The Malta Confederation of Women's Organisations (MCWO) said today that it was bewildering how provocation was been cited as an excuse to justify battering.
"No one, least of all men, have a right to cite provocation to justify acts of violence. Violence is condemned for whatever reason and is excused neither by alcohol, drug taking or psychological provocation."
The federation did not specify the context of its statement but The Times yesterday reported how former MP Josie Muscat, a leading voice in Malta's medical sector sparked outrage at an MIM forum on Monday when he suggested beaten women often goaded their aggressors into violence. http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120926/local/-Most-men-are-provoked-into-domestic-violence-.438414
The confederation noted that according to the Domestic Violence Act of 2006, "domestic violence" meant any act of violence, even if only verbal, perpetrated by a household member upon another household member and includes any omission which causes physical or moral harm to the other."
That meant that all emotional and psychological violence wereincluded in the law contrary to what was currently being said.
"Research has shown that the goal of battering and violence is for the perpetrator to gain power and control over his victim. Women are the victims in 85 percent of reported cases of domestic violence. Domestic violence is a form of oppression that occurs within a social context that makes violence against an oppressed group possible and even acceptable. Women are considered to be an oppressed group. They do not enjoy effective equal rights and they do not have institutional power. Examples of this include gender pay gap and dearth of women in decision-making positions.
The confederation said that during the MIM Forum one of the panellists said that whilst at Appogg there were approximately 500 cases of women victims, the men's programme for help with conflict management and anger control attracted only some 50 to 60 cases during the same period.
"In every domestic violence scenario, there is a victim, and a prepertator. For every abused wife, there is an abusive husband/partner. And yet, there is a clear gulf in the numbers of those victims and perpetrators who recieve the necessary care.
"Is this perhaps because anger management and anger control programmes are not included in the sentencing when the courts give judgements in instances of domestic violence?" the confederation asked.
It called on the state to give high priority to such issues.
ADITUS CONCERN
Human rights NGO Aditus in a separate statement said it was concerned at the statements made about domestic violence.
"The statements seem to imply that domestic violence can often be attributed to some form of provocation from the victim, leading to a minimisation of what is in fact a very serious violation of a person's physical and psychological integrity," the NGO said.
It added that while each case has to be seen on its own merits, such generalised public statements which were not backed by credible research, did nothing towards effectively combating domestic violence. On the contrary, they
undermined the extremely valuable work being done by the relevant agencies in
supporting victims and also in attempting to foster a culture of respect and
inviolability of the human person.
Aditus called for a definitive zero tolerance to all forms of domestic violence, whether physical or psychological, and whether perpetrated against men, women or children.
"We need to ensure effective prevention and awareness policies, tough deterrent systems and adequate victim support mechanisms. A change in popular culture and attitudes is also imperative," Neil Falzon, Aditus foundation director said.