Despite the EU’s reputation for progressivism, for its value-based aspect, and its Nobel Peace Prize, European governments are not collecting reliable and comparable data on domestic violence, rape, and femicide – just to name a few. Furthermore, there is inconsistency in legal definitions and criminalisation of gender-based violence. It is ironic that the EU, which is known for its norms and values (human rights, equality, human dignity, freedom, rule of law, and democracy), is failing to address this “silent war on women”.

Now that I have gotten your attention, let’s dive into the nitty-gritty stuff and get to the heart of the matter.

What’s this guy’s deal with blabbering about this topic anyway?

Data and definitions are crucial for identifying and addressing issues related to social inequality. The lack of data and definitions (or well the absence of consistent and reliable data) can make it difficult to measure progress and identify areas that require improvement. However, in the spirit of recent local issues and the 8^th of March, the scope of this article will be to focus on a subcategory of social inequality (furthermore, addressing this topic in its entirety would be an enormous undertaking, quite a behemoth task): gender equality. By delving into the belly of the beast of inequality here I hope we can understand a bit more that in our society we still have unequal treatment, opportunities, and outcomes that individuals face based on their gender.

This social issue affects both men and women, but can disproportionately impact women, leading to discrimination, poverty, and violence. In various aspects of life, including education, employment, politics, social norms etc; gender inequality can limit women’s access to healthcare, education, and economic and political opportunities, whilst potentially perpetuating harmful gender stereotypes and norms.

Oh where, oh where is the data?

The absence of consistent and reliable data, along with the lack of cross-border frameworks, weakens both national (member state) and the EU-wide efforts to achieve justice, protection, and convictions in cases of violence against women. With the COVID-19 pandemic and the (on-going) war in Ukraine already straining state resources across Europe, NGOs are bearing the brunt of meeting women’s needs. Additionally, authorities’ inability to collect accurate data or define domestic violence and femicide further complicates the situation.

The European Commission lacks a clear overview of the situation regarding violence against women in the EU, and even when asked for figures and trends, they do not have a complete answer. Additionally, the European Women’s Lobby highlights the issue of a lack of data and proper definitions of femicide and domestic violence at both levels of governance, leading to the underestimation of the scale of the problem. Women’s organisations report that existing figures do not provide a complete picture, making it difficult to fully address the issue with policies currently in place. The lack of comparable EU-wide data on violence against women has resulting in the EU not receiving a score in this domain, which is something that simply cannot and should not be happening in this day and age.

We are all too familiar with the prevalence of femicide…

UN Women defines femicide as “an intentional killing with a gender-related motivation”. Yet, several European countries lack reliable data on femicide, domestic violence, and convictions.

For example: in France, femicide is not legally recognized, while NGOs are largely responsible for keeping track of cases. Austria, Belgium, Bulgarian, and Germany also fail to maintain centralised records of femicide and domestic violence, with some countries authorities fail to gather information on rape as well. The Czech Republic records instances of violence against women but does not recognize the concept of domestic violence. In Albania, domestic violence is classified as `family violence`, and femicide is not legally defined.

This behaviour risks further holes in the data that lays the foundation for policy development, to inevitably actually wage an effective war on gender-based violence.

Violations on other fronts

There is divergence among EU member states in criminalising psychological violence and coercive control, with only 4 EU member-states being compliant with the article on psychological violence in the Istanbul Convention. A 2022 report found that a whopping 44% of women in the EU have experienced psychological violence, emotional abuse, or coercive control in their lifetime.

This is very much a serious problem, and deeply concerning, all of which goes against the very values of equality, respect, and human rights that the EU upholds and preaches internationally. It is important to take a strong stance against violence towards women and to work towards creating safer communities for everyone.

However, it is crucial to recognise that responsibility for this issue is not solely on the EU’s fault, but shared by its member states as well. Across Europe, low conviction rates in cases of violence against women are preventing victims from reporting crimes against them. A lack of trust in the judiciary and high rates of cases dismissed for lack of evidence or an unknown perpetrator contribute to this problem.

For example, in Belgium, 53% of rape cases are dismissed, while in France only 1% of complaints result in conviction. Increasing conviction rates requires clearer recognition of violence against women, and better recording of these crimes. Additionally, a more common method of documenting and measuring such pervasive crimes would help authorities actually address the situation.

Roughly what has been done so far?

The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) is working to gather data from each member state on violence against women, but the collected data is not up to date. However, this proposed system regarding data gathering would extend well beyond the intimate partner violence. The EU has established a common helpline number for women experiencing violence and proposed a directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence. The European Women’s Lobby is calling for swift adoption of the directive and final ratification of the Istanbul Convention, despite opposition from 6 member states.

