The Netherlands is falling short in its current approach to forced marriage, transnational abandonment and female genital mutilation. Each year several hundred to several thousand people, mainly girls and women, are at risk of becoming victims of these forms of violence. A new study has shown that the Netherlands can learn a lot from other countries. In the United Kingdom, services and agencies have accumulated many years of experience in the use of these protection orders which, when violated, are punishable with a prison sentence. According to British experts, systematic use of these “hybrid” protection orders is an essential addition to existing legal instruments. Such an approach could strengthen the protection of victims in the Netherlands too.
Right to Rise, an independent research and consultancy firm, conducted the research at the request of the WODC (Research and Data Centre). The aim was to explore how preventive protection orders – as used in Belgium, Denmark, Norway and the United Kingdom – could strengthen Dutch practice.
Obstacles to protecting victims
Why is it that in the Netherlands victims of forced marriage, transnational abandonment or female genital mutilation (FGM) often fail to receive protection or only when it is too late? Research has revealed various system-wide and legal obstacles:
- Insufficient detection: (possible) victims are not visible or warning signs of possible violence are not recognised or only when it is too late.
- When warning signs are recognised, professionals often have difficulty raising and addressing these sensitive issues.
- Risks are not adequately assessed, which sometimes leads to overly hasty interventions or a reluctance to act.
- Services and agencies often work in isolation, fail to exchange information and lack collective direction.
- Legal gaps: the rulings of Dutch courts are not recognised abroad and more pressure needs to be put on possible perpetrators.
- These issues are often marked by group pressure, and current protection measures only offer temporary protection.
As a result of these obstacles, the legal instruments presently in place, such as child protection measures and street entry bans or restraining orders, fall short of effectively addressing the intended objective and therefore are only used to a limited extent.
Belgium, Denmark and Norway have diverse preventive protection orders available, but in practice these measures are used to a very limited extent. They are hindered by the same obstacles. In those countries too, the level of protection is not substantially higher than in the Netherlands.
Beeld: © Rijksoverheid
Hybrid protection orders
The United Kingdom is an exception. In the UK, hybrid protection measures are used which offer a good solution to the obstacles mentioned above. These are civil protection orders but violations are considered a criminal offence, with a maximum prison sentence of five years. So civil and criminal law are combined. We still don’t have anything like this in the Netherlands, but it fits well within developments that are already underway. With increasing frequency, the boundaries between civil, criminal and administrative law are becoming blurred, which creates a space for innovative approaches that overarch different fields of law.
Such a hybrid approach would also contribute to more effective protection of (possible) victims of forced marriage, transnational abandonment and FGM in the Netherlands. The advantages of protection orders applied in Great Britain include placing the victim at the core of the protective measures, rather than the perpetrator, and offering better protection against group pressure. There are also more options for individualised orders, and they can also be applied for by social workers, teachers and family members.
Recommendations
The researchers put forward the following recommendations:
- Invest in providing information to communities, strengthen the knowledge and skills of professionals, and promote durable forms of collaboration between services and agencies. This will enable faster detection and better risk assessments.
- Introduce a civil protection order – based on the British model – that is enforced under criminal law when violated.
- Ensure a robust framework of support, protection and enforcement.
Take care of preconditions, such as targeted social services, and systematic training of judges, legal professionals, the police and the Public Prosecution Service. Set up system-wide monitoring and proper enforcement for violations. A well coordinated, integrated approach increases the effectiveness of protection measures. - Practice outreach and prevent stigmatisation. Don’t allow protection measures to lead to exclusion, distrust or discrimination. Actively work with communities on raising awareness, sharing responsibilities and lasting change.
This report was previously published in Dutch: Combinatie van civiel en strafrecht als nieuwe route naar betere bescherming slachtoffers.