Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence
Policy Brief
1 6 A U G U S T 2 0 2 1
Photo Pragyna Mahpara, BIGD, BU
Maheen Sultan, Marufa Akter, Pragyna Mahpara, Nuha Annoor Pabony, and Fariha Tasnin
Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence
Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence August 2021
Authors
Maheen Sultan, Dr. Marufa Akter, Pragyna Mahpara, Nuha Annoor Pabony, and Fariha Tasnin
Advisors
Dr. Faustina Pereira, Dr. Mirza Hassan
Collaborating Organizations
Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST), BRAC Human Rights and Legal Aid Services, RDRS Bangladesh
and gender stereotypes prevalent in the society generally make it difficult for women to seek redress from domestic violence. The COVID crisis and movement restrictions exacerbated these constraints as resources and access to services become even more difficult. It was feared that additional economic, financial, and health stressors in the household would serve to exacerbate the already high rates of violence and the United Nations declared DV as a “shadow pandemic”. As a global collective effort to stop VAW during the COVID crisis, the UN Secretary General issued an appeal for peace at home—and in homes—around the world (Care USA, 2020; UN, 2020; UN Women, 2020). In addition to that, the 8FYP the government of Bangladesh recognizes that “Multipronged actions are essential to combat VAW including enforcement of the legal provisions, motivation of family, enhancing community support, orientation of youth group, improving women’s human capabilities, access to low cost prosecution services and economic self-reliance of women.” (Page 762).
In response to these global and national concerns, the Rule of Law Programme of GIZ Bangladesh commissioned the BRAC Institute of Governance and Development (BIGD) to undertake a research to explore the justice-seeking journeys of women facing domestic violence.
The research was supported by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth
& Development Office (FCDO). The
different domestic violence response mechanisms from the perspective of survivors. It also sought to understand the challenges and achievements of Legal Aid NGOs to respond to the needs of women justice seekers during the pandemic. The in- depth research was undertaken in partnership with Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST), BRAC Human Rights and Legal Aid Services (HRLS) and RDRS Bangladesh.
Scope and Methodology
Qualitative methods were used to capture the experiences of domestic violence (DV) survivors interacting with their families, communities, NGOs and the formal justice system during the COVID period. Twelve in-depth case studies of women experiencing domestic violence were prepared through in-depth interviews, process documentation through case diaries and 104 interviews of people involved in the cases. These case studies were selected purposely to have a selection of women who had approached legal service organizations before and during COVID, as well as cases where the conflict was on-going, and where the conflict was resolved.
The research was conducted between November 2020 and May 2021.
Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence
Findings and Recommendations
1. Justice Journey at the Family Level
Physical and mental health of survivors are at stake. Women generally experienced multiple forms of violence over a long period before disclosing it or seeking redress.
Multiple perpetrators often carry out the abuse. Various intersecting factors trigger abuse making it difficult to pin point the reason for violence. Survivors decide to reveal incidences of violence to their family members or community members when they can no longer put up with violence. Psychological abuse is a common form of abuse that covers a range of harmful and coercive actions affecting the women’s mental health and social life. Many of the respondents faced psychological abuse at one time or another by their husbands and in-laws. Some were under constant fear of losing their children and home.
Women survivors of DV have shown various forms of agency within social, cultural and economic constraints.
Some of the women actively reached out for support to family members and neighbors, while others tried to contact local leaders, journalists, NGO workers for mobilizing supports. A few proactively called up the police, helplines or lawyers. When faced with financial pressures a few women took up jobs in factories or work as domestic workers. Some protested and spoke out about the abuse they were facing in the traditional Shalish.
They were fighting against various odds to protect their marriage, their
“shongshar”
(everything that makes up a home) and the rights of their children.
The family provides resources, contacts and on-going support for women, but their capacity is affected by COVID. Survivors’ justice journey started at the family, as a first step in conflict resolution. Family members, especially mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters, played crucial roles in survivors’ justice-seeking journeys from the community to the formal justice system. They offered financial support despite their financial constraints. Both immediate and external family members supported respondents while approaching socially and politically influential people, rescuing them from the hostile environments of in-laws when beaten up severely or thrown out, taking them to hospitals, helping them access information about different available services. They extended their services to stop the violence and enable the respondents to continue their marriages peacefully. However, their efforts were constrained in the COVID period due to increased expenses and their economic hardship.