This is merely the beginning. We need to continue to improve and take further action. One critical step towards addressing such major disparities within our society is acknowledging that there is a problem both within the society, and within the systems meant to run it.

Food for thought to ponder over.

Gender inequality is an essential social issue that demands attention and action from individuals, communities, policymakers and the EU itself in order to promote gender equity and ensure equal opportunities for all individuals, regardless of their gender. Although International Women’s Day has passed, the fight against gender inequality must continue to achieve a more equal, just, and inclusive society.  

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post How the Mighty have fallen: the EU’s failure to Protect Women appeared first on The Third Eye.

The murder of Bernice Cassar happened just a few days before the “International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women”. Instead of talking about what happened, I want to talk about the bedrock of femicide and its implications.

Roderick Cassar is the first person to be charged with femicide after shooting his wife on her way to work.

Femicide was introduced to Malta’s Criminal Code early this year after the death of Paulina Dembska. It can be defined as the murder of a woman because of her gender. Femicide can be an intentional crime or it can be unintentional, such as a fatal lack of reproductive care. These killings are often done by an intimate partner or family member, usually rooted in power dynamics. What binds one case to another is that femicides are typically committed by men, the victims would have experienced some sort of abuse in the past & the rate of killings remain steady depending on the societal & economic foreground.
During the peak of the pandemic, thousands of victims had to go into lockdown with their
abuser, ultimately with no escape. In terms of the law, femicide is different to homicide as it cannot be excused through “passion”, meaning that it’s a harder crime to be excused.

When the bill was first discussed many believed that it belittled the number of male victims and saw it as preferential. Some argued that the differentiation between femicide and homicide was futile as those charged with homicide already received the highest form of punishment available. I argue that coining the term isn’t useful for the sentence per se but is there to help notice a pattern. If these crimes are labelled as such, it will be a lot easier to see why the rate is what it is, especially since the data on femicide are so incredibly low. The struggle to accept this term could reveal society’s hidden reluctance to acknowledge that gender inequality still exists and affects lives every day.

Femicide Study and Implications

This can be seen in a study conducted on 33 EU countries. The data showed that women who lived more traditionally were less at risk for violence than women who lived differently. Femicide is about control. Ted Bundy, a notorious killer, claimed that his murders were never about lust or violence but about possession. It can start from a simple catcall to show prowess but it can also manifest into something a lot worse. Certain behaviours have become normalised and are only given the time of day when they turn into severe circumstances, such as femicide. Women are so used to these instances that we tend to shift the blame onto ourselves and so does the general population.

Why were you in that area so late? What were you wearing that night? Are you sure that you didn’t lead him on? I know him well he would never do that!

Regardless of who what or where, the focus is always on what the woman did and what she could’ve done better. In cases where children are put in the mix, the situation is aggravated.

Current Protocols and The Required Amendments

Alongside this skewed mindset, we also struggle with processes that fail victims. Bernice Cassar did everything that she was meant to do. She reported him several times, sought support, told the people around her and even had a protection order and yet her case was going to be heard in November of next year. 500+ individuals are scheduled to be arraigned in court by 2024 and the number will inevitably rise. Additionally, there is just 1 magistrate (Lara Lanfranco) who handles these proceedings. Over 1,429 hearings were in the hands of a single person. That is simply not just, not sustainable and certainly not effective at reaching each victim at an appropriate time.

New systems and protocols must be created but a new mindset should also be implemented. Society must accept that the world is not yet gender-neutral, hence the policies put in place cannot be either. So far there’s a proposal for people to be able to check their partner’s police conduct for domestic abuse. Although it can be valuable to protect oneself, it also hints that victims should be responsible for their fate, in the sense that they can predict whether their partner will be abusive or not. Instead of seeing the matter as a male aggressor and female victim, we should consider everyone including ourselves as a bystander and we all have the same obligation to call violence out, no matter how small it may seem. At the end of the day, isn’t our silence some sort of societal acceptance?

Conclusive thoughts

I hope that Bernice Cassar’s tragedy and that of other women don’t go forgotten. To do this men must be at the forefront of these issues. Highlighting the struggles of a certain group doesn’t have to undermine the struggles of another. There is more than enough room in this discourse to have compassion for all. That being said, if a marginalised group is finally given the space to speak up, someone joining that conversion just to speak in favour of another cause is missing the point.

This uproar is not about misandry or partisan politics. It’s about the lives of women and I am sure that all of us have a mother, daughter or friend that we wish to protect.

This article was written by an independent writer whose views are not associated with The Third Eye. The Third Eye strives to be the student’s voice, and that entails giving them a platform to voice their opinions.

The post The Underpinnings Of Femicide appeared first on The Third Eye.