For best experience please turn on javascript and use a modern browser!
You are using a browser that is no longer supported by Microsoft. Please upgrade your browser. The site may not present itself correctly if you continue browsing.
The fear of the “stranger hiding in the bushes” is well and truly ingrained following the murder of 17-year-old Lisa. But beware, warns Bregje Dijksterhuis, assistant professor of Family Law: most femicide takes place within the home. According to her, it is time for the law to address domestic violence adequately.

The random murder of 17-year-old Lisa from Abcoude was the starting point for a wave of protests against femicide. Women feel less safe on the streets, and a discussion about the legalisation of pepper spray is underway. But according to Bregje Dijksterhuis, we must not lose sight of the uncomfortable truth that most murders of women take place in the domestic sphere.

Why does murder by a stranger receive more attention?

'A complete stranger murdered Lisa when she biked home after a night out. This is every parent's greatest fear. From an early age, you are brought up with the idea that you have to be wary of strangers on the street. It feeds our fear that bad things could happen to anyone. It makes you lose your sense of control. The murder of Anne Faber was the same story: suddenly, you're in the wrong place at the wrong time. These are murders that you read a lot about in the press, but underneath that there is a whole pyramid of femicide that we don't see.'

What forms of femicide are there?

'There are three categories of femicide. In the first, the murder is committed by a stranger. This happens relatively rarely, but it does fuel our fear. In the second category, the perpetrator is someone from the victim's social circle – for example, someone from school or a sports club. This happens more often. But by far the most cases of femicide we see is in the third category: the murder of women by partners or ex-partners. We find this horrifying, but people are often quick to dismiss it as a private matter because it occurs in the domestic sphere. “That won't happen to me,” people think. But that's nonsense. It's better to warn your daughter about a boyfriend who can become violent than about a stranger on the street.'

How do you deal with femicide in family law in the Netherlands?

'Potential partner violence plays a role in divorce proceedings and child custody arrangements. This remains a sensitive issue for judges, as they must weigh various interests. For example, it is in principe in the child's interest to maintain contact with both parents. However, the mother's interest in not continuing to be or becoming a victim of violence after the divorce was not a priority for a long time. We are now seeing a turnaround in this respect. The so-called “evidence issue” also plays a role in divorce. It is often challenging to prove that violence has taken place instead of a mother wanting to keep the father out of the children's lives.'

Copyright: flickr cc / Samir Luther
Family law is gender-neutral, but in practice, this is not the case

‘It is also telling that only gender-neutral terms are used in family law. A term such as 'domestic violence” was introduced because men can also be victims of violence, which, incidentally, involves a great deal of shame. Family law is gender-neutral in theory, but in practice, this is not the case. It is mainly women who are victims of (ex-)partner violence. We need to look more closely at evidence-based methods to eradicate partner violence and femicide. The legislation primarily affects women, and it would be helpful if you acknowledged this. The primary issue with vague terms is that women's organisations are less likely to become involved, and women as a group are less likely to advocate for themselves.'

What further legal action is being taken against partner violence?

‘In 2016, the Istanbul Convention came into force in the Netherlands to eliminate violence against women. It also states that judges are obliged to take domestic violence into account when making decisions about child custody arrangements. The convention divides violence into physical, sexual, financial and emotional violence. But too little is being done with the convention.’

Copyright: Bregje Dijksterhuis
We are dealing with different ideas about male-female relationships

Why is the Istanbul Convention not being used enough?

'There is too little insight into violence that takes place behind closed doors. Additionally, there are various perspectives on male-female relationships. If you follow an influencer like Andrew Tate and look through his lens, you are less likely to classify an incident as economic or even sexual violence. Much of it is then seen as a normal male-female relationship. In that worldview, it may be quite normal for women to lack access to a bank account and be financially dependent. The term “emotional violence”, for example, is not clearly explained in the Istanbul Convention. It is challenging to determine what does and does not fall under this category. As a society, we have not yet reached a consensus on this, and this is reflected in the political arena. There is considerable polarisation: one side is dismissed as left-wing, woke and feminist, and the other as right-wing and misogynistic. The question is to what extent you can resolve this debate in society through family law.'

Copyright: Vrij
If you look at our family law legislation now, there is nothing in it about domestic violence against women.

What needs to be done to reduce partner violence?

‘Judges should implement the Istanbul Convention more effectively. In theory, they are obliged to do so, but in practice, this happens too little. There is too little knowledge and interest in the convention among lawyers. If you look at our family law legislation book (Book 1 of the Dutch civil code) now, there is nothing in it about domestic violence against women. The provisions on marriage refer to providing each other with help and assistance, providing each other with what both (financially) need and being faithful to each other. Partner violence is not mentioned. I would suggest: abolish the provision on fidelity in marriage as those are personal choices in a relationship and replace it with a provision on “refraining from any form of violence against your partner, whether physical, sexual, financial or emotional”.'

Does that really solve anything in practice?

'Of course, the question remains how you are going to carry that out in practice. Proving that violence has occurred remains difficult. But by clearly stating this in the legisation, at least the norm is that domestic violence is not acceptable. The law can also have a symbolic effect.'