COVID exacerbated family conflicts by impacting the respondents’ family income, which led to increased stress and conflict within the family. The ensuing financial constraints and loss of employment created additional challenges for survivors’ justice journeys.
parental families
The needs of domestic violence survivors and their families should be recognized and their capacity should be strengthened by state and non- state service providers
Recognize and prioritize needs of DV survivors: DV is an emergency, even during pandemic.
y Primary and support services for DV survivors should be comprehensive, treated as essential and uninterrupted
y Other relevant services should also be available: medical, shelter, referral, financial, counselling as well as accompaniment to these services
y Greater access to information to DV survivors on medical, legal services, shelter.
Create awareness of the provisions of the DVPP Act of the right of the victim to reside in the shared home (Article 10) and the possibility of the court to issue residence orders to protect this right while ensuring security of the victim (Article 15).
Mental health related support including psycho-social counselling should be made available to women and girls, their family and the perpetrators.
Families supporting DV survivors should be provided advise and counselling by formal and informal service providers on options and services available both online and offline for seeking redress
Explore options to provide financial support to survivors to cover costs of shelter, and for reimbursement of medical costs and for alternative livelihoods through the allocation of programmatic support by the government and NGOs.
2. Justice Journey within the Community Level
Informal justice mechanisms were most accessible and used during the COVID period. Respondents approached the community and UP representatives before going to the police or the courts, considering
the costs associated with formal channels of justice. Community actors such as neighbors, extended family members, and influential people in the community were active in mobilizing support for respondents, arranging shalish/meetings or performing the role of negotiators. In few instances, they put pressure on perpetrators or
Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence perpetrator’s family members to stop
the violence. Access to community actors was not impacted by lockdown restrictions as mobility restrictions within the communities and villages were not strictly enforced.
Community Animators/’Restorative Justice’ facilitators/Paralegals were active in responding survivors’ needs.
As a member of the community, restorative justice (RJ) facilitators or community animators of RDRS Bangladesh were often approached by the respondents as reliable people who could help them. They were informed, advised women who needed help on the phone and put them in touch with UP representatives and Federation members. They also maintained a good working relationships with UP representatives and influential community members, which made accessing the UPs convenient for these organizations.
They were active in providing counselling and information on available services, referral services, supported them and accompanied them, whenever needed to courts, District Legal Aid Offices, hospitals and the police.
Local Government representatives felt accountable to local populations for outcomes reached through traditional shalishes. They considered conducting shalishes and finding solutions as an essential part of their responsibilities.
They took responsibility in resolving family disputes and assured the respondents’ families that they would be responsible for ensuring no further harm to the woman or her family. UP chairs provided initial protection and responded with help
and advice in our cases. They provided necessary support, including required documents to survivors who went/
wanted to go to the courts or other government service providers.
Lack of clarity in UP representatives’
roles results in informality and risk of going beyond their mandate.
Whether they are operating under the Muslim Family Court ordinance as an arbitration court council, or under the Village Court Act as a Village Court, or, when they are conducting shalishes informally, was unclear, both to survivors and maybe even to themselves. Sometimes UP chairs were seen going beyond their mandate during shalishes, by compelling respondents to beg for forgiveness from their in-laws; while in some cases threatening and forcing the perpetrators to participate in the shalish. Respondents also reported out of pocket expenses in dealing with UP representative while resolving disputes through traditional shalish.
Stereotypical gender norms on marriage and justice at the community level constrain women’s choice. The views of the community actors and UP elected representatives reflected the prevalence of social norms around marriages. Preserving families and maintaining the status quo was given utmost importance.
Often DV survivors were expected or suggested to tolerate the husband or in-laws abuse for the sake of their children’s better future or advised to
“behave” so that in-laws would not find any fault. Divorce was looked upon as a wrong choice for women, and survivors were asked to beg for forgiveness from their in-laws during the shalishes.
and elected leaders at the community level
Government and Non-state actors to strengthen community role in preventing DV and supporting DV survivors
Introduce the ‘every door is the right door’ approach for DV survivors to ensure grievance redressal process at the earliest time of occurrence. For example UP representatives, community clinics
Recognition of paralegals, “ain shebikas”, community animators and community legal aid providers as essential service providers to be supported by the State.
Emergency response for DV survivors to be made available at the local level community clinics.
