COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document PROPOSAL FOR A DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on combating violence against women and domestic violence

EN EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Strasbourg, 8.3.2022
SWD(2022) 62 final
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Accompanying the document
PROPOSAL FOR A DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF
THE COUNCIL
on combating violence against women and domestic violence
{COM(2022) 105 final} - {SEC(2022) 150 final} - {SWD(2022) 60 final} -
{SWD(2022) 61 final} - {SWD(2022) 63 final}
Offentligt
KOM (2022) 0105 - SWD-dokument
Europaudvalget 2022
1
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION: POLITICAL AND LEGAL CONTEXT...................................................................................6
2. PROBLEM DEFINITION.............................................................................................................................7
2.1. WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS?........................................................................................................................ 7
2.1.1 Scope ............................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.2 Problem description............................................................................................................................ 10
2.1.3. Who is affected?............................................................................................................................ 24
2.1.4. Why is violence against women and domestic violence a problem?............................................. 26
2.2. WHAT ARE THE DRIVERS? ......................................................................................................................... 27
2.2.1 Structural gender inequality and gender stereotypes ................................................................... 27
2.2.2. Failure to recognise the specificities of crimes and offences relating to violence against women
and domestic violence ................................................................................................................................. 28
2.3. HOW WILL THE PROBLEM EVOLVE?............................................................................................................. 30
3. WHY SHOULD THE EU ACT?................................................................................................................... 31
3.1. LEGAL BASIS........................................................................................................................................... 31
3.2. SUBSIDIARITY: NECESSITY OF EU ACTION ..................................................................................................... 32
3.3. SUBSIDIARITY: ADDED VALUE OF EU ACTION ................................................................................................ 33
4. OBJECTIVES: WHAT IS TO BE ACHIEVED?............................................................................................... 35
4.1. GENERAL OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................... 35
4.2. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES................................................................................................................................ 35
5. WHAT ARE THE AVAILABLE POLICY OPTIONS? ...................................................................................... 36
5.1. WHAT IS THE BASELINE FROM WHICH OPTIONS ARE ASSESSED? ........................................................................ 36
5.1.1. Dynamic baseline: EU level measures ........................................................................................... 36
5.1.2 Dynamic baseline: Member States measures................................................................................ 38
5.2. OPTIONS DISCARDED AT AN EARLY STAGE..................................................................................................... 39
5.3. DESCRIPTION OF THE POLICY OPTIONS ......................................................................................................... 40
6. WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS OF THE POLICY OPTIONS? ............................................................................. 45
6.1. FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ............................................................................................................................ 46
6.2. SOCIAL IMPACTS ..................................................................................................................................... 50
6.3. ECONOMIC IMPACT ................................................................................................................................. 51
6.3.1 Estimated benefits: reduction of costs of violence ........................................................................ 52
6.3.2 Administrative and compliance costs for Member States and employers .................................... 54
6.3.3 Summary of costs and economic benefits ..................................................................................... 58
7. HOW DO THE OPTIONS COMPARE?....................................................................................................... 59
7.1. EFFECTIVENESS ....................................................................................................................................... 60
7.2. EFFICIENCY ............................................................................................................................................ 65
7.3. COHERENCE ........................................................................................................................................... 66
7.4. PREFERRED OPTION ................................................................................................................................. 66
8. HOW WILL ACTUAL IMPACTS BE MONITORED AND EVALUATED?......................................................... 67
2
Glossary
Term or acronym Meaning or definition
Asylum-seeking women and
girls
A woman or a girl who has left her country of origin to
seek international protection.
Child Any person below 18 years of age.
Coercive control Oppressive conduct that is typically characterised by
tactics to intimidate, degrade, isolate and control the
victim. Can be combined with physical abuse and sexual
coercion.
Domestic violence All acts of physical, sexual, psychological or economic
violence that occur within the family or domestic unit, or
between former or current spouses or partners,
regardless of whether the perpetrator shares or has
shared the same residence with the victim. Domestic
violence can target anyone in the family unit and covers
for instance women, men, children, older people and
same-sex partners.
Female genital mutilation
(FGM)
Procedures that involve partial or total removal of the
external female genitalia, or other injury to the female
genital organs for non-medical reasons.
Forced abortion Intentional termination of a pregnancy without the prior
and informed consent of the victim (woman or girl).
Gender Socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities and
attributes that a given society considers appropriate for
women, men, girls and boys. This includes the
relationship among and between these socially
constructed norms, behaviours and roles.
Gender bias Prejudiced actions or thoughts based on the perception
that women are not equal to men in rights and dignity.
Gender stereotype A generalised view about attributes or characteristics, or
the roles that should be performed by women and men in
a given society. A gender stereotype is harmful when it
limits individuals’ capacities to develop personal
abilities, pursue careers or make other life choices.
Gender-sensitive policies Policies that take into account the particularities
pertaining to the lives of women and men, in all their
diversity, while aiming to eliminate inequalities and
promote gender equality, including an equal distribution
of resources, thus taking into account the gender
dimension.
General support services Help offered through for instance social services, health
3
services and employment services. General support
services provide short and long-term help and are not
exclusively designed for victims of violence against
women or domestic violence, but serve the public at
large.
Secondary victimisation When the victim suffers further harm due to the manner
in which institutions and individuals approach the
victim. Secondary victimisation may be caused, for
instance, by repeated exposure of the victim to the
perpetrator, repeated interrogation about the same facts
or the use of inappropriate or insensitive language by
those who come into contact with the victim.
Sexual harassment Any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal or physical
conduct of a sexual nature, with the purpose or effect of
violating the dignity of a person, in particular when
creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating
or offensive environment.
So-called “honour crimes”
against women and girls
Acts of violence that are disproportionately, though not
exclusively, committed against girls and women,
because family members consider that certain suspected,
perceived or actual behaviours bring dishonour to the
family or community.
Specialist support services Support services targeted to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence. Specialist support
services can include social, emotional, psychological and
financial support, as well as practical and legal support.
Trafficking in human beings A crime which consists of the recruitment,
transportation, transfer, harbouring or reception of
persons. Control over the victim is attained through the
threat of force or use of force or other forms of coercion,
of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of
power or of a position of vulnerability, or of the giving
or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the
consent of a person having control over another person.
The purpose is the exploitation of the trafficked person.
Exploitation includes, as a minimum, the exploitation of
the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual
exploitation.
Victim A natural person who has suffered harm, including
physical, mental or emotional harm or economic loss, as
a result of violence against women or domestic violence,
including child witnesses of such violence.
Violence against women All acts of violence that are directed against a woman
because she is a woman or that affect women
disproportionately, which result or are likely to result in
physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or
suffering to women, including threats of such acts,
4
coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether
occurring in public or in private life.
Women Women and girls under the age of 18, in all their
diversity.
Term or acronym Meaning or definition
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination
against Women
CFR Charter of Fundamental Rights
CJEU Court of Justice of the European Union
DSA Digital Services Act
DV Domestic violence
ECHR European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
ECtHR European Court of Human Rights
EIGE European Institute for Gender equality
EPRS European Parliamentary Research Service
FGM Female genital mutilation
FRA Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union
GREVIO Council of Europe’s Group of Experts on Action
against Violence Against Women and Domestic
Violence
Istanbul Convention Council of Europe Convention on preventing and
combating violence against women and domestic
violence
TEU Treaty on European Union
TFEU Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union
UNCRPD United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities
VaW Violence against women
5
VRD Victims’ Rights Directive
WHO World Health Organization
6
1. 1. Introduction: Political and legal context
Violence against women and domestic violence are widespread across the European Union
and worldwide. When taking office, Commission President von der Leyen announced that the
EU should do all it can to prevent violence against women and domestic violence, protect
victims and punish offenders.1
The EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-20252
announces
key actions for preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence in
Europe and, in particular, a legislative proposal tackling such violence. The need to tackle
violence against women and domestic violence also figures prominently in the EU Strategy
on the Rights of the Child (2021-2024)3
, the EU Strategy on Victims’ Rights (2020-2025)4
,
the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-20255
, and the Strategy for the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities 2021-20306. The Gender Action Plan III7
makes the fight against gender-
based violence one of the priorities of the Union’s external action. Gender equality is also the
second principle of the European Pillar of Social Rights8, which aims to ensure and foster
equality of treatment and opportunities between women and men in all areas.
At international level, measures to counter violence against women and domestic violence
have been called for since the 1990s, including in the framework of the United Nations
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (‘CEDAW’).
The Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and
domestic violence (‘Istanbul Convention’) is the first instrument in Europe to set binding
standards on the matter. While all Member States have signed the Convention, to date, 21
Member States have become parties to it.9
This means that the remaining six Member States
are not bound by the Convention’s standards.
1
European Commission, A Union that strives for more. My agenda for Europe – By candidate for President of the European
Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, 2019.
2
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-
2025, COM(2020) 152 final, 5 March 2020.
3
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. EU strategy on the rights of the child, COM(2021) 142
final, 24 March 2021.
4
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. EU Strategy on victims’ rights (2020-2025), COM(2020)
258 final, 24 June 2020.
5
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Union of Equality: LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-
2025, COM(2020) 698 final, 12 November 2020.
6
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Union of Equality: Strategy for the Rights of Persons
with Disabilities 2021-2030, COM(2021) 101 final, 3 March 2021. Gender equality is also the second principle of the
European Pillar of Social Rights, which aims to ensure and foster equality of treatment and opportunities between women and
men in all areas, including in tackling gender-based violence. See European Commission, Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions. The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan, COM/2021/102 final, 4 March 2021, at 19, 21.
7
European Commission, Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council. EU Gender Action Plan (GAP)
III – An ambitious agenda for gender equality and women’s empowerment in EU external action, JOIN(2020) 17 final, 25
November 2020.
8
https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/economy-works-people/jobs-growth-and-investment/european-pillar-
social-rights/european-pillar-social-rights-20-principles_en.
9
All Member States have signed the Convention at the latest following the adoption of the Council Decision on the signing
the Convention on behalf of the EU, COM/2016/0111 final.
7
The Commission proposed in 2016 the EU’s accession to the Convention10
, but this proposal
has not yet been adopted by the Council and the accession negotiations have been blocked for
several years. The EU’s accession is opposed by the six Member States that have not ratified
the Convention due to a political backlash against it, which is partly caused by
misunderstandings of certain provisions and exacerbated by disinformation campaigns.11
On 6
October 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued its opinion on the
EU accession to the Istanbul Convention.12
The CJEU clarified that the EU can accede to the
Convention even if not all Member States have ratified it, but grants the Council discretion to
wait with a vote until consensus has been reached. It is therefore not possible to predict when
the EU’s accession to the Istanbul Convention might take place, and how many Member
States would eventually ratify the Convention. While finalisation of the EU’s accession to the
Convention remains a key priority for the Commission, the measures of the present initiative
are aimed at achieving the objectives of the Convention within the areas of EU competence
until such accession has taken place. Once the EU accedes to the Convention, this initiative
will implement its provisions within such areas.
This initiative builds on the Istanbul Convention and the Commission’s continued
commitment to finalising the EU’s accession. To reach the objectives of the Istanbul
Convention in the areas of EU competence, this initiative aims to fill in the gaps identified in
the EU acquis in the areas covered by the Convention. It aims at setting up minimum
standards concerning the rights of this group of crime victims, binding on the Member States
and enforceable by the Commission. This initiative also takes into account recent
developments such as the digital transformation and lessons learnt from the COVID-19
pandemic.
The European Parliament has repeatedly called on the Commission to propose legislation on
violence against women and domestic violence.13
In January 2021, it underlined the need for
measures to address the disparities in laws and policies between Member States and called for
an EU framework directive on the matter.14
The Parliament has adopted two own-initiative
reports, on adding gender-based violence as a new Euro-crime15
and on combatting gender–
based cyber violence.16
2. 2. Problem definition
2.1.2.1. What are the problems?
2.1.1 Scope
10
European Commission, Proposal for a Council Decision on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the council of
Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, COM(2016) 111 final, 4
March 2016.
11
In Bulgaria, the Constitutional Court considered in 2018 the Convention not to be compatible with the Constitution.
12
Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber); opinion A-1/19 of 6 October 2021.
13
See, for example: European Parliament, Resolution on the EU’s accession to the Istanbul Convention and other measures
to combat gender-based violence, 2019/2855(RSP), 28 November 2019.
14
European Parliament, Resolution on the EU Strategy for Gender Equality, 2019/2169(INI), 21 January 2021. For more
information on the relevant activities of the European Parliament, see: EPRS, Gender-based violence as a new area of crime
listed in Article 83(1) TFEU – European added value assessment, 2021, p. 19.
