Maltese women re-victimised by system that does not hear their voice

A report by Council of Europe experts lambasting Malta’s judiciary and police for their insensitivity on domestic violence, is “only a shadow” of what professionals and NGOs have witnessed for years, the women’s rights activist and lawyer Lara Dimitrijevic has said.

Dimitrijevic told this paper that she and other activists have been echoing identical recommendations to the report drawn up by the Council of Europe’s experts from GREVIO, since the first report was issued back in 2016.

The GREVIO report noted that Malta’s judges appear to have an “inadequate understanding of the change in paradigm in proving rape, of the role and importance of emergency barring orders and protection orders in breaking the cycle of violence”.

Dimitrijevic said it would be unjust to put the whole judicial system in the same basket. “The report dealt with various aspect of the legal system from criminal to civil. The role of the judiciary is imperative; it is not just the symbol of justice, but it ensures effective protection and accountability,” she said.

But Dimitrijevic said the legal system had to do its part to prevent violence against women, and other domestic violence victims, lawyers not least.

The report said that police officers who routinely receive reports or respond to call-outs were not trained on the dynamics of domestic violence, nor on the gendered aspect of such violence, its risk factors and the need to ensure victim protection.

Dimitrijevic said that since GREVIO’s visit to Malta, the police force had made strides with the launch of a specialised domestic unit. “This unit has brought the much-needed change, not only because they are trained, but because it is sensitised to deal with victims and their children.”

The GREVIO report also raised concern over the systematic granting of bail, which they said was coupled with a lack of monitoring and enforcement of protection orders by the state. This, they said, sent a strong signal that domestic violence was tolerated.

Dimitrijevic agreed, stating that mechanisms needed to be put into place to ensure effective enforcement when bail conditions were breached. “Another issue is the lengthy proceedings of our court. Whilst summarily, cases are generally heard with practicality, a compilation of evidence can take months, if not years to be concluded until the final judgment is reached.”

Lawyer and women’s rights activist Lara Dimitrejivic

Conviction rates in Malta remain low: only a small number of domestic violence cases are prosecuted. Out of the 480 cases prosecuted in 2017, only 53 ended with a guilty verdict – just 11%. It is a low conviction rate that suggests that violence against women takes place with impunity.

“A low conviction rate could be a result of various issues, including a lack of sufficient evidence brought to the court for it to be in a position to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The general attitude towards violence against women and domestic violence is all too often viewed as not being a grave offence. However, again: putting all courts in the same basket would be unjust to say that low conviction rates imply impunity,” Dimitrijevic said.

Throughout the years, Dimitrijevic has seen a change in attitude, punishment and sensitivity in the way cases are dealt with. “But of course, constant professional development is required in any area, let alone a legal system.”

GREVIO’s report says that even the dynamic of the legal system in Malta can allow perpetrators to use it to continue to control their victims. “Money, money, money,” Dimitrijevic chimes in. “Unfortunately, within the dynamics of intimate partner abuse, more often than not the perpetrator is always in an advantageous position to file applications, pay for lawyers and use the legal system to take advantage and control their victims. This does not only happen in Malta, but there is ample research to show that it takes place in any legal system.”

Dimitrijevic referenced an example in the UK, where a situation had gone so far as having perpetrators representing themselves, putting them in a situation where they can examine their victims.

Even the physical layout of the court requires room for improvement, the lawyer says. Victims and perpetrators can be left to wait outside the courtroom for their case to be called. “On a more positive note, the court is more open to having testimonies done via video-conferencing to ensure that the victim is free to testify without fear, ensuring the avoidance of re-victimisation,” Dimitrijevic said.

Insensitive courts: out of the 480 cases prosecuted in 2017, only 53 ended with a guilty verdict – just 11%

Women burdened with leaving the household

GREVIO experts are concerned by the fact that more often than not, the burden of leaving the household falls on victims of domestic violence and their children. “Unfortunately, this is still the case. We still do not have a fast-track system where victims can request for removal orders or emergency barring orders,” Dimitrijevic said.

She highlighted that if a person is not married and does not have children in common, the victim cannot even have recourse to the family court, nor can they go to the criminal court since the law does not cater for such person in such situations. “Within a family context, before the setting up of the Domestic Violence Unit, the arrest did not always take place even if the victim and children were at high risk; and many reported to us that they would be told that for safety it is best they moved out and go into a shelter. This is never acceptable,” Dimitrijevic said.

Dimitrijevic said this not reverses the State’s obligation to protect victims, but the very system meant to prevent violence and protect victims was putting further burden on them. “Being forced out of one’s home becomes another form of punishment for victims. Not to mention that this is explicitly against the rights of the victims,” she said.

Dimitrijevic said Malta has to move on from pitting one against the other, to truly invest in qualified and trained professionals to assist the courts to get to the truth. “It is always frustrating to hear police or judiciary say that the person is lying because it is faced with a different version. Let’s face it: every individual would experience the same situation differently,” Dimitrijevic said.

“It is high time that we introduce victim impact assessments before passing judgment. The voice of the victim ought to, and needs to be heard loud and clear,” she said.