How to accurately identify and respond to "atypical" domestic violence-- Observation of the trial of the case from the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court
China Women's Daily reporter Wang Chunxia.
Wang Xin. It has been eight years since the Anti-Domestic Violence Law came into force on March 1, 2016. The judges of the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court found that in family cases, most of the violence advocated by the parties was physical violence between family members, which was still quite limited compared with the scope of protection under the law. Because domestic violence is related to various factors such as personal experience, family education, ideology, and mental health, it directly leads to the complexity and diversity of its manifestations. It is very necessary to recognize the atypical forms of domestic violence in order to prevent "violence" accurately.
"Self-harm and self-harm" type of domestic violence
Wang (female) and Li are husband and wife. The two parties often had disputes over trivial family matters, and Li repeatedly threatened to jump off the building and drink pesticides in front of Wang's workplace, and Wang also called the police many times but the negotiation failed. In order to ensure personal safety, Wang applied to the people's court for a personal safety protection order.
After review, the court held that Li's self-injury and self-harm would cause the applicant to feel nervous and fearful, which was a mental offense, and Wang's application met the statutory requirements for a personal safety protection order. Ruling: 1. The respondent Li is prohibited from committing domestic violence against the applicant Wang;2. The respondent Li is prohibited from harassing, stalking, or threatening the applicant Wang.
The judge said that under the Anti-Domestic Violence Law, domestic violence includes not only physical violence, but also psychological violence. Psychological violence includes neglect, threats, intimidation, insults, etc., mainly through psychological control, verbal insults, neglect or isolation of the other party. In this case, the perpetrator indirectly caused panic to the victim by self-harm and self-harm, so as to finally achieve the goal of controlling the victim, which is psychological violence. This type of "self-harm and self-harm" type of domestic violence is more insidious, and it requires us to be keenly observed and remedied.
"Stalking" type of domestic violence
Lin (female) and Zhao were originally husband and wife, but later divorced due to incompatible personalities. After that, Zhao harassed Lin through the use of violence, location tracking, use of eavesdropping equipment, destruction of door locks and electric switches, installation of surveillance cameras and other forms, which seriously affected Lin's normal life and work, and posed a threat to Lin's personal safety. Lin mediated with Zhao many times, but Zhao refused to make corrections. Lin then applied to the people's court for a personal safety protection order.
After review, the court held that the Law on the Protection of Women's Rights and Interests clearly stipulates that it is forbidden to pestering and harassing women after divorce. Where women suffer the violations described above or face a real threat of the violations described above, they may apply to the people's courts for a personal safety protection order. The evidence provided by the applicant satisfies the statutory requirements for making a personal safety protection order. Ruling: The respondent Zhao is prohibited from beating, harassing, stalking, or contacting the applicant Lin.
The judge explained that people often think that domestic violence will stop naturally after divorce, but that the intrinsic motivation for domestic violence is the abuser's deep need to control the victim. In general, this desire will not only not disappear as a result of divorce, but will be strengthened by the stimulus of the victim's request for divorce. Therefore, once the victim files for divorce, the abuser often resorts to begging for forgiveness, assuring that he will not make an example, and using children to retain the victim. If the pleas do not work, the perpetrator will often turn to violence or more severe violence to achieve the goal of control, thus "break-up violence". This phenomenon is quite common after a couple separates or divorces.
To this end, Article 29 of the Law on the Protection of Rights and Interests of Women expands the scope of persons applying for personal safety protection orders due to domestic violence to people who have been divorced and who have had romantic relationships or have had contact on the grounds of love or friendship, so as to better prevent and stop illegal acts that occur in intimate relationships outside of family members.
"Promoting privacy" type of domestic violence
Luo (female) and Chen are husband and wife, and due to the discord between the two parties, Luo sued the court for divorce. In the course of the litigation, Chen threatened not to divorce by planning to disclose Luo's privacy. After being rejected by Luo, Chen immediately found the two main leaders of Luo's unit and disclosed the privacy-related content that Luo had previously mentioned at home, which caused Luo's normal working environment and social foundation to be seriously damaged, his mind was damaged, and he wanted to resign based on shame and indignation. At the same time, Luo applied to the people's court for a personal safety protection order.