15
Resolution of 16 September 2021 with recommendations to the Commission on identifying gender-based violence as a new
area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU, (2021/2035(INL)).
16
Combating Gender based Violence: Cyber Violence, 2020/2035(INL), to be voted in December plenary.
8
This initiative covers violence against women, and domestic violence against any person. This
corresponds to the scope of the Istanbul Convention. Violence against women and domestic
violence are commonly addressed together both in the Member States and at international
level. This is due to their common features, as explained in detail under section 2.1.2 below.
The key concepts used in this Impact Assessment follow established international definitions,
which have been incorporated in the 21 Member States’ national laws, in order to ensure
consistency once the EU accession to the Istanbul Convention takes place. Violence against
women hence covers all acts of gender-based violence resulting in, or likely to result in, or
threatening physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or suffering to women,
irrespective of whether they occur in public or in private.17
The term gender-based violence
is commonly used to highlight the dynamics and drivers behind this type of violence. The
terms gender-based violence and violence against women are often used interchangeably, as
most violence against women is inflicted due to their gender. This Impact Assessment follows
the approach of the Istanbul Convention and uses the term ‘violence against women’.
Domestic violence occurs within the household either between intimate partners (intimate-
partner violence) or between other household members, including inter-generationally
between parents and children. Thus, domestic violence covers not only women, but any
person living in the household, including men, older people, same-sex partners, non-binary
persons18
, and children.
Most forms of violence against women and domestic violence are criminal acts19
under
national law and such violence, when targeted at women, is a form of sex-based
discrimination.
In order to meet the objective of the Istanbul Convention effectively, this initiative takes into
account the fast pace of the current digital transformation; it further deals with cyber-violence
and sexual harassment, in particular at work. Although such types of violence are not
explicitly covered by the Istanbul Convention, cyber violence against women and intimate
partner cyber violence have become increasingly common in recent years.20
Cyber violence
against women refers to online content or activity which targets the victim because she is a
17
United Nations, Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, Proclaimed by General Assembly resolution
48/104 of 20 December 1993, Article 1; CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 19: Violence against women – Background,
1992; CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 35 on gender-based violence against women, updating general
recommendation No. 19, CEDAW/C/GC/35, 26 July 2017, at 1-2; Istanbul Convention Article 3(1)(a).
18
While most people – including most transgender people – are either male or female, some people do not neatly fit into
these categories. They use different terms to describe themselves, with non-binary being one of the most common, see
National Center for Transgender Equality; https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-non-binary-people-how-
to-be-respectful-and-supportive.
19
For relevant national criminalisations, see European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination.
Criminalisation of gender-based violence against women in European States, including ICT-facilitated violence. A special
report, 2021, available at https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/5535-criminalisation-of-gender-based-violence-against-
women-in-european-states-including-ict-facilitated-violence-1-97-mb (EELN 2021).
20
HRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and Consequences on online violence
against women and girls from a human rights perspective, A/HRC/38/47, 14 June 2018, p. 12; NATO Strategic
Communications Centre of Excellence 2020. Abuse of power: coordinated online harassment of Finnish Government
Ministers, p. 10.
9
woman or targets women victims disproportionately.21
Cyber violence can also be perpetrated
between current or former intimate partners.22
Cyber violence can take a variety of forms,
ranging from cyber stalking and non-consensual sharing of private and intimate images or
personal data to sexual cyber harassment.23
Experiences of online and offline violence are
often interlinked. Cyber violence against women is a part of the continuum of the violence
victims experience offline. Sexual harassment is included as it is currently covered by a
number of gender equality directives which have proven not to be effective in preventing and
combatting this type of violence against women (see gap analysis, Annex 8).
Violence against women and girls is a specific phenomenon in that its drivers are different
from other types of violence (see section 2.2 below). Gender-based violence may affect
both women and men, but women are disproportionately affected (see section 2.1.3.
‘Who is affected’ for details). This is the case in particular for sexual violence.24
Violence
against women is rooted in structural inequalities between women and men and is the
manifestation of historically unequal power relations, which have led to discrimination
against women.25
Violence against women is often driven by misogyny. As explained in more
detail in section 2.2.2, violence against women entails certain specificities, such as taking
place in the private sphere, suffering from systemic under-reporting, disrupted criminal
proceedings, the commonly sexual nature of crimes and/or a high prevalence of elements of
coercive control.26
These elements are different compared to most violence experienced by
men. For instance, violence against men usually occurs in public settings, is not usually of a
sexual nature, and is generally perpetrated by other men.27
Men are also frequently victims of
other types of violence, but are much less often victims of violence targeting them because of
their gender.28
Also the consequences of violence against women include specificities,
especially in regard to social consequences, which requires targeted action. Violence against
women negatively impacts the physical health of the victims. Sexual violence exposes
women to sexually-transmitted diseases, unintended pregnancies, abortions and miscarriages,
and lowers women’s control over their reproductive health.29
Violence against women and
21
See HRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on online violence against women and girls, at 23. European Parliament
Research Centre, Combating gender-based violence: cyber violence. European added value assessment, 2021, at 4-7. Also
Centre for international governance innovation (CIG), What is gender-based online violence,
https://www.cigionline.org/multimedia/what-is-online-gender-based-violence/.
22
CyberSafe. Cyber violence against women and girls. Final report 2021, pp. 29- 34.
23
Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention Committee (C-TY) 2017, Mapping study on cyber violence (T-CY (2017)10),
at 6. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE), Cyber violence against women and girls, 2017. GenPol Gender &
Policy Insights 2019. When technology meets misogyny. Multi-level, intersectional solutions to digital gender-based violence,
p. 16.
24
More than 9 in 10 rape victims and more than 8 in 10 sexual assault victims were girls and women, while nearly all those
imprisoned for such crimes were male (99%). Eurostat, Violent sexual crimes recorded in the EU, 2018. See
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20171123-1.
25
Council of Europe, Explanatory Report to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against
women and domestic violence, 2011.
26
FRA, Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. Main results report, 2014; EPRS, Combating gender-based violence:
Cyberviolence, European added value assessment, 2021
27
FRA, Crime, Safety and Victims’ Rights, 2021.
28
FRA, Crime, Safety and Victims’ Rights, 2021.
29
World Health Organization, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, South African Medical Research Council.
‘Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and
non-partner sexual violence’. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2013.
10
domestic violence also increase the probability of mental health problems,30
linking to higher
rates of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, alcohol and drug abuse, and
suicidal ideation.31
In light of the above, the scope of the initiative focuses on violence against
women, as this manifestation of structural gender inequality with its specific consequences
requires a targeted approach, but includes, in relation to domestic violence, also men. Male
victims of other types of violence than domestic violence are covered under the Victims’
Rights Directive that is applicable to all victims of crime and the Gender Equality Directives
as regards harassment.
Violence on the basis of other grounds of discrimination than sex is not part of the primary
scope of the current initiative. This does not mean that such violence does not merit
addressing. However, as set out above the dynamics and consequences of violence against
women and domestic violence require a specific approach.32
Nevertheless, special
measures address the intersection of sex with other grounds of discrimination included in the
Treaties, such as racial or ethnic origin, disability, religion or belief, age or sexual orientation.
Also, the provisions regarding domestic violence include victims of such violence in all their
diversity, including non-binary people. Specific measures to tackle violence and
discrimination based on other grounds than sex are included in relevant sectoral EU initiatives
and legislation.33
However, while this initiative would oblige Member States to implement
minimum standards concerning violence against women only in relation to this group of
victims, Member States would be encouraged to extend all measures to men and non-binary
people.
2.1.2 Problem description
a) High prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence in the EU
Violence against women and domestic violence are widespread across the EU. Their
prevalence and scale have been examined most comprehensively in the 2014 survey on
violence against women34
of the Fundamental Rights Agency of the European Union (FRA),
and confirmed in multiple studies and surveys carried out since then.35
These include the
30
Magnusson Hanson, Nyberg, Mittendorfer-Rutz, Bondestam, Madsen: ‘Work related sexual harassment and risk of suicide
and suicide attempts: prospective cohort study’, 2020, BMJ2020;370:m2984.
31
J. Mannel & S. Hawkes, ‘Decriminalisation of gender-based violence is a global health problem’, Journal BMJ Global
Health, Vol. 2(3), 2017, pp. 1-3.
32
For example, while violence against women is most often perpetrated by a family member or relative (Supra 16), victims
of violence motivated by racism usually do not know the perpetrators (FRA, Being Black in the EU: Second European Union
Minorities and Discrimination Survey – Summary, 2019).
33
E.g. Council Directive 2000/78 of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment
and occupation; Council Directive 2000/43 of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons
irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.
34
FRA, Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. Main results report, 2014; EPRS, Combating gender-based violence:
Cyberviolence, European added value assessment, 2021. The FRA survey on violence against women is based on face-to-face
interviews with 42,000 women across the EU. The survey presents the most comprehensive survey worldwide on women’s
experiences of violence.
35
An overview of the most recently available data is included in Annex 6.
11
recent FRA survey on crime victims published in February 202136
and administrative data
gathered by the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) from national authorities.37
According to the 2014 FRA survey, one woman in three aged 15 or above reported having
experienced some form of physical and/or sexual violence in the EU. One in 10 women
reported having been victim to some form of sexual violence, and one in 20 had been raped.
Just over one in five women have suffered physical and/or sexual violence from either a
current or previous partner, whilst 43% of women have experienced some form of
psychologically abusive and/or controlling behaviour when in a relationship. While both
women and men experience cyber violence and harassment, women are overrepresented
among victims of cyber violence perpetrated based on the victim’s sex, in particular sexual
forms of cyber violence.38
In addition, women and girls more often report serious and
disturbing forms of such violence, and report feeling more vulnerable after such violence
and more harshly judged as victims.39
Usage of the internet and social media increases the
risk of cyber violence.40
In a global 2017 survey on online abuse in eight countries, on
average 23% of women reported having experienced abuse or harassment online.41
The 2014
FRA survey suggested that 20% of women aged 18–29 years old had experienced cyber
violence since the age of 15.42
In 2020, the World Wide Web Foundation found that 52% of
young women were affected and over 80% were of the opinion the phenomenon was
increasing.43
In a recent study, more than 50% of all respondents replied they did not dare
express political opinions due to fear of online targeting.44
Data from 2017 illustrate that 70%
of women victims of cyber stalking also experienced at least one form of physical or/and
sexual violence from an intimate partner (see section 2.1.1 above).45
Experiences of online
and offline violence are often interlinked, showing that it is important to tackle them together.
Women also experience violence at work. About a third of women who have faced sexual
harassment in the EU experienced it at work. According to the FRA survey, 32% of
perpetrators of sexual harassment faced by women since they were 15 were from the
employment context such as colleagues, supervisors or clients.46
When asked whether the
36
FRA, Crime, Safety and Victims’ Rights, 2021. This survey collected data from 35,000 people and focuses on respondents’
experiences as victims of selected types of crime, including violence and harassment.
37
EIGE, Gender Statistics Database, available at: (https://eige.europa.eu/gender-statistics/dgs).
38
GenPol Gender & Policy Insights 2019, p. 14. CyberSafe 2021, pp. 30-33, 72, referring to the DeShame project on online
sexual harassment and violence, https://www.childnet.com/our-projects/project-deshame.
39
CyberSafe 2021, pp. 38-39,
40
CyberSafe 2021, p. 24.
41
CyberSafe. Cyber violence against women and girls. Final report 2021, pp. 30-33. See however also EPRS 2021, pp. 7-8,
where EU-level estimates of 1% to 7% were obtained for women’s experiences of cyber harassment and cyber stalking in
EU-27.
42
Supra 34, p. 104; EPRS, Gender-based violence as a new area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU – European added
value assessment, 2021, p. 19.
43
Web Foundation, “The online crisis facing women and girls threatens global progress on gender equality”, World Wide
Web Foundation Blog, 12 March 2020.
44
IDZ, #Hass im Netz – der schleichende Angriff auf die Demokratie, 2019, pp. 6, 22, 23. Women respondents reported
expressing their political opinions less often than men (54% and 47%).
45
EIGE, Cyber violence against women and girls, 2017, according to which 1044 women have suffered one or more of the
three forms of cyber stalking and out of those women, 727 have experienced at least one or more forms of physical or/and
sexual violence from an intimate partner. As part cyber harassment, out of 677 women who stated having suffered at least
one of the three forms identified as cyber harassment, 518 (77 %) have also experienced at least one form of physical or/and
sexual violence from an intimate partner.
46
FRA, 2014, p. 113.
