The recent case of Selina Ramotar, who almost died as a result of stab wounds she sustained at the hands of the father of her child, with whom she had reportedly severed a relationship, is one that should cause the authorities to question their proclamations of zero tolerance for domestic and gender-based violence.
The fact that Ms Ramotar’s sworn testimony in court was enough to cause the charge against her assailant to be dropped, should have set off alarm bells. As a matter of fact, the charge should have been proceeded with. But moves should be afoot even now to prevent a recurrence in any other similar case.
Ms Ramotar was not by any means the first woman to have decided not to testify against her attacker in court. This has happened thousands of times. It has also happened, in many instances, long before charges were brought against the abusers. We have all heard the countless stories of women who made reports to the police and then went back to withdraw their statements so that their spouses/boyfriends could be released. Ms Ramotar was perhaps the most severely injured woman, physically, to have done so in recent memory, hence the consternation.
Sadly, in several cases where this occurred, the women in question were subsequently murdered or maimed. The reason is that whatever twisted or heinous thoughts the attacker had that would have caused the action in the first place tend to persist. There is therefore every likelihood of a second attack unless the victim is far out of reach as a result of having left the jurisdiction.
Ms Ramotar may or may not have obtained a protection order as prescribed in Guyana’s now outdated Domestic Violence Act of 1996. But there have been cases in the past where the protection order was violated and the victim was attacked. Men who abuse their wives and girlfriends are no respecters of any laws anyhow. They know that the abuse they are committing is a crime. Is a piece of paper which sets boundaries going to be adhered to? Not likely.
Last Saturday, December 10, was Human Rights Day. It was also the culmination of 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, which started on November 25, the observance of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women. This global campaign, also observed in Guyana, was touted as a time to galvanise action to end violence against women and girls around the world. The theme was ‘Orange the World: Raise Money to End Violence against Women and Girls’ in recognition that one of the major challenges faced by the global organization UN Women in preventing and ending violence was the substantial shortfall in the financing needed for interventions and initiatives.
While that may be the case in individual countries as well, there is a lot that can still be done throughout the year to address the scourge of gender-based and domestic violence. One means would be carrying out ongoing education and awareness at every given opportunity, rather than waiting to hold specific workshops or seminars. Another would be ensuring that women and children who are attacked or otherwise exposed to such violence receive counselling.
In the case of Ms Ramotar, while she did not say so herself as she declined to be interviewed, this newspaper was told that she was not afforded counselling, which is unfortunate. Counselling is a mechanism which allows women to get beyond blaming themselves and being embarrassed by a crime which was committed against them. Often, too, it is counselling which helps strengthen women’s resolve to seek justice, escape abusive relationships and not become victims over and over again. Counselling is important for the abusers as well as it has helped some of them desist from lashing out violently.
While there have been cases where magistrates have ordered couples to attend counselling sessions when matters appear in court, and while many police stations now have designated spaces to deal with domestic violence complaints, the nexus between these and the Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Policy Unit at the Ministry of Social Protection is not known.
The manager of that unit was reported as saying at a forum last week that the ministry ‘continues to offer counselling services to victims of any form of violence’. However, the method by which victims are reached was not stated.
Finally, and these are by no means the end all and be all of addressing this scourge without incurring further costs, the Domestic Violence Act should be amended to specifically allow the police and the court to proceed with the prosecution of perpetrators in the face of withdrawals by victims.
Two years ago, at a special session on the issue, Acting Chancellor of the Judiciary Carl Singh had said that domestic violence must be seen as a critical human rights issue because it impacts and infringes on the constitutional guarantee to the right to life, liberty and security of the person. He had added that the role of government in the elimination of this scourge cannot be ignored.
Justice Singh had stressed that it was not just the laying out of policies and programmes that were important but implementation coupled with meaningful interventions at all levels of society. How many more women have to die before zero tolerance truly becomes a reality?