After review, the court held that Chen went to Luo's unit to publicize privacy-related content, and the dissemination and evaluation of the above facts were information that the woman was unwilling to let others know. The disclosure of the woman's private information by the man is an invasion of his privacy. Conduct that clearly stipulates in article 29 of the Law on the Protection of Women's Rights and Interests that disseminates women's private information meets the statutory requirements for issuing a personal safety protection order. Ruling: The respondent Chen is prohibited from disseminating the privacy of the applicant Luo.
The judge said that, unlike the average marital dispute, the core of domestic violence is power and control. The aggressor has the subjective intention to achieve the goal through violent harm, and to varying degrees, causes the victim to cause physical or psychological harm to the victim, causing the injured party to submit to the will of the aggressor out of fear. The disclosure of the victim's privacy seriously infringes on the victim's personal dignity and social evaluation, and is a form of mental violence that has a wider impact, a deeper degree of harm, and is more difficult to eliminate. On the basis of article 29 of the Law on the Protection of Women's Rights and Interests, women may apply to the people's courts for personal safety protection orders.
"Child-snatching" type of domestic violence
The final judgment of the divorce dispute between Cai and Tang (female) was that the legitimate son Cai was raised by Tang, but Cai still refused to perform, and failed to enforce it after many times. Later, through the joint efforts of the court, psychological counselors and other parties, Cai handed over Cai to Tang. Cai Moumou was extremely insecure because he had been separated from his mother for many days, and began to accept long-term psychology**. The following month, Cai went to Tang's place and asked to take Cai away, but Tang did not give permission, and a dispute broke out between the two parties. Ignoring Cai's crying and dissuasion, Cai beat Tang and caused Cai's facial injuries. Cai Moumou was greatly injured physically and mentally because of the robbery incident. In order to protect Cai's personal safety from being threatened, Tang applied to the people's court for a personal safety protection order on Cai's behalf.
After review, the court held that after Cai's parents divorced, the court ruled in accordance with the law that he was directly raised by his mother Tang. Cai X used violent methods to rob Cai XX during the visit, and beat his mother Tang XX in front of Cai XX, causing physical and mental harm to Cai XX, which is domestic violence. Therefore, it is ruled in accordance with the law: 1. The respondent Cai is prohibited from insulting, slandering, or threatening the applicant Cai and his close relatives by means of **, text messages, instant messengers, emails, etc.;2. The respondent Cai X is prohibited from engaging in activities that might affect the normal life, study, and work of the applicant Cai XX and his or her relevant close relatives within a certain range of the residence, school, work unit, and other places where the applicant Cai XX and his or her relevant close relatives are frequented.
The judge said that in accordance with the principle of the best interests of the minor, it is generally not appropriate for the abusive party to directly raise the minor child. The presence of domestic violence on the abuser indicates that the abuser is unable to rationally and objectively handle the conflicts between intimate relationships, and that the behavior has a negative impact on the healthy growth of minors in daily life. Therefore, if one of the parents is found to constitute domestic violence, regardless of whether or not the perpetrator directly committed violence against the minor child, if there are no other circumstances, it is generally determined that the abuser should not directly raise the minor child, which is helpful to stop the intergenerational transmission of domestic violence in a timely manner, and also indicates the position of giving a negative legal evaluation to the abusive party in marriage and family. In addition, Article 24 of the Protection of Minors** clearly stipulates that custody rights shall not be fought for by snatching or hiding minor children. For the sake of healthy growth, minors may have their close relatives or relevant departments such as public security organs and women's federations apply for personal safety protection orders on their behalf.
A judge of the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court told reporters that ending domestic violence requires the joint efforts of the whole society. We need to build a social environment that can support victims, punish perpetrators, and provide more education and awareness, and we also need each of us to improve our awareness and ability to prevent violence, polish our eyes, reject any form of domestic violence, and return warmth, harmony and safety to every family.
The names of the parties in this article have been changed).
*|All-China Women's Federation**.