12
perpetrator of sexual harassment was male or female, 71% of victims indicated that the
perpetrator of an incident since the age of 15 was a man, 2% indicated a female perpetrator
and 21% pointed to both male and female harassers. The results reflect that, although the sex
of many perpetrators is unknown because of the nature of harassment – such as through the
internet – this form of violence against women is perpetrated mostly by men.47
The administrative data collected by EIGE shows that the prevalence of violence against
women and domestic violence may be estimated at 21.2% (2019 figures), i.e. one in five
women in the EU experienced violence against women or domestic violence. This figure is
based on administrative data and only includes acts reported to the authorities. The severity,
i.e. the percentage of women who experienced health consequences of physical and/or sexual
violence, was estimated at 46.9%. The rate of disclosure to anyone of this kind of violence
was estimated at 14.3%. It follows that almost half of these incidences cause health
consequences for the victims but less than one in seven of them is reported.
Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, violence against women and children,
particularly domestic violence, has increased.48
Stakeholders noted an increase in contact to
helplines for victims of violence against women and domestic violence during the pandemic;
an increase in the demand for specialised support services (emergency accommodation,
counselling services); an increase of reports to law enforcement and in numbers of emergency
protection orders issued in cases of such violence, while support services were required to
reduce or temporarily stop work; an increase in risk factors for violence due to the pandemic
(e.g. isolation, stress, working from home), coupled with a decrease in accessibility of victim
support. Even if measures were taken to address this rise in violence, many victims were not
in a position to look for help. This was often because victims were forbidden from leaving
their homes, but also subject to technological control such as webcams, smart locks or a
control via social media.49
Pending the end of the pandemic and the full manifestation of its
social and economic consequences, it is still unclear whether this increase in incidence is
temporary (e.g. an increase in intensity) or indicative of a trend. Although both the EU and
its Member States, have taken measures to prevent and combat violence against women
and domestic violence, significant gaps remain, both at the level of legislation and its
implementation.
b) Gaps at national level
The studies carried out in support of this impact assessment50
show the fragmentation of the
national regulatory frameworks. The heterogeneity of the existing measures correlates with
different legal, historical and political traditions of the Member States. Standards of protection
47
Ibid.
48
EIGE, The Covid-19 pandemic and intimate partner violence against women in the EU, 2021; WHO, “The rise and rise of
interpersonal violence – an unintended impact of the COVID-19 response on families”, 2020, available at:
(https://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/disease-prevention/violence-and-injuries/news/news/2020/6/the-rise-and-rise-of-
interpersonal-violence-an-unintended-impact-of-the-covid-19-response-on-families).
49
See: E. Arenas-Arroyo, D. Fernandez Kranz & N. Nollenberger, “Intimate Partner Violence under Forced Coexistence and
Economic Stress: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 194, 2020.
50
See EELN 2021 and the supporting study conducted in support of this initiative.
13
vary significantly between the Member States and the rights of victims of violence against
women and domestic violence are not always enforced in practice. This leads to unequal
protection depending on where in the EU violence against women and domestic violence is
experienced. It is also problematic in situations where the victim moves or otherwise
exercises their right to free movement in the EU. The gap analysis in Annex 8 provides a
detailed assessment of gaps in the relevant EU and national legislation as well as the
shortcomings in its implementation. The main gaps at national level are presented below,
structured into the five problem areas which have been identified as relevant by the Istanbul
Convention: prevention, protection, access to justice, victim support and policy coordination.
Gaps at EU-level are set out in section c) below.
Ineffective prevention of violence
All Member States have introduced prevention measures. In response to the targeted
consultation, 23 Member States reported having organised awareness raising campaigns51
on violence against women and/or domestic violence. This is supported by the public
consultation. In-country research, however, highlights a number of shortcomings with the
existing campaigns, namely that they do not reach target groups meaningfully, with little
emphasis on the right to be protected against violence against women and domestic violence.
The Council of Europe’s Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and
Domestic Violence (‘GREVIO’) has also noted challenges related to awareness-raising
programmes.52
Although there are some good measures in place, they tend to focus on
domestic violence, are too short-term and do not sufficiently target the problem of
intersectionality. According to the gap analysis (see Annex 8), there is also a lack of
awareness-raising initiatives to tackle underlying stereotypical attitudes (BE, IT, NL, PT)53
as
well as insufficient teaching material on gender equality (FI, IT, MT, SE)54
.
Training is important to increase professionals’ skills to recognise victims. While general
training is widely available to professionals,55
targeted violence against women and domestic
violence trainings, particularly concerning the interactions of police and judicial authorities
with victims, are lacking. Moreover, trainings are not compulsory in most Member States for
several categories of professionals. They are also not institutionalised and not available in the
same manner and frequency for all categories. While police, judges, lawyers, and prosecutors
are the most likely to receive training, few Member States provide other personnel in public
administration who come into contact with victims with training.56
Lack of training of social
workers and relevant court appointed professionals has been identified as insufficient in some
Member States (FR, IT, MT, PT).57
Many Member States have insufficient initial and in-
service trainings and lack of guidelines based on a gendered understanding of violence against
51
Also research evidence supports the effectiveness of awareness campaigns in inducing victims of violence to seeking help.
See: M. Colagrossi, C. Deiana, A. Geraci & L. Giua, “Hang Up on Stereotypes: Domestic Violence and Anti-Abuse Helpline
Campaign”, HEDG Working Paper Series, 2020.
52
GREVIO, Mid-term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline reports, 2021, pp. 54-57, available at:
(https://rm.coe.int/horizontal-review-study-2021/1680a26325).
53
Gap Analysis in Annex 8, GREVIO submission targeted consultation, p. 2.
54
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, at para. 3
55
Targeted consultation to Member States, question 11.
56
Supra 52, p. 65. GREVIO highlights the need for initial and in-service training for all relevant professions to be systematic
and compulsory.
57
Gap Analysis in Annex 8, GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 11, 79.
14
women and domestic violence (AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, IT, MT, NL, PT, ES, SE58
). Staff of
relevant services should likewise be aware of the effects of domestic violence on children,
including of witnessing domestic violence (FR, IT).
Work with perpetrators to prevent re-offending, as well as with men and boys at risk of
offending, has a positive impact on combating violence against women and domestic
violence.59
While all but one Member State (HU) have set up support programmes for
perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence, these programmes are often
not structured, primarily targeting domestic violence and not always compulsory.60
In many
Member States, programmes for perpetrators are not sufficiently available or suffer from low
attendance (DK, IT, PT, AT, FI, MT, NL).61
Regarding sexual harassment at work, the gap analysis identified shortcomings in the
effectiveness of the implementation of the Gender Equality Directives,62
which require
Member States to take measures to prevent all forms of sex-based discrimination in the areas
of employment and access to and supply of goods and services.63
They however do not
contain explicit provisions on preventing such harassment. Gaps identified in the Member
States include insufficient knowledge of the issue by relevant professionals.64
EU law does
not include explicit obligations on the prevention of cyber violence against women either.65
Ineffective protection from violence
Many Member States have made efforts to put measures in place to protect victims of
violence against women and domestic violence, including against intimidation or
retaliation by the perpetrator, but these are insufficient in some Member States.66
While
mid- and long-term protection orders are available in all Member States, these orders are not
always effective. In addition, emergency protection or barring orders where the police are
allowed to prevent an alleged or potential perpetrator of violence from entering the victim’s
apartment and its immediate surroundings, are available only in 18 Member States.67
Even
where protection orders are available, their practical application remains low. Factors which
might contribute to this are notably the length of proceedings and the limited enforcement of
58
Gap Analysis in Annex 8.
, GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 11, 78-79.
59
Audra J. Bowlus and Shannon Seitz, 2006, ‘Domestic Violence, Employment, And Divorce’, International Economic
Review, vol. 47(4), pp. 1113-1149.
60
More perpetrator programmes are available in prisons. Interview with European Network for Work with Perpetrators
(WWP EN), 2 July 2021.
61
Gap Analysis in Annex 8, GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 22.
62
See also: Council Directive 2004/113/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the
access to and supply of goods and services, 13 December 2004; Directive 2010/41/EU on the application of the principle of
equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity, 7 July 2010. Also Council
Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health
of workers at work, OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, pp.1-8.
63
EELN, ‘Criminalisation of gender-based violence against women in European States’, 2021, p. 82; EELN, ‘Harassment
related to Sex and Sexual Harassment Law in 33 European Countries’, 2011, available at:
https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/e06dcc86-b7bf-459e-8241-47502ef379c4.
64
EELN 2021, p. 77.
65
EPRS, ’Combatting gender-based violence: cyber violence’, 2021, pp. 12-13.
66
In the 2001 British Crime Survey, 36% of women and 31% of men who had fallen victim to domestic violence reported
being intimidated, e.g. not to report the violence.
67
AT, BE, BC, CZ, DE, DK, FI, HR, HU, IE, IT, LV, LU, NL, PO, RO, SI, SK. In most other Member States, protection
orders could be applicable in some emergency situations, but legislation does not cover all situations of this kind of violence,
e.g. FR, PT.
15
the measures, in particular insufficient sanctions for breaches of the orders and a lack of
awareness on their availability. In some Member States, there is a lack of effective and
immediate protection after reporting (AT, EE, DE, NL, PL, PT).68
Also, victims who move or
travel abroad risk losing protection, since the wide divergence of national measures remain
an obstacle to the recognition of measures issued in their home country in other Member
States.
As set out in detail in the gap analysis (Annex 8), an individual assessment of the specific
protection needs of victims of violence against women and domestic violence is absent in
eight Member States (CZ, BE, EE, LU, MT, RO, SI and SK).69
Measures ensuring specific
protection of child victims or witnesses of violence against women and domestic violence
also remain insufficient. Relevant professionals lack appropriate training to provide protection
and support in a child-friendly manner (FR, IT), sufficient psychological counselling is not
provided for child witnesses (AT, FI, FR, ES) and child witnesses are not always considered
victims of violence.70
Reporting of violence by children should be child-friendly71
, and there
should be a possibility for visits with family members suspected of this kind of violence to
take place in a safe, surveyed place and in the best interest of the child72
(arrangements in
place e.g. in ES, FI, DE, MT).73
Ineffective access to justice for victims of violence
Several shortcomings limit access to justice for victims of violence against women and
domestic violence.74
While the majority of violence against women and domestic violence
offences are criminalised in all Member States, gaps and divergences in national criminal
law remain.75
Large gaps exist with respect to cyber violence against women and intimate
partner cyber violence, such as ICT-facilitated stalking and non-consensual dissemination of
private images. In 17 Member States, non-consensual dissemination of intimate/private/sexual
images online has not been criminalised (AT, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, DE, EL, HU,
LV, LT, LU, RO, SK, SI).76
Gaps in criminalisation also exist in the area of domestic
violence, because the majority of national definitions require repetition of violent acts in order
for them to fall under the criminal offence of domestic violence. Such a requirement of re-
victimisation can pose challenges for prosecution, as well as reinforce secondary
victimisation. Also, sexual violence within intimate relationships is not always recognised
as domestic violence.77
68
Infra 157, pp. 36-39.
69
Victim Support Europe, Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis Report, 2019, p. 154,
available at: (https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-web.pdf).
70
EELN 2021, pp. 47-49, 154. Gap Analysis in Annex 8. Also European Commission 2013; Interview with Victim Support
Europe, 9 July 2021.
71
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/child-friendly_justice_20180625-26_background_paper_final.pdf, p. 3.
Concerning judicial cooperation in matters of parental responsibility for the benefit of the children concerned in cases of
suspicions of domestic violence, see Gap Analysis in Annex 8 at p. 17.
72
Also European Court of Human Rights, O.C.I. and Others v. Romania, application no. 49450/17, judgment of 21 May
2019, §§ 43-46 concerning the return of children between two Member States.
73
Information gathered in October 2021 from the European Judicial Network.
74
ICJ, ‘Women’s Access to Justice for Gender-Based Violence – A Practitioners’ Guide’, 2016.
75
Supra 35.
76
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, Thematic Report on the Criminalisation of
gender-based violence against women in European States, including ICT-facilitated violence, Chapter 8.
77
EELN 2021 at 11, 75.
16
The use of force or threats as an essential element of rape is required in 16 Member States
instead of focusing on lack of consent, as recommended by human rights bodies.78
This
results in unequal protection and an important gap in access to justice for victims of sexual
violence across the EU. Gaps also exist with respect to other forms of violence against women
and domestic violence, which may negatively affect access to justice: female genital
mutilation (FGM) is not a specific criminal offence in 9 Member States, forced marriages
are not explicitly criminalised in 7 Member States79
and while all Member States have
criminalised forced abortion, forced sterilization has been introduced as a specific criminal
offense only in France, Malta, Portugal and Spain.