Strengthen community role and coordination between community actors and leaders to strengthen community efforts in prevention and support to DV survivors.
Ensuring that community level mediation efforts respect domestic laws, international human rights principles and allow space for women to express themselves freely.
Capacity of UP elected representatives including women UP members to address DV issues to be developed.
Social pressure on women, towards preserving families at any cost and social stigma around divorce to be countered by greater awareness of risks entailed and human rights violations involved.
3. Justice Journey through legal aid services, DLAO and Courts
Legal Aid NGOs’ services were limited during the strict lockdown.
Office premises remained closed, but clients who had ongoing cases followed up on case proceedings and hearing dates over the phone.
Organizations received complaints through phone calls but could not take new complaints or file new cases for courts as office premises were closed.
Upon partial opening up the lockdown, organizations resumed their activities
and faced an increased number of formal complaints. BRAC HRLS and BLAST conducted a few telephone ADRs (through conference calls), as well as socially distanced physical ADRs.
District Legal Aid Office (DLAO) services were limited during the strict lockdown. DLAO in our research areas remained closed during the strict lockdown. The hotlines were
Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence
Recommendations for legal aid services, DLAO, Panel Lawyers and Courts
Increasing gender awareness among people working in Government and NGOS’s to counter prevailing social norms of normalizing violence and of valorizing women’s submissiveness
Justice is an essential need, and treating DV cases as urgent matter in virtual and actual courts is important. Both virtual and actual courts should remain open and accept family matters and DV related cases.
Greater outreach by government agencies and NGOs during
emergencies. Greater dissemination of information about emergency and legal services available on online platforms and expansion of essential, online and tele-based services.
Ensuring transparency about services available in all offices and charges at all levels.
Increasing gender responsiveness of government, and non- government service providers (understanding of gender discrimination, their own roles and responsibilities to address differential needs of women and men) to counter social pressure on women to accept violence and abuse in marriage.
Promoting the provisions of the DVPP Act regarding the right of the victim to reside in the shared home (Article 10) and the possibility of the court to issue residence orders to protect this right while ensuring security of the victim (Article 15).
active and provided legal advice and counselling including referral services upon receiving calls from DV survivors.
Office activities resumed slowly after June and were fully functional after the opening of the courts from August 2020. The DLAO arranged limited numbers of socially distanced Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) during the partial opening. Although online application processes were open, none of our respondents availed of these. Since the courts were closed until August, applications for court cases were not considered
immediately. DLAO reported receiving a greater number of complaints upon opening of their office premises and courts.
With the closure of courts, cases relating to domestic violence have been piling up throughout the lockdown. Virtual courts dealt primarily with matters considered to be urgent such as bail hearings and injunctions rather than for other cases including domestic violence and family matters. DV cases were not taken up by courts as priority.
The research has shown that women survivors of DV have various forms of agency within social, cultural, and economic constraints.
At the household level, we can see that COVID disrupted respondents’
lives with migrant husband returning to their villages, other husbands losing their jobs, business getting worse and families being separated because of travel restrictions. While none of these factors led to DV they did lead to aggravations of conflicts and tensions with increased demands for money from wives and their families, difficulties paying for children’s costs, and also refusals to bear household expenses by husbands. The women’s families were also affected in their efforts to support the survivors, with increased travel costs, loss of their own incomes and jobs, and restrictions in their movements.
The justice journeys at the community level were least affected in that access
to community leaders and also to NGO paralegals and community animators was not hampered as they lived nearby.
However at the state level, accessing to formal institutions and offices did make more difficulties due to strict lockdown restrictions. This included the courts and DLAO office which resulted in delays in case hearings and filing of cases, thus delaying the disposal of cases. The closure of NGO offices also delayed both ADRs and legal advice and action. Although both government agencies and NGOs tried to overcome the restrictions of lockdown by trying online dispute resolutions, telephone outreach and advice through hotlines (GO and NGO), and online filing of applications (DLAC), the outreach and use of these remained limited.
Access to Justice during COVID-19 for Survivors of Domestic Violence
The Rule of Law (RoL) Programme of GIZ Bangladesh is a joint initiative under the Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) and Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs (MoLJPA).
The programme is working in 26 districts aiming to improve people’s access to justice through prison and justice reform, particularly on issues of overcrowding in prisons and case backlog within the judiciary. The RoL programme is supported by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and the UK Foreign, Commonwealth &
Development Office (FCDO).
