which was launched in March 2002, is one of these programmes run by the Family Court itself. Under the project, counsellors try to help alcoholic abusers kick their alcohol addiction, and at the same time address issues relating to their violent behaviour.
Other additional conditions that the Court can attach to the PPO include the grant of exclusive right of occupation of the shared residence to the protected person.
With the new Section 66, a victim who is afraid that the abuser will become even more violent after knowing of a PPO application can apply for an Expedited Order (EO). An EO – which has the same effect as a PPO - can be made in the perpetrator’s absence and will take effect once the EO is served on the perpetrator. But it will only be granted if the Court finds that there is an "imminent danger" of family violence being committed.
The Charter also provides for effective enforcement: anyone who disobeys an EO, PPO or a Domestic Exclusion Order (DEO) made against him or her can be arrested without a warrant by a police officer and charged in the criminal court. With the amendments, greater penalties are also meted out. The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine not exceeding $2,000 or imprisonment for up to 6 months, or both, if it is a first offence. The fine and possible imprisonment term about doubles for a second or subsequent offence.
(ii)Possible improvements in Singapore
While Singapore already has in place a rather comprehensive legislative approach to address violence against women, there is always room for improvement.
In some cases, the Court might not think it appropriate to grant Domestic Exclusion Orders for reasons such as the perpetrator being unable to secure alternative accommodation. To plug such ‘gaps’, and to provide for a more holistic approach that can prevent further incidence of violence more completely, there should be legislation giving Singapore Courts the mandate to order the perpetrator to move into a rehabilitative centre for a specified period. The perpetrator remains free to leave the centre to go to work, but he would have to return each day to participate in treatment programmes that address behavioural issues such as anger management. The victim and family can then continue to remain in the comfort of their own home instead of living in a shelter.
Since the law is as effective as it is enforced, I think it is also desirable to have procedural streamlining in the Singapore judicial process that will allow enforcement proceedings for orders made in the Family Court to be carried out in the Court itself. The current practice is for enforcement to be pursued in the Subordinate Court under the Criminal Procedure Code, where the burden of proof by the victim that the PPO has been breached by the perpetrator is based on ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
Legal Education
From studies conducted in various countries, the World Report on Violence and Health found that in more traditional societies wife beating is “largely regarded as a consequence of a man’s right to inflict physical punishment on his wife”[5]. Legal redress often eludes the victim when law enforcers and those working within the judicial process also adopt such misguided social values.
To help cast off such social attitudes and practices that foster violence against women, public education with a woman’s human rights perspective becomes a crucial tool. The agenda should include not just domestic laws but also international laws such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), international declarations, principles and guidelines relating to the human rights of women.
This campaign should target all levels of society including law enforcement officers, judges, lawyers, doctors, nurses and other health care providers, civil servants, high level government officials, humanitarian aid workers, religious leaders, women’s groups, and school-going boys and girls. With respect to law enforcers, Singapore has an inter-ministerial committee called the Women and Family Violence Committee that, among other things, looks into the training of police officers in the handling of family violence, coordinates the service providers and improves the support services along the way.
Working to change social perceptions that foster discrimination against women is necessary. But at the same time, we need to also educate women on the laws that affect their everyday living so that they are empowered to make informed decisions. They need to understand at least the domestic laws that govern family, labour, inheritance, housing and income issues, for example. They also need to understand the judicial process so that they are not daunted by it. The same goes for immigrant women: they too need to know the legal avenues they have in the new country when their rights are infringed, such as when they are abused or denied their rest days.
To educate the layman effectively, information on the law must be relayed in very simple language so that every one can understand. Interesting ways to teach the law, such as using cartoons and puppet shows, should be adopted especially for the very poorly educated or illiterate audience. The Singapore Association of Women Lawyers has done this successfully with their publications and street theatre.
Other organisations in Singapore such as the Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations, the Law Society of Singapore and the Family Court have produced free, easy-to-understand pamphlets to educate the public on some areas of the law, including the rights of women and the judicial process. Legal information has also been made readily available to the public on the Internet.
Support services
The law cannot work in isolation. It needs to work in partnership with all sectors of the community to achieve zero tolerance of violence against women.
In this respect, we need to have support services such as counselling, mediation, shelter for abused victims and their children, free health care for the abused and legal aid.
In Singapore, there are many organisations that provide support services to abused women. For example, the Samaritans of Singapore and the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) run hotlines that offer telephone counselling for women and men in distress. There are also quite a few crisis centres in Singapore for abused persons such as the Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations (SCWO) Star Shelter established in 1999.
Also, legal aid is provided by some organisations such as the Legal Aid Bureau and the Singapore Family Court. Many voluntary welfare organisations such as SCWO, Jamiyah Singapore and AWARE offer free legal counselling to the community.
Providing support services to abused women and girls, and other victims of violence is a primary concern. But to stem violence against women effectively, we should work to remove the violent behaviour itself. Leaving an abusive relationship does not guarantee the victim’s safety, a pattern noted in all countries according to the World Report on Violence and Health[6]. Indeed, the abusive behaviour could surface in new relationships. In Singapore, the Family Court itself has taken the initiative to provide such preventive intervention through its Family Transformation and Protection Unit. The unit provides counsellors who will encourage the abusers to participate in rehabilitative programmes and to learn to curb their violent behaviour.
Changing violent behaviour, through education or rehabilitative processes, is one of the strongest tools we have to combat this epidemic of violence. It is the root of the problem, and more should be invested towards this end. Together with legal reform, public education and other supporting programmes, we stand a better chance at preventing violence to women.
Written by Dr Anamah Tan [LLB(Hons)(Singapore); MRICS; FIAML; SiARB; Solicitor EnglandWales; PhD (Business Admin); PPA (G); PBM, BBM, JP]. Dr Tan is a family lawyer and women’s rights activist. She is currently the President-elect of the International Council of Women based in Paris, as well as Special Advisor to the ASEAN Confederation of Women’s Organisations.
[1]Elisabeth Rehn and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, “Women, War and Peace: The Independent Experts’ Assessment on the Impact of Armed Conflict on Women and Women’s Role in Peace-building”. United Nations Development Fund for Women (Unifem), 2002, Chp 7, p 88.
[2]“World Report on Violence and Health”, Geneva, World Health Organisation, 2002. Fact Sheets on Intimate Partner Violence.
[3] ibid, studies from a range of countries referred to in report.
[4]Elisabeth Rehn and Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, “Women, War and Peace”, op cit, Chp 1, p 15.
[5]WHO, “World Report on Violence and Health”, op cit, Chp 4, p 94,
[6]WHO, “World Report on Violence and Health”, op cit, Summary, p 16.