The lack of targeted training on violence against women and domestic violence for law
enforcement and judicial authorities can lead to insufficiencies in the investigation and the
judicial process. The majority of Member States have established ex officio prosecution for
some violence against women and domestic violence crimes, yet a small minority have
dedicated guidelines for the prosecution to ensure that this is done effectively in a manner
taking into consideration the specificities of this kind of crime.
Difficulties in evidencing violence during judicial proceedings can also form a barrier to
accessing justice. In particular in cases of sexual violence, there are typically no witnesses and
there may be no physical signs left by the time the victim has a medical examination. It is also
often not clear who (the police, medical professionals, support organisations) should be
responsible for providing information and support. The prospect of investigation and
prosecution can hinder a victim from reporting a crime and initiating judicial proceedings, as
victims may want to avoid secondary victimisation by not repeating the original trauma
during the proceedings.80
Lack of measures protecting victims against retaliation and repeat
victimization has been identified as a gap in some Member States (AT, FR, DE, NL, PL,
PT).81
Lack of reporting was highlighted by six Member State authorities in the targeted
consultation as one of the main challenges in the prosecution of cases of GBV (BE, BG, CY,
DE, IE, RO).82
Furthermore, access to compensation has not been effective with regard to victims of gender-
based violence, including violence against women and domestic violence.83
The amount of
78
See ECtHR, M.C. v. Bulgaria, application no. 39272/98, judgment of 4 December 2003, paras. 154-166, 185-187.
79
Fourteen countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal,
Slovenia, Spain and Sweden) have specific provisions on forced marriages. Six countries (Denmark, Estonia, Greece,
Iceland, the Netherlands, and Slovakia), despite not having introduced a specific provision on forced marriages, address this
specific behaviour under other general criminal provisions (such as an aggravating circumstance, or as one of the purposes of
human trafficking, for example). Child marriages are not per se generally criminalised, except in Sweden, but the commission
of the crime against a minor has been considered as an aggravating circumstance. Nine countries went beyond the idea of
marriage, to include civil unions and extrajudicial marriages. In the latter case, the concept combines the prohibition of forced
marriages with the prohibition of justifications based on honour. Czechia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and
Romania rely on civil law or on general provisions of criminal law without explicit reference to forced marriages.
80
Secondary victimisation may result from e.g. invasive questioning, including on the victim’s sexual history, repetitive
interviews or unnecessary confrontation with the offender.
81
Infra 157, pp.34-35.
82
Submission for the Member State targeted consultation question no. 43.
83
Infra 114; Faircom, ‘Fair and Appropriate? Compensation of Victims of Sexual Violence in EU Member States: Greece,
Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands and Spain’, 2020, available at: (https://nscr.nl/app/uploads/2020/11/2020-11-01-Fair-and-
Appropriate-FAIRCOM-Report-Part-II.pdf). In regard to state compensation, in Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, which
17
compensation is very low, which may have particularly damaging consequences for victims of
VAW/DV as they often need to re-build an independent and violence-free life of dignity,
especially as domestic violence can often occur in situations of economic dependence.84
In
addition, victims may have to go through both criminal and civil proceedings to claim
compensation, which exposes them to a high risk of revictimisation.85
Some Member States
have restricted time limits to apply for state compensation (AT, CY, HR, HU86
, EL87
).
Finally, victims are not aware of their rights (see gap analysis, Annex 8).
Regarding sex-based, including sexual, harassment, reporting and dispute resolution
mechanisms are often not readily accessible or gender-sensitive, and involve lengthy
proceedings.88
The Gender Equality Directives require Member States to prohibit sex-based
and sexual harassment and provide effective remedies in the areas of employment and access
to and supply of goods and services. Lacking criminalisation of sexual harassment (see also
Section 3.1.1), retaliation measures towards complainants, lack of case-law, and insufficient
knowledge of the issue by relevant professionals are identified as gaps in the Member
States.89
Stakeholders indicate that victims of cyber violence against women and intimate partner
cyber violence often struggle in accessing remedies. Law enforcement is often not adequately
aware or equipped to address the specificities of the digital dimension of violence against
women and domestic violence. In particular, there are often no facilities to report incidents
online and cyber violence may be harder to prosecute for non-specialised authorities.90
Insufficient information on what constitutes cyber violence and on the reporting options also
leads to underreporting.91
The role of national equality bodies to deal with cases of violence against women beyond
sexual harassment is limited in the majority of the Member States, which equally limits access
to justice (BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, FI, FR, EL, HU, IE, IT, LT, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO, SK,
ES.92
concerned a victim of sexual violence, the CJEU held that Member States must grant fair and appropriate state compensation
to all victims of violent intentional crime under Council Directive 2004/80.
84
European Commission, Strengthening Victims’ Rights: from compensation to reparation. For a new EU Victims’ rights
strategy 2020-2025. Report of the Special Adviser, J. Milquet, to the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude
Juncker, 2019, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/summary-report-strengthening-victims-rights-compensation-
reparation_en), p. 32.
85
Victim Support Europe, Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis Report,
2019, p. 56, available at: (https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-
content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-web.pdf), p. 121.
86
Infra 114, p. 23.
87
Baker McKenzie, Fighting Domestic Violence: Greece, 2021, at 4.2.4., available at:
(https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/fighting-domestic-violence/europe/greece).
88
EELN 2021, at 97.
89
EELN 2021, p. 97.
90
Hate Aid, ‘Statement: General Recommendation on the Digital Dimension of Women’, 2021, available at:
(https://hateaid.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Protection-of-women-against-digital-violence.pdf).
91
EPRS, ‘Gender-based violence: cyber violence’, 2021, pp. 12-13.
92
Supra 76, Table 30.
18
Ineffective support to victims of violence
Support services, such as counselling and shelters for victims, are fundamental in ensuring the
well-being of victims, need to be based on an understanding of the victim’s specific needs and
be available for all victims in a manner that ensures confidentiality and privacy.
While all Member States have general support services in place, i.e. service provision to the
public at large, including social services, health services and employment services,
stakeholders93
identified an insufficient number of specialist support services for victims of
violence against women and domestic violence, which can cover targeted social, emotional,
psychological and financial support, as well as practical and legal support specifically
designed for victims of violence against women and of domestic violence. For example, there
is a gap in specialised support services dealing with forms of violence against women other
than domestic violence, such as sexual violence (AT, BE, FR, MT, PT, ES).94
There is, in
particular, an insufficient number of shelters available to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence. GREVIO refers to discrepancies in the information provided
by Member State authorities and civil society organisations on the numbers of shelters and
observes that, with the exception of Austria and Malta, Member States are not close to
reaching the target put forward by the Council of Europe to set up one family place per
10,000 heads of population.95
There are furthermore limitations to accessing the existing support due to conditions related
to citizenship, residency, economic means, or dependents (children). In some Member States,
women with children have more difficulties to be accepted to support services or supported.
In the majority of Member States, access to shelters is particularly difficult for women with
disabilities and mothers of children with disabilities. In several Member States, specialised
support services are available only to citizens of the country or even to residents of the
respective area/region/municipality. The gap analysis shows that there are significant barriers
for migrant and asylum seeking women to access general and/or specialised support services
(BE, DK, IT, NL,ES, SE).96
There are also problems of access to support services depending
on geographical location. Access to support may also depend on the victim’s willingness to
bring charges against the perpetrator.
While several Member States have developed a wider and stronger network of specialist
support services that assists victims of domestic violence, a gap has been identified
concerning specialised support to children, including child witnesses of violence against
women and domestic violence, especially of psycho-social counselling and other child-
sensitive support.97
Such support needs to be provided with regard to the best interests of the
child and their needs, which may exclude shelters as the primary temporary housing
93
Women against Violence Europe (WAVE) collects data and reports on the availability of support services in the EU. These
data are presented every two years.
94
Supra 52, p. 90.
95
Supra 52, p. 92. The information was also provided in the targeted consultation of international organisations.
96
See more in the Gap Analysis in Annex 8. GREVIO submission targeted consultation p. para 75.
97
See more in the gap analysis annex 8. In the targeted consultation, 13 Member States said specialist support services
systematically take into account the needs of child victims and witnesses of domestic violence based on a child-sensitive
approach. Eight said they do, but not systematically.
19
solution.98
The gap analysis also identified a lack or insufficiency of national state-wide, 24/7
and free of charge helplines to women victims of violence (BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, FI, FR, EL,
HU, IE, LV, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SI).99
There is also lack of multilingual support on
national women’s helplines (BE, HR, CZ, HU, LV, LT, MT, NL, PL, PT, SI).100
There are also gaps in support for victims of cyber violence against women. The gap
analysis identified a lack of measures tackling this kind of violence and the related support
services in the majority of the Member States (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, DE,
FR, HU, IE, IT, LV, LT, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SI, ES, SE).101
Service provision is commonly ensured by victims’ rights and women’s organisations,
which are staffed with experienced specialists. These organisations report a lack of sufficient
resources for staff, professional training and financial assistance to run the services as well as
a lack of recognition of their work by national governments.
Insufficient policy coordination
Due to the involvement of various public and possibly private sector actors in cases of
violence against women and domestic violence, coordination is required to ensure concerted
action. Coordination at national level can be substantiated by national plans of action that
assign each actor a particular role. In addition, due to the high prevalence of violence against
women and domestic violence across Europe and globally, Member States participate in
international coordination efforts.102
According to national and desk research, however, the
implementation of the legislative and policy framework shows gaps in most Member States.
The realities are diverse and complex in each Member State, but commonly identified
problems are lack of coordination between different institutions with mandates in the area;
differences in resources and in quality of the service delivery between urban and rural/remote
or more and less developed areas.
There are also shortcomings in the collection of data on violence against women and
domestic violence, as noted by GREVIO in a recent report on the implementation of the
Istanbul Convention.103
High quality data is a crucial basis for effective policy-making and
these shortcomings make it challenging to form an accurate overview of the prevalence of
violence against women and domestic violence in the EU. Data on the prevalence of violence
against women and domestic violence is gathered through administrative data collection and
survey data. Data collected from administrative sources is not adequately disaggregated.
For example, data on perpetrators are typically not disaggregated by sex, which is an obstacle
98
See Council of Europe, Convention on preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence
(‘Istanbul Convention’). Children’s rights. FRA, Child-friendly justice. Perspectives and experiences of children involved in
judicial proceedings as victims, witnesses or parties in nine EU Member States, 2017, at 99-100, on the importance of
maintaining the confidentiality of a child’s housing arrangements when children access support services to avoid secondary
victimization.
99
See more in the Gap Analysis in Annex 8. WAVE, WAVE Report 2015 on the role of specialist women’s support services
in Europe, 2015, p. 90.
100
See more in the Gap Analysis in Annex 8. WAVE Report 2015 on the role of specialist women’s support services in
Europe, 2015, p. 90.
101
Gap Analysis in Annex 8. EPRS, ‘Gender-based violence: cyber violence’, 2021, pp. 12-13.
102
This is the case in particular for the 21 Member States parties to the Istanbul Convention, Article 10 of which requires the
establishment of national coordination bodies.
103
Supra 52, pp. 44-47, 51-52.
20
to the visibility of violence against women and domestic violence in their different forms.
Data also does not systematically cover the sex and age of the victim or the relationship with
the perpetrator. The lack of sex disaggregated data on victims/perpetrators of violence
collected by the criminal justice system has been identified as problem also in the gap analysis
in Annex 8 (BE, DK, MT, NL).104
Moreover, data collection between public bodies is not
harmonised. The gap analysis identified this as a problem in several Member States (AT, BE,
DK, FI, FR, IT, MT, SE).105
The lack of co-ordination and comparability of the data
(including a lack of common definitions and units of measurement) makes it impossible to
track cases at all stages of the law-enforcement and judicial proceedings, and during support.
It impedes an assessment of conviction, attrition, and recidivism rates, as well as the
identification of gaps in the responses of institutions. An estimated 2/3 of victims do not
report violence, and therefore, official criminal justice data only record a limited number of
cases. This is why it is important to be able to rely on population survey additionally to police
statistics.
The only available, comparable data at the EU level is the FRA survey from 2014. Currently,
Eurostat is coordinating an EU survey on gender-based violence and other forms of
interpersonal violence. 18 Member States will carry out the survey (which is supported by
EU funds) while others declined to participate mostly because of human resources constraints.
