Protection without discrimination

DR GABRIELLE JAMELA HOSEIN

WHEN A woman experiences partner violence, her neighbours, friends and family can report even if she does not. Often, neighbours and families witness or experience violence or its threat because of their relationship or proximity to a victim. The more we all report is the more we empower police to respond and can hold them accountable for doing so.

Reports of domestic violence do not require women to seek a protection order to ensure their safety. Threats and violence by partners and relatives are also criminal offences, and police can immediately investigate and charge perpetrators.

As the Coalition Against Domestic Violence has stated, “It is time that the police develop and implement a zero tolerance policy for domestic violence. If a serious offence has been committed or is threatened, the police must act independently, whether the victim co-operates or not.”

Proposed amendments to the Domestic Violence Act include provisions for undertaking risk assessments. Upon reports being made, a risk assessment should be undertaken so that police can predict whether lethal harm is likely. A protocol should then be in place which connects with the courts, psychiatric intervention, and social services.

Police should also check perpetrators’ history of violence. As Conflict Women’s recent press release reminded, Michael Maynard was charged with rape and released on bail in 2018. In February this year, after a history of violence, he killed his eight-year old daughter, Makeisha.

In response to a report by her mother, police were willing to go with Tricia Ramsaran-Ramdass to remove her belongings from the house. The TTPS press release states, “She never did, but instead, moved back into the same home with her spouse until her death on June 9th.”

Perpetrators, not victims, should be removed from a home. Nonetheless, we must keep in mind that leaving a home does not guarantee that violence will end. Women are at greater risk when they begin to leave or have left, and threats and intimidation continue long after they attempt to end relationships.

In the case of Tricia Ramsaran-Ramdass, she was fearful of a partner who killed a woman already. It had been years of torture. Her family was also vulnerable. Such terror can lead women to return to abusive partners repeatedly.

Love, hope, forgiveness, guilt, loss of self and self-blame are always enmeshed in such decisions, but such complexity should never distract from the fact that responsibility for violence always lies with the perpetrator and, in many cases, his controlling practices, his beliefs in traditional gender roles and male dominance, his history of witnessing, experiencing or expressing violence, and triggers such as substance abuse.

The proposed amendments also allow police to seek emergency protection orders electronically through judicial officers, enabling them to be granted quickly. They allow interim orders to be granted after the second hearing where adjournments are being sought by the court and/or respondent.

In 2017-2018, over one-third of more than 9,000 applications were dismissed, 72 per cent of adjournments were related to the unavailability of the magistrate, and only 29 per cent resulted in a protection order. The amendments address the needs of victims who appear repeatedly at court and leave without even protection on paper.

Expanded beyond cohabitation and marriage, the amended legislation will enable some people in visiting and dating relationships to seek protection orders. There are expanded protections for children, including those who are witnesses to domestic violence. Mandatory reporting to police is now required if domestic violence is being perpetrated against vulnerable groups, such as the elderly or people with disabilities. Such reports should also be able to be made to the Division of Family Services and the Children’s Authority.

The Alliance for State Action to End Gender-based Violence, comprising over 20 civil society organisations, including The UWI, continues to call for the amendments to protect all people who experience violence in a domestic context, regardless of family status or gender. To continue to exclude some from protection is to define who can share domestic space or have relationships. That is not the point of the DV Act. It should provide protection without discrimination.

My condolences to the family of Tricia Ramsaran-Ramdass, 37 years old and mother of one. We should all commit to preventing such violence in whatever way we can. These amendments will be debated in Parliament next week. The GBV Unit and Special Victims Department are important, but as yet underfunded, steps in the right direction. Where police and judiciary can improve, the only headlines should be about how much is possible and how soon.

Diary of a mothering worker

Entry 379

motheringworker@gmail.com