FRA and EIGE are stepping in to complete the results for these Member States. Results for all
countries are expected in 2023. To monitor developments, it would be necessary to carry out
the survey on a regular basis by all Member States in the future.
c) Gaps at EU level
There is currently no specific EU legal instrument addressing violence against women and
domestic violence. The topic falls, however, in the scope of application of several directives
and regulations, in particular in the areas of criminal justice, gender equality and asylum. The
existing EU legal framework for addressing violence against women and domestic violence
was assessed for the purposes of this initiative; this assessment concludes that the current
legal framework has significant gaps and shortcomings with regard to this group of victims,
which has come to the forefront particularly due to the increased risk of domestic violence
following the confinement measures of the COVID-19 pandemic (see Annex 8 for details).
The gap analysis in Annex 8 also shows that the relevant EU legislation has been
ineffective in preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence.
While there is no EU legislation dedicated to such violence, the gap analysis identified 14 EU
law instruments which are relevant for victims of violence against women and domestic
violence as they either establish general rules applicable also to this category of victims, or
establish specific rules on certain forms of such violence. For example, the provisions on
protection and access to justice in the Victims’ Rights Directive and the European
Protection Orders (‘EPO’) apply to all victims of crime, whereas the Directives on child
sexual abuse or trafficking in human beings establish sectoral rules on these forms of
104
See more in the Gap Analysis in Annex 8; Supra 52, pp. 42-46. On cyber violence, EPRS, ‘Gender-based violence: cyber
violence’, 2021, pp. 12-13.
105
See more in Annex 8; Supra 52, p. 46.
21
violence. In addition, the Gender Equality Directives include provisions on sexual
harassment. The assessment supplements and builds on the on-going general evaluations of
some of these instruments, in particular those concerning the Victims’ Rights, the Child
Sexual Abuse and the Anti-Trafficking Directives.106
With regard to prevention, the EU framework includes some obligations on awareness-
raising, but these either concern victims’ rights in general107
, or are limited to specific forms
of violence, such as trafficking in human beings, child sexual abuse or sexual harassment at
work. As to training for professionals, EU legislation provides some obligations for the
Member States108
, but such provisions are not specific to violence against women and
domestic violence.
When it comes to protection of victims, the instruments on the mutual recognition of
protection orders provide for cross-border recognition of criminal and civil protection orders.
However, the take-up of the EPO instruments is very low which limits their effectiveness.
Moreover, the instruments do not ensure that effective emergency barring orders and
protection orders are available and effective in all Member States. As set out above,
emergency protection orders do not exist in all Member States and the modalities for their
issuance vary.109
Lack of efficiency of the protection orders at the national level results in a
poor take-up of protection orders in cross-border cases and as a consequence in a very low
application of the EU EPO instruments.110
The insufficient and unequal criminalization of different forms of violence against women
and of domestic violence makes it more difficult for victims to access justice. EU-level
criminalisations of specific forms of violence against women with harmonised definitions
and sanctions are currently included in the Anti-Trafficking and the Child Sexual Abuse
Directives.111
While most conduct of violence against women and domestic violence is
criminalised at national level, the situation at EU level leaves important gaps, in particular
with regard to sexual harassment and cyber violence against women and intimate partners (see
above, Section 2.1.2). This directly impacts the victims’ access to justice. In cases of cyber
violence, if national law enforcement mechanisms are unavailable, victims can complain to
the online platform. Effective means of redress are however not always provided by the
platform, which is particularly problematic for serious forms of cyber violence.112
Similarly,
with regard to sexual harassment, EU law obliges Member States to prohibit sexual
harassment as a form of discrimination and impose sanctions. They however do not require,
106
See ‘Combating child sexual abuse – review of EU rules’, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-
regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13073-Combating-child-sexual-abuse-review-of-EU-rules_en), planned for the first
quarter of 2022; ‘Fighting human trafficking – review of EU rules’, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-
regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/13106-Fighting-human-trafficking-review-of-EU-rules_en), open until 22 March 2022.
107
Art. 26 the Victims’ Rights Directive.
108
Such as Art. 25 the Victims’ Rights Directive.
109
EELN 2021, p. 11.
110
European Commission, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation
of Directive 2011/99/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the European protection
order, 2020.
111
The Gender Equality Directives require Member States to sanction sex-based work harassment, but do not necessarily
require criminalisation.
112
EELN 2021, at 137-138.
22
for most serious cases, criminal sanctions.113
Lack of adequate compensation remains a
challenge and obstacle for this group of victims in accessing justice, despite the minimum
standards of the Compensation Directive and, for sexual harassment, the Gender Equality
Directives.114
The amount of compensation attributed in violence against women and
domestic violence cases is often very low and compensation is not granted in adequate time.
Concerning access to support for this group of victims, the Victims’ Rights Directive has not
reached its full potential: implementation remains dissatisfactory.115
The complexity and
broad formulations in the Victims’ Rights Directive often cause obstacles in its practical
application. The broad formulation of the provisions concerning support to victims of
violence against women and domestic violence further effects the quality of the non-
legislative measures taken pursuant to the Directive. Implementation issues were identified in
several Member States on access to shelters, including their availability and numbers. Such
shortcomings tend to particularly affect victims of violence against women and domestic
violence. Moreover, only 13 Member States reported that their specialist support services
systematically take into account the special needs of child victims and witnesses in cases of
domestic violence and ten additional Member States applied a child sensitive approach in a
non-systematic manner. Courts also regularly categorise child witnesses as indirect victims,
despite it being standard practice in child protection to consider child witnesses as direct
victims due to the psychological harm inflicted. This can hinder children’s access to services,
such as counselling.
Regarding cyber violence against women and between intimate partners, the existing EU
legal framework does not include specific obligations in this regard. The Victims’ Rights
Directive applies to all criminalised conduct, but forms of cyber violence against women are
only criminalised in 11 Member States. Hence, victims of such violence are often not eligible
for protection and support measures under the Directive.
The Gender Equality Directives116
establish that sex-based and sexual harassment at work and
in the access to goods and services are contrary to the principle of equal treatment between
men and women, and oblige Member States to prohibit such conduct, ensure remedies and
enforcement, including compensation, and provide for effective, proportionate and dissuasive
113
EELN 2021, at 88, 93-94, finding that the existing criminalisations of sexual harassment in the Member States are not
uniform and do not correspond to the requirements of the main international obligations in this field.
114
European Commission, Strengthening Victims’ Rights: from compensation to reparation. For a new EU Victims’ rights
strategy 2020-2025. Report of the Special Adviser, J. Milquet, to the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude
Juncker, 2019,
available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/strengthening_victims_rights_-
_from_compensation_to_reparation_rev.pdf).
115
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Directive 2012/29/EU
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012, COM/2020/188 final, pp. 3, 6-7, stating that ‘victims of
domestic violence do not receive effective support and protection in several Member States. Furthermore, not all Member
State provide for a right to support services for victims’ family members’.
116
Directive 2006/54/EC of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of
men and women in matters of employment and occupation; Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004
implementing the principle of equal treatment between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services;
Directive 2010/41/EU of 7 July 2010 on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged
in an activity in a self-employed capacity.
23
penalties. However, these provisions have not been effective in reducing the prevalence of
sexual harassment (see Section 2.1.2 (b) at 1 and 3).
More generally, the gap analysis shows that the relevant EU legislation has been
ineffective in ensuring the rights of victims of violence against women and domestic
violence. The EU-level measures do not explicitly address victims of violence against women
and domestic violence. The relevant obligations are not specific enough with regard to
victims of violence against women and domestic violence or leave wide discretion to the
Member States. The relevant EU legislation is not up to date; it is on average over ten years
old and the international obligations have evolved considerably in the area of violence
against women and domestic violence in the meantime (see below).
Finally, EU law is no longer coherent with the international legal and policy framework.
Concerning violence against women and domestic violence generally, EU law remains below
the standards of the Istanbul Convention and the CEDAW Convention with regard to this
group of victims. The relevant provisions of EU law are mainly formulated in a gender-
neutral manner and do not require Member States to take into account the specific needs of
women victims of violence and victims of domestic violence. In addition, EU law includes
few provisions on targeted preventive measures, and fails to address the protection needs of
these victims with the specificity required in Chapter VI of the Istanbul Convention. With the
exceptions of child sexual abuse and trafficking in human beings for the purposes of sexual
exploitation, EU law does not establish harmonised definitions and sanctions of most of the
forms of violence against women and domestic violence enumerated in the Istanbul
Convention.117
The framework does not address the rights of witnesses, particularly child
witnesses, of such violence. All Member States have ratified the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child, which in its Article 19 includes provisions on prevention, protection,
support and access to justice to children affected by violence. General and specific support
services to this group of victims are regulated in the Victims’ Rights Directive, but the lack of
detail in the provisions has led to ineffective implementation by the Member States. There is
currently no obligation on the Member States to collect data specifically on violence against
women and domestic violence, and no specific EU-level coordination structures exist on this
kind of violence. The gap analysis further finds that action at national level is likely to have
resulted from the implementation of the Istanbul Convention in those Member States that are
parties.
Since the adoption of the directives, the international #MeToo movement has raised the
visibility of sexual harassment against women, potentially encouraging more victims, but also
governments, social partners and employers, to take action.118
In 2019, the International
Labour Organization adopted the Violence and Harassment Convention No. 190, which
requires parties to prohibit gender-based violence and harassment at work and provides a
117
On the division of competence between Member States and the EU for the envisaged agreement to conclude the Istanbul
Convention, see CJEU, Opinion A1/19, from §278 onwards.
118
European sectoral social partners have been active in this area: e.g. European social partners from the railway sector
negotiated in June 2021 a new autonomous agreement on gender equality, which also covers the prevention of violence and
harassment, available at https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=521&langId=en&agreementId=5745. See also the
Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament transmitting the European framework
agreement on harassment and violence at work (COM(2007) 686 final)).
24
comprehensive protection, prevention, and support framework for victims. EU law does not
ensure the criminalisation of serious forms of sexual harassment; the applicability of the
protection and support measures of the Victims’ Rights Directive therefore depends on
whether harassment is criminalised under national law. The prevention, protection and
support measures concerning sexual harassment are also not as developed as in Convention
no. 190.
Finally, the current EU legislation has not led to effective monitoring and enforcement of
the relevant EU rules with regard to violence against women and domestic violence. This
is due to the absence of a focus on such violence and the ambiguous drafting of the legal
obligations, which has not enabled targeted enforcement measures in the key problem areas
relating to violence against women and domestic violence.
2.1.3. Who is affected?
Gender-based violence is disproportionately perpetrated against women. In the majority of
cases of physical violence, the perpetrator is a man or a group of men.119
Although women and girls account for a far smaller share of total victims of homicides than
men, they are overrepresented among victims of intimate partner/family-related homicide, and
intimate partner homicide. Victim/perpetrator disaggregations reveal a large disparity in the
shares attributable to male and female victims of homicides committed by intimate partners or
family members: 36 per cent male versus 64 per cent female victims.120
These findings show
that even though men are the principal victims of homicide globally, women continue to bear
the heaviest burden of lethal victimization as a result of gender stereotypes and inequality. In
particular sexual violence is strongly gendered with more than 9 in 10 rape victims and more
than 8 in 10 sexual assault victims being women and girls, while nearly all those imprisoned
for such crimes are male (99%).121
Research also suggests that more women than men become
victims of sexual harassment or sex discrimination.122
Incidents of physical violence against
women (excluding specifically sexual violence) most often take place at home (37%). Such
violence also often involves a family member or a relative as the perpetrator. Thus, although
men and non-binary people can also be victims of gender-based violence123
, the majority of
victims are women in all their diversity.
Cyber violence against women has been found to target in particular young women124
and
women visible in public life. Women in public positions, such as journalists and politicians,
experience cyber violence targeting them because they are women and seeking to question
119
Supra 34; Supra 36.
120
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2018, Global Study On Homicide - Gender-related killing of women and girls,
pp. 9-11.
121
Eurostat crime statistics: (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/EDN-20171123-1), last visited
19/08/2021.
122
Heather Antecol, Vaness Barcus, Deborah Cobb-Clark, 2009, ‘Gender-biased behavior at work: Exploring the
relationship between sexual harassment and sex discrimination’, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 30(5).
123
FRA, Report - A long way to go for LGBTI equality, 2020.
124
EIGE 2017, p. 1, finding that particularly young women disproportionately experience severe forms, namely cyber
stalking and online sexual harassment. FRA 2014. LGBTI in the past 5 years. In the case of trans men, the figure was 16%,
and for non-binary persons 13%.
25
their entitlement to participate in societal discussions. This can have a silencing effect on the
victims and negatively affect democratic decision-making processes.125
Similarly, while both women and men experience harassment, women face more
harassment of a sexual nature. In a 2012 survey, up to 55% of women in the EU-28 (ages
18–74) reported having experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15. One in five (21%)
had experienced at least one form of sexual harassment in the 12 months before the survey.
Such harassment consists of forms such as unwanted touching, hugging or kissing, or sexually
suggestive, unwanted comments or cyber harassment.126
In 2021, 18% of women described
the most recent incident of harassment as of a sexual nature, compared with 6% of men.
Women and girls in vulnerable situations, such as women with disabilities, women victims
of trafficking in human beings, women prisoners, women migrants and asylum seekers, non-
heterosexual women and women sex workers, are at a higher risk of violence. For example,
exposure to physical or sexual partner violence differs between women with and without
disabilities (34% vs 19%) and non-heterosexual and heterosexual women (48% vs 21%).127
Human traffickers exploit the particular vulnerabilities of persons with disabilities for the
purpose of sexual exploitation128
.
Children are often seriously affected by violence against women and domestic violence.
They can be themselves victims or witnesses of such violence; both experiences are
considered to be equally traumatizing.129
Exposure to violence at an early age can cause
impairments to the brain and nervous system development, as well as result in life-long
negative coping and health risk behaviours.130
Children who witness or are victims of
emotional, physical, or sexual abuse are also at higher risk for health problems as adults.
These can include mental health conditions, such as depression and anxiety.131
While the exact prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence varies among
Member States, it is widespread in every Member State regardless of socio-economic
boundaries.132
125
Nato StratCom 2020, p. 10. Inter-Parliamentary Union, Sexism, harassment and violence against women in parliaments in
Europe, Issue Brief, 2018; M.L. Krook, Violence against women in politics, Oxford University Press, 2020; HRC, Report of
the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and Consequences on violence against women in politics,
A/73/301, 6 August 2018; HRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and Consequences
on violence against women journalists, A/HRC/44/52, 6 May 2020; UNESCO, The Chilling: Global trends in online violence
against women journalists – Research Discussion Paper, 2021. See also: European Commission, Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions. On the European democracy action plan, COM(2020) 790 final, 3 December 2020; European Commission,
Recommendation on ensuring safety of journalists in the European Union.
126
FRA, Violence against women survey, 2014, p. 95.
127
Supra 34. The risk is further augmented for women in segregated settings and closed institutions, such as specialist
institutions for persons with disabilities.
128
Commission (COM(2020) 661 final): Third Report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings
and its Staff Working Document, SWD(2020)226 final).
129
For a recent systematic review see, among others, Petruccelli K, Davis J, Berman T. Adverse childhood experiences and
associated health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Child Abuse Negl. 2019 Nov;97:104127. doi:
10.1016/j.chiabu.2019.104127. Epub 2019 Aug 24. PMID: 31454589;
130
E. Kimball, “Edleson Revisited: Reviewing Children’s Witnessing of Domestic Violence 15 Years Later”, Journal of
Family Violence, Vol. 31(5), 2016, pp. 1-13.
131
Monnat, S.M., Chandler, R.F., Long Term Physical Health Consequences of Adverse Childhood Experiences. The
Sociologist Quarterly; 56(4), 2015: 723-752.
132
For more information on Member State-specific prevalence, see Annex 6.
26
2.1.4. Why is violence against women and domestic violence a problem?
Violence against women and domestic violence can violate a number of fundamental rights,
including the right to life and to equality between women and men (see Section 6.1). They
cause pain and suffering to the victims and result in large costs on the economy and society as
a whole. They negatively impact the physical health of the victims. Sexual violence exposes
women to sexually-transmitted diseases, unintended pregnancies, abortions and miscarriages,
and lowers women's control over their reproductive health.133
Violence against women and
domestic violence also increase the probability of mental health problems134
, linking to
higher rates of depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, alcohol and drug abuse, and
suicidal ideation.135
Some of the social and health impacts of violence against women and domestic violence can
be quantified in terms of costs and/or economic consequences. For the EU, EIGE has carried
out two studies on the costs of violence in 2014 and 2021.136
The 2021 study considers three
main sources of costs: direct cost of services (to victims or to public providers); lost economic
output; and physical and emotional impacts measured as a reduction in the quality of life.
Direct cost of services consists of the use of services provided by various sectors to mitigate
the harm caused by violence. This includes the use of health services to treat the physical and
mental harms; social services; the criminal justice system involved in the investigation,
prosecution and adjudication of cases of violence against women and domestic violence; the
civil justice system to e.g. disentangle from a violent partner; and specialist services for the
prevention and/or mitigation of the impacts, such as protection and support services. Victims
of intimate partner violence may incur costs not covered by the state, notably judicial costs
and the costs of a new home.
Violence against women and domestic violence also result in lost economic output, as a
result of the victim’s decreased ability to look for a job or productivity on the job and the time
taken off work to handle the consequences of the crime. According to a European Parliament
Research Service (‘EPRS’) study137
, research conducted in Belgium found that 73% of those
subjected to domestic violence reported an effect on the ability to work. Another recent EPRS
study138
estimates the lost economic output due to mental health impairments caused by
cyber-violence on women, both in terms of lost work days and lower productivity. A study on
the costs of violence against women in Italy calculates the costs of work days lost, reduced
133
World Health Organization, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, South African Medical Research Council.
‘Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and
non-partner sexual violence’. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2013.
134
Magnusson Hanson, Nyberg, Mittendorfer-Rutz, Bondestam, Madsen: ‘Work related sexual harassment and risk of
suicide and suicide attempts: prospective cohort study’, 2020, BMJ2020;370:m2984.
135
J. Mannel & S. Hawkes, ‘Decriminalisation of gender-based violence is a global health problem’, Journal BMJ Global
Health, Vol. 2(3), 2017, pp. 1-3.
136
EIGE, Estimating the costs of gender based violence in the European Union: Report, Publications Office of the European
Union, Luxembourg, 2014 (https://eige.europa.eu/publications/estimating-costs-gender-based-violence-european-union-
report); EIGE, The costs of gender-based violence in the EU’, 2021; available at
https://eige.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/20213229_mh0921238enn_pdf.pdf. See also Annex 2: Mutual learning
seminar on ‘Methodologies and good practices on assessing the costs of violence against women’, 7-8 July 2021.
137
EPRS, Equality and the Fight against Racism and Xenophobia: Cost of Non-Europe Report, 2018.
138
EPRS, Combating gender-based violence: Cyberviolence, European added value assessment, 2021, p. 8.
27
productivity, and the cost of replacing absent workers. It furthermore calculates the lost tax
income and the multiplier effect of households' lost incomes.139
The third cost category in the EIGE study is the physical and emotional impact on victims,
measuring the loss of healthy life years.140
This allows a monetary value to be attached to
health conditions to translate losses usually not measured in money into economic losses. The
greatest source of economic loss due to violence against women and domestic violence is the
loss in quality of life that monetises the physical and emotional impacts of violence.
On this basis, the 2021 EIGE study estimates that total yearly costs of gender-based
violence against women in the EU-27 stand at €290 billion141 and almost €152 billion for
domestic violence. These costs, consist in large part of physical/emotional impacts (55.57%),
criminal justice system (20.43%) and lost economic output (13.93%) (see Annexes 3 and
5).142
2.2.2.2. What are the drivers?
2.2.1 Structural gender inequality and gender stereotypes
Whilst there is no single cause for violence against women and domestic violence, some of
the most consistent drivers are harmful social norms and stereotypes that contribute to
gender inequality.143
Such social norms concern the roles of women and men; harmful gender
stereotypes include ideals linking masculinity to the provider role, macho behaviour, as well
as ideals linking femininity to chastity, submission and victimhood.144
The WHO has
identified community norms that ascribe higher status to men, low levels of women’s access
to paid employment, and low level of gender equality as factors increasing the risk of violence
against women and domestic violence.145
Societal norms affect perpetrators’ and bystanders’ behaviours. Perpetrators may not
consider their act of violence as morally reproachable.146
Gender roles and stress over
masculine gender roles have been found to strengthen tolerance toward violence against
women147
, which may, in turn, be caused by factors such as negative stereotypes towards
139
G. Vingelli, et al., Quanto costa il silenzio? Indagine nazionale sui costi economici e sociali della violenza contro le
donne, Intervita, Grafica Aelle snc, 2013.
140
These estimates are based on the Home Office 2018 study which computed unit cost for all crimes. This lack of specificity
means that the potential differences in the long term psychological impact of the relationship between victims and perpetrator
is not taken into account with a potential underestimation of costs.
141
This represents an increase with respect to the 2014 estimates (€225 billion) which were however based on a slightly
different methodology. See EIGE (2014) for details.
142
These estimates demonstrate the direct costs of gender-based violence against women to the victims and to the state public
services, as well as a larger component in terms of long term indirect impact (long term health conditions, lost production and
replication effects).
143
Council of Europe, ‘What causes gender-based violence?’ UN Women (2020), Stereotypes.
144
L. Kelly & N. Westmarland, ‘It’s a work in progress’: men’s accounts of gender and change in their use of coercive
control”, Journal of Gender-Based Violence, 2019.
145
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women, last visited 19/08/2021.
146
‘JRC Science for Policy Report - Insights from behavioural sciences to prevent and combat violence against women’,
cited above. For more, please also see Joint Research Center, ‘Literature references on gender-based violence and domestic
violence prepared for the Gender-based violence and domestic violence initiative’, cited above.
147
M. Jakupcak, D. Lisak & L. Roemer, ‘The role of masculine ideology and masculine gender role stress in men’s
perpetration of relationship violence’, Psychology of Men & Masculinity, Vol. 3(2), 2002, pp. 97–106.
28
women. Tolerant attitudes towards violence against women may be further encouraged by the
social environment, leading to a circle of violence.148
Another key cause of attitudes and behaviour is the lack of a common understanding of
violence against women.149
The 2016 special Eurobarometer on gender-based violence depicts
these problematic assumptions, as 27% of the respondents said that sexual intercourse without
consent may be justified in at least some situations.150
Although most people would agree that
rape is morally wrong (i.e. negative attitude), not all would agree on what constitutes rape.
Tolerant attitudes towards violence against women have also been observed with respect to
some forms of sex-based harassment. In some Member States, tackling sex harassment at
work was not considered a real issue.151
Some forms of violence against women and
domestic violence are sometimes considered a private matter. Thus, in the 2016
Eurobarometer, one in six respondents believed that domestic violence should be handled
within the family. About one in five expressed victim-blaming views, agreeing that women
make up or exaggerate claims. Just under one in five (17%) held that violence against women
is often provoked by the victim, with respondents in the Eastern European Member States the
most likely to agree. 152
2.2.2. Failure to recognise the specificities of crimes and offences relating to violence
against women and domestic violence
Criminal acts of violence against women and domestic violence have specific characteristics,
such as systemic under-reporting, disrupted criminal proceedings153
, the commonly sexual
nature of crimes and a high prevalence of elements of coercive control. Rates of reporting
violence against women and domestic violence to the police are low.154
According to the FRA
2014 survey, victims reported the most serious incident of partner violence to the police
only in 14% of cases and the most serious incident of non-partner violence in 13% of
cases.155
In 2021, FRA confirmed that reporting of violence and harassment in general was
less common than that of other crime, and that reporting crime to the police was less common
148
A. Bandura, Aggression: A social learning analysis, Prentice Hall, 1973.
149
G. Bohner, et al., ‘Rape myth acceptance: Cognitive, affective and behavioural effects of beliefs that blame the victim and
exonerate the perpetrator’, in M. Horvath & J. Brown (eds.), Rape: Challenging contemporary thinking, 2009, pp. 17-45.
150
Respondents were most likely to say this about being drunk or on drugs (12%), voluntarily going home with someone
(11%), wearing revealing, provocative or sexy clothing or not clearly saying no or physically fighting back (both 10%).
151
EELN, Harassment related to Sex and Sexual Harassment Law in 33 European Countries, 2011.
152
Research shows that misreporting of GBV/DV remains marginal. The rate of false reporting for sexual assault has been
estimated to remain in the range of 2-8% (Lonsway, Archambault, Lisak, ‘False Reports: Moving Beyond the Issue to
Successfully Investigate and Prosecute Non-Stranger Sexual Assault’, The National Center for the Prosecution of Violence
Against Women, 2009). Women and men have been found to provide differing accounts of violence, controlling behavior
and injuries, which highlights the need to take into account both parties’ accounts of the violent behaviour (Dobash RP,
Dobash RE, Cavanagh K, Lewis R., ‘Separate and Intersecting Realities: A Comparison of Men’s and Women’s Accounts of
Violence Against Women’, Violence Against Women. 1998; 4(4):382-414).
153
See FRA, Women as victims of partner violence, 2019, at 39, referring to the risk for victims to withdraw their complaint
due to difficulties in reporting and at 45, referring to discontinuance due to lack of evidence.
154
Supra 34; Supra 36; E. Gracia, ‘Unreported cases of domestic violence against women: towards an epidemiology of social
silence, tolerance, and inhibition’, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Vol. 58(7), 2004, pp. 536-537.
155
GBV/DV can typically consist of several violent incidents. See ECtHR, Eremia and others v. The Republic of Moldova,
application no. 3564/11, judgment of 28 August 2013, §54, where the Court acknowledged that ‘the fear of further assaults
was sufficiently serious to cause the first applicant to experience suffering and anxiety amounting to inhuman treatment’.
29
when the perpetrator was a family member or a relative (only 22% of incidents were
reported).156
The reasons for not reporting violence against women and domestic violence are multiple.
They include the trouble involved in reporting an incident if the victim perceives that the
police will not take her seriously or will be unwilling to do anything about the crime.
Furthermore, for around one quarter of victims of sexual violence by a partner or non-partner,
feeling ashamed or embarrassed about what happened was the reason for not reporting the
incident to the police or a support organisation. Victims may also fear retaliation from the
perpetrator or consider the violence a private matter.157
In addition, they may be hesitant to
report an incident perpetrated by a family member or, in cases of sex-based or sexual
harassment at work, a hierarchical superior or a colleague.
The above specificities hamper efforts to effectively address violence against women and
domestic violence. Incidents may be difficult for authorities to address, since victims may not
disclose their experience or withdraw statements and discontinue participation in
investigations or court proceedings. These dynamics interfere with efforts to ensure an
appropriate follow-up within the judicial system or through support mechanisms. They also
underline the need to ensure the accessibility of support regardless of whether the victim has
officially reported the violence.
Due to the specificities of crimes and offences relating to violence against women and
domestic violence, gender-sensitive measures are needed. In their Evaluation Report on
Finland, GREVIO noted that gender-neutral approach in policy making and service
provision is not sufficient and does not provide women victims of violence and domestic
violence effective protection, support and access to justice. GREVIO notes that this may
not always do justice to the particular experiences of women as victims of domestic
violence, who are more frequently and more severely impacted.158
Moreover, the
European Court of Human Rights also requires Member States to adopt a gender-sensitive
approach in their measures to prevent and combat such violence (see Section 6.1 for details).
156
Supra 36.
157
FRA, Women as victims of partner violence – Justice for victims of violent crime, Part IV, 2019, p. 33.
158
GREVIO, Baseline Evaluation Report: Finland, 2019, p. 6, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-report-on-
finland/168097129d).
30
Figure 1 - Problem tree
2.3.2.3. How will the problem evolve?
Based on the evolution of the situation in the past decades, it is unlikely that the prevalence of
all forms of violence against women and domestic violence, as measured through
administrative and survey data, will decrease significantly without additional policy
intervention. All Member States have adopted policy and legislative measures on this kind of
violence, and 21 Member States have taken measures pursuant to their obligations under the
Istanbul Convention. The gaps concerning prevention, protection, access to justice, support
and coordination can however be expected to persist (see Section 3.1.3).159
Stakeholders, such
as non-governmental and international organisations, note that without further action at EU
level, national legislation and practice are unlikely to develop sufficiently and in a
coordinated manner in line with international standards to ensure that the needs of victims of
violence against women and domestic violence are sufficiently addressed throughout the EU
(see Annex 2).
159
As indicated in EPRS, Combating gender-based violence: Cyber violence, 2021.
31
3. 3. Why should the EU act?
3.1.3.1. Legal basis
The initiative pursues the general objective of preventing and combatting violence against
women and domestic violence. As confirmed in Declaration No. 19 on Article 8 of the TFEU,
combatting ‘all kinds of domestic violence’ is part of the Union’s general efforts to eliminate
inequalities between women and men and Member States should take all necessary measures
to prevent and punish these criminal acts and to support and protect the victims.
The initiative would build on the Victims’ Rights Directive and establish minimum standards
on the rights of victims of all forms of violence against women and domestic violence,
constituting a lex specialis to this Directive, in the same way as victims of terrorism and
trafficking have been addressed through specific legislation. It would include measures aimed
at preventing this kind of violence, and ensuring adequate protection, access to justice,
support and coordination before, during or after criminal proceedings by responding to the
specific needs of victims of violence against women and domestic violence. The relevant
legal basis, in line with the Victims’ Rights Directive, would be Article 82(2) TFEU. This
provision provides for the establishment of minimum rules concerning the rights of victims of
crime, to the extent necessary to facilitate mutual recognition of judgments and judicial
decisions and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters having a cross-border
dimension.
In addition, the initiative would introduce minimum standards on the definition of criminal
offences in the areas of crime set out in Art. 83(1) relating to sexual exploitation of women
and children and computer crime. Article 83(1) TFEU allows for the establishment of
minimum rules concerning the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in the areas of
particularly serious crime with a cross-border dimension resulting from the nature or impact
of such offences or from a special need to combat them on a common basis.
It would further introduce, on the basis of Art. 83(2), minimum rules concerning the definition
of serious forms of sexual harassment to ensure effective application of the Gender Equality
Directives, which regulate this matter by providing definitions and requiring prohibitions and
sanctions for sex-based and sexual harassment.160
Article 83(2) provides for the establishment
of minimum rules with regard to the definition of criminal offences and sanctions in an area
which has been subject to harmonisation measures, if the approximation proves essential to
ensure the effective implementation of the Union’s policy in this area. The background
studies conducted for the initiative show that the implementation of the relevant provisions
has not been effective, and sexual harassment continues to remain common in the Member
States.161
In order to ensure effective implementation of the policy, harmonisation measures
with regard to the definition and sanctions of serious forms of sexual harassment are essential
to ensure the effective implementation of the Union’s policy.
160
Directives 2006/54 and 2010/41 are based on the current Article 157(3) TFEU. Directive 2004/113 is based on Article
13(1) TEC (currently Article 19 TFEU). The inclusion of sex-based harassment in these instruments may be considered
ancillary to their respective main objectives.
161
See above, Section 2.1.2 at p. 12 concerning the prevalence and at p. 26 concerning the effects on access to justice.
32
When proposing EU accession to the Istanbul Convention, the Commission took the view that
the appropriate legal bases for action in regard to the matters covered by the Convention are
the Treaty provisions in the fields of judicial cooperation in criminal matters and crime
prevention. In its Opinion on the EU accession of 6 October 2021162
, the CJEU confirmed that
view. The Court takes a broad view on the types of measures that can be adopted on these
legal bases, in particular in the areas of prevention, protection, victim support, and access to
justice163
, as envisaged in this initiative. The Court also clarified that aspects of substantive
criminal law remain the primary responsibility of Member States and that criminalisation of
specific types of conduct remains to a great extent subject to national law. The initiative
takes this into account by proposing criminalisation only to a very limited extent. It would
thus be based on the combined legal basis of Art. 82(2) and 83(1)164
and 83(2) TFEU165
.
These provisions provide for the adoption of directives in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure as the appropriate instrument.
3.2.3.2. Subsidiarity: Necessity of EU action
The continuous EU-wide prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence and
the serious harm caused to individual victims and societies create a special need to combat
such violence on a common basis in the EU. In light of prevalence data and cost estimations,
the impact on European societies is considerable. Millions of EU citizens and persons residing
in the EU are concerned. Violence against women and domestic violence violate the
fundamental rights of citizens and affects gender equality, one of the fundamental values of
the EU.
In addition, cyber violence against women and in intimate partnerships has emerged as a new
form of violence against women and domestic violence, spreading and amplifying beyond
individual Member States. The internet is inherently a cross-border environment, where
content hosted in one Member State can be accessed from another Member State. As noted in
the DSA proposal, interventions by one Member State will be insufficient to solve the
issue.166
In some cases, violence against women and domestic violence includes a physical cross-
border element. On average 8% of women in the EU-27 report having experienced physical
162
Opinion 1/19 of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber); 6 October 2021; A-1/19.
163
See, in particular, points 295 and 297 of the Court’s opinion. The Court further clarifies that EU accession to the Istanbul
Convention would require additional legal bases than those proposed by the Commission, in particular Art. 78(2) TFEU on
asylum and Art. 336 TFEU on the EU’s staff regulations and that the existing legal bases of sexual exploitation and
trafficking of human beings in Art. 83(1) only offer room for criminalisation at EU level to a very limited extent. This
assessment is conducted against the scope of the concluding decisions.
164
See Directive 2011/36 of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its
victims; Directive 2011/93 of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child
pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA.
165
The required prior harmonization in the area of harassment was effected by Directive 2006/54 of 5 July 2006 on the
implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and
occupation; Council Directive 2004/113 of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between men
and women in the access to and supply of goods and services; Directive 2010/41 of 7 July 2010 on the application of the
principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity.
166
European Commission, Commission Staff Working Document: Impact Assessment accompanying the Proposal for a
Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market for Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and
amending Directive 2000/31/EC, SWD(2020) 348 final, 15 December 2020, pp. 35-36.
33
violence in the past five years.167
This corresponds to more than 19 million women in the EU-
27. On average 3% of women victims of all physical violence reported the violence to have
taken place abroad.168
Although it is not possible to establish the precise share, women
victims of violence against women and domestic violence in cross-border situations are likely
to be in the order of several hundreds of thousands in Europe annually, also taking into
account possible underreporting.
In other cases, the cross-border nature may arise at a certain point during proceedings, for
instance, if a suspect flees or a victim moves to another country. Even after criminal
proceedings have concluded with a final judgment imposing a sentence on the defendant in
the Member State of nationality, the case can necessitate judicial cooperation between
Member States.169
Cross-border elements may equally arise when criminal cases are
transferred to another Member State.170
The current initiative not only covers physical cross-border dimensions of violence against
women and domestic violence, but the rights of victims of these crimes in general. In its
opinion of 6 October 2021, the Court broadly lists the measures in the Convention related to
victims’ rights (prevention, protection, support, access to justice) for which the EU has
competence, not presupposing the existence of a physical cross-border element in all
respects of the problem considered.
Within the limits of EU competence as indicated by the CJEU, the issue should be addressed
at EU level in order to ensure a minimum level of protection of victims’ rights and
fundamental rights. The objective is not to achieve harmonised, equal protection everywhere
in the EU, but to establish minimum standards for rights from which all victims of such
violence in the EU should benefit. The existence of minimum standards would also facilitate
the mutual recognition of protection orders and judicial decisions concerning violence across
the EU, thereby supporting a better application of the existing acquis in this area (see section
2.1.2).
3.3.3.3. Subsidiarity: Added value of EU action
All Member States have addressed violence against women and domestic violence in
legislation and policies, as explained in Section 2.1.2. Some Member States have
demonstrated strong commitment to address such violence through innovative and effective
measuring, including during the Covid-19 pandemic.171
Over the last decades, the
acknowledgement of this kind of crime has led to the adoption of specialised national and
167
Supra 36.
168
Supra 36, p. 27.
169
European Commission, Commission Staff Working Paper: Impact Assessment accompanying the Proposal for a Directive
on the rights of access to a lawyer and of notification of custody to a third person in criminal proceedings, SEC(2011) 687
final, p. 23.
170
European Commission, Commission Staff Working Paper: Impact Assessment accompanying the Proposal for a Directive
establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, SEC(2011) 580 final), p. 18.
171
See e.g. European Network on Victims' Rights. Specific measures during COVID-19 crisis, available at
https://envr.eu/specific-measures-during-covid-19-crisis/. For instance, IE has developed an inter-agency plan to address
domestic abuse during this period and ran various awareness-raising campaign, as well as directly contacting victims who
have reported domestic abuse in the past. In MT, law enforcement authorities use social media to share information on how
to act in cases of cyber violence. In PT, channels for victims to seek help were strengthened and diversified.
34
international frameworks. While these measures testify to the existence of the problem, they
have not led to an observable decrease in this kind of violent crime in the EU.
As discussed under Section 2.1.2, the approaches taken by Member States have also not been
sufficiently effective in guaranteeing the safety and protection of victims. The multitude of
national approaches creates legal uncertainty on the rights of victims of violence against
women and domestic violence. The fragmentation is more substantial at regional and local
levels, where differences in access to protection and support services are observed.
The EU already supports the Member States in addressing this kind of violence, but EU-
action has been limited to non-legislative measures (see Section 5.1.1). The funding and
awareness-raising efforts have not been sufficiently effective in decreasing the prevalence of
violence against women and domestic violence as criminal acts. Thus, legislative measures
are necessary for addressing this kind of violent crime in an effective and sustainable
manner.
While the effectiveness of national measures ultimately depends on Member States’ resources
and efforts, EU level action can increase their effectiveness by specifying minimum
standards and adding value in line with good practices and recommendations of
international monitoring bodies and research. EU-legislation on violence against women and
domestic violence would further align the EU legal framework with internationally recognised
norms and permit coordinated action at EU level. It would enable the EU to enact more
specific obligations (see Section 5.3 – description of the policy options) and be a standard-
setter in preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence.172
Through the approximation of criminal definitions and sanctions, it would ensure victims’
access to justice in areas where specific gaps have been identified.173
The initiative would oblige the six Member States who have not ratified the Istanbul
Convention to undertake, to the extent not yet done on their own initiative, measures that
correspond to the minimum level of protection needed to tackle this kind of violence. For the
21 Member States who are parties, the new EU measures fill identified gaps in
implementation and effectiveness and enable further measures to be taken in a coordinated
manner.
While the initiative would be adopted by qualified majority, it would feature a number of
mitigating measures that it could make it acceptable to the six Member States that have not
ratified the Istanbul Convention: in particular, the initiative would be limited in scope to areas
of EU competence, and could clarify concepts prone to misconceptions.174
Further EU action would allow the EU to support Member States in their efforts to implement
their fundamental rights obligations in this field. It would enhance legal certainty by setting
172
For information on measures taken globally, see OECD at https://www.oecd.org/development/sigi-2019-global-report-
bc56d212-en.htm. For recent legislative initiatives outside the EU, see e.g.,
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/17/introduction/enacted; https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R46742.pdf;
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1620/text.
173
See Section 2.1.2 at p. 26, Section 3.1.1.
174
With regard to the misconceptions concerning same-sex marriage, education and reporting by professionals, see European
Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), Opinion No. 961 / 2019, pp. 75-87, available at
https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2019)018-e.
35
minimum standards to ensure that all Member States take measures in all policy areas
regardless of where in the EU the victims find themselves, and that national measures reach
the level that is considered necessary for effectively addressing such violence.
Targeted EU action would create added value in particular by enabling effective monitoring
and enforcement. This is a decisive advantage of EU law, since international human rights
bodies do not have the possibility to launch infringement proceedings against a Member in
cases of non-compliance with the Convention. While Member States may take further
measures to comply with international obligations (notably following periodic reporting to
GREVIO and the CEDAW Committee), the added value of corresponding EU law obligations
would be to ensure compliance more swiftly and effectively. EU-level measures would also
allow for comprehensive EU-level data collection and contribute to a more nuanced
understanding on this kind of violence.
4. 4. Objectives: What is to be achieved?
4.1.4.1. General objectives
The general objective of the initiative is to prevent and combat violence against women and
domestic violence as criminal acts and a form of discrimination between women and men as
part of the European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice foreseen in Title V TFEU.
4.2.4.2. Specific objectives
The initiative pursues a number of specific objectives aimed at responding to the needs of this
group of victims:
- Ensuring effective prevention of violence against women and domestic violence:
ensuring that effective measures are in place to prevent violence against women and
domestic violence, including awareness-raising and information provision, training, work
with perpetrators and the involvement of men and boys.
- Ensuring effective protection of victims of violence against women and domestic
violence: ensuring that effective measures are in place to protect victims from violence
online or offline, at work or in private.
- Ensuring effective access to justice in cases of violence against women and domestic
violence: improving access to justice for victims of violence against women and
domestic violence including through EU-level approximation of criminal definitions and
sanctions related to specifically serious forms of violence against women; effective
remedies for all forms of such violence; as well as by ensuring gender-sensitivity and
respect for the rights of child victims and witnesses.
- Ensuring effective victim support in cases of violence against women and domestic
violence: ensuring the availability of general and specialised support services, in
sufficient numbers and of a high quality, including those addressing the effects of
violence on physical and mental health.
- Ensuring strengthened coordination in preventing and combatting violence against
women and domestic violence: ensuring effective and efficient coordination and
cooperation, including through multi-agency approach and improved data collection on
violence against women and domestic violence.
The intervention logic of the initiative is summarised in Figure 2:
36
Figure 2 - Intervention logic
5. 5. What are the available policy options?
5.1.5.1. What is the baseline from which options are assessed?
5.1.1. Dynamic baseline: EU level measures
Under the baseline scenario, the EU would continue to address violence against women and
domestic violence through the existing EU legislative instruments described in Section
2.1.2. As regards cyber violence against women and between intimate partners, this
framework would be updated by the DSA175
which addresses emerging risks in the online
space, including to women’s safety online, by setting out a horizontal framework for
regulatory oversight, accountability and transparency of intermediary service providers. The
DSA would notably oblige service providers to notify suspicions of serious criminal offences
involving a threat to the life or safety of persons; this would be likely to include content
inciting to serious physical and sexual violence against women, including gender-based
killings of women. The DSA would also oblige very large platforms to undertake risk
assessments concerning fundamental rights, including risks related to non-discrimination. The
DSA, however, does not define what is illegal or criminal. The effectiveness of the
obligations in the DSA thus depends on whether gender-based cyber violence is clearly illegal
in either Member State or in EU law. The Commission would continue to monitor the
implementation of the relevant legislation and, whenever possible, enforce it with regard to
victims of violence against women and domestic violence.
175
European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For
Digital Services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC, COM(2020) 825 final, 15 December 2020.
37
The Commission would further implement the non-legislative measures announced in the
EU Gender Equality Strategy: It would launch an EU network on the prevention of violence
against women and domestic violence, issue a Recommendation on the prevention of harmful
practices against women and girls176
and develop a Code of Conduct between online
platforms and stakeholders to better protect women’s safety online. The Code of Conduct
would provide for self-regulatory measures for service providers to counter illegal and
harmful content which is not always illegal, thus complementing the DSA with non-
legislative measures.
In addition, the Commission would continue to provide funding under the Citizens,
Equality, Rights and Values Programme (CERV)177
to Member States and non-
governmental organisations to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic
violence and conduct communication activities on the issue.178
The Commission has been
taking policy actions and funding national activities in this field, including on prevention and
support services since 1997.179
Initially, the Commission has funded organisations and
projects tackling violence against women and children through the Daphne funding
programme, which was later integrated as a funding stream into the Rights, Equality and
Citizenship (REC) Programme and the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV)
Programme. Based on rough estimates, the Commission has funded over 800 projects to
combat violence against women and children with more than 250 million euros since 1997.
Under the CERV programme, the Commission expects to spend approximately €150 million
through the Daphne strand to tackle violence against women and children throughout the
course of the programme. This represents almost 10% of the total budget of CERV (€1.55
billion).
The EU-level actions of the baseline are likely to remain limited in effect, since they
would constitute a continuation of the policy actions taken by the Commission for
several decades. While important, the baseline policy actions would not suffice to prompt
Member States to step up their national measures on violence against women and domestic
violence and to adequately prevent such violence, protect and support victims, ensure access
to justice and establish better policy coordination. In the absence of further legislation in this
area, the possibilities to enforce the existing EU-level legal measures would remain limited
given the shortcomings outlined above. EU funding under the Daphne strand of the
Citizenship, Equality, Rights and Values programme is essential to support organisations and
projects working on preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic
violence on the ground. However, despite a significant increase in the programme’s budget
and an increased focus on sustainability, the financing of projects and organisations has
inherent limits and cannot replace structural changes in national legislation and state
institutions. The interim evaluation report of the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme
176
In this context, the Commission would also continue to follow the take-up of the Communication on female genital
mutilation. COM/2013/0833 final.
177
https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/portal/screen/programmes/cerv.
178
These measures would be supplemented by those outlined in the EU Strategy on victims’ rights and the EU Strategy on
the Rights of the Child, respectively, to empower victims of GBV/DV and raise awareness about child victims and witnesses
of such violence.
179
(https://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants/results/daphne-toolkit/daphne-toolkit-%E2%80%93-active-resource-daphne-
programme_en, last visited (19/08/2021)). For a description of the upcoming non-legislative measures, see Supra 2.4.
38
shows that in general, the Programme activities are contributing to the achievement of its
objectives, but the impact on specific objectives such as gender equality is quite moderate, as
more structural societal changes are needed.180
5.1.2 Dynamic baseline: Member States measures
The baseline takes into account the evolving situation in the Member States and the national
measures taken to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence.181
The gap analysis covers the relevant national measures regardless of whether taken as a direct
consequence of the country’s ratification of the Istanbul Convention or any other international
obligation, as a result of the applicable EU acquis, or as purely national measures. As set out
in detail in Section 2.1.2 above, there are significant gaps in the legislative and
implementation framework at national level.
While some Member States have demonstrated significant political will and put in place
ambitious measures to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence,
others are lagging behind. Even in Member States where the relevant measures are on a good
level overall, GREVIO has identified room for further development (see the gap analysis in
Annex 8). The studies referred to above confirm that the national measures remain uneven.
This is the situation between those Member States that have ratified Istanbul Convention and
those that have not, but also between the Member States that are parties to it.
As explained above, EU accession to the Istanbul Convention remains uncertain; without it,
there is little incentive for those Member States that have not yet acceded to step up their
national policy response. Member States that are parties to the Convention are required to
improve their legal and policy frameworks following GREVIO’s assessment. However, this is
a lengthy process: Since 2016, GREVIO has completed baseline assessments of 10 EU
Member States and plans to evaluate all states parties by 2027.182
Subsequently, a further
rounds of reporting are foreseen to evaluate the new measures and remaining gaps. GREVIO
reports do not set a timeline for Member States to implement the recommendations; the EU
Member States that have been evaluated so far have not yet implemented all
recommendations. Furthermore, as with all international conventions, the Istanbul Convention
does not have an enforcement mechanism that is comparable to the enforcement mechanisms
under EU law. Thus, while Member States may eventually achieve full compliance with
Istanbul Convention, this is unlikely to cover all EU Member States in the medium term and
would take a lot longer than when supported by the envisaged initiative.
180
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and
the Committee of the Regions on the Interim Evaluation of the Implementation of the Rights, Equality and Citizenship
Programme 2014-2020. 2018. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0508
COM/2018/508 final.
181
In particular, the comparative study conducted by the European network of legal experts analysed the existing legislative
and policy measures taken in each Member State. The national measures were also taken into account in the national research
conducted for the supporting study by the external contractor. Further information was gathered in the written targeted
consultation of the Member States, as well as from other stakeholders.
182
https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention/about-monitoring1.
39
5.2.5.2. Options discarded at an early stage
In a potential non-legislative option, the Commission would have pursued the non-
legislative measures of the baseline and supplement them with a Recommendation on a
gender-sensitive application of the relevant EU law to this group of crime victims. This
would have supported the Member States in implementing the relevant EU obligations in a
manner that is aligned with EU and international best practice from this field. This option was
discarded for reasons of effectiveness. Whereas non-legislative action continues to be an
important element of addressing violence against women and domestic violence, it has limited
effectiveness in terms of affecting the high prevalence of this violent crime in the EU (see
also Sections 3 and 7).
An alternative policy option could have consisted of legislative measures in one or two of
the problem areas. For instance, the initiative could have supplemented the existing
legislative framework and national measures with EU-level legislative measures on
prevention. Prevention measures are vital in addressing the drivers of this kind of violence,
and they are relatively inexpensive in comparison to interventions in other problem areas.
Similarly, additional obligations could be envisaged solely in the area of victim support
and/or coordination, where the Victims’ Rights Directive already includes broad legislative
obligations. Such limited intervention to some problem areas only has equally been discarded
for reasons of effectiveness. Since gaps have been identified in all five problem areas and it is
internationally recommended to adopt a holistic approach to addressing these problems,
action on one or more of the problem areas alone would not be effective in addressing
violence against women and domestic violence.
Yet another policy option would be to amend the relevant 14 instruments of EU law.
However, this would maintain the existing legal fragmentation at EU level and could not fill
the gaps which would not fit under any of those instruments. It would not bring about the
recommended holistic approach. In addition, amendments to the 14 instruments would need to
be embedded in a more general evaluation of those instruments and would be adopted at
different points in time, thus preventing a coordinated and consistent approach. In contrast, a
targeted EU-level instrument dedicated to this group of victims would supplement and
support the application of the above EU standards and lead to improved efficiency of the
current framework. It would create simplification for the benefit of the relevant professionals
and victims by focusing the relevant EU rules in a single instrument in a transparent
manner. In so doing the initiative would follow the approach of other policy areas, where
general EU rules and international obligations have been supplemented by a targeted EU legal
instrument such as on child sexual abuse and trafficking in human beings.
A further policy option could have consisted of a proposal to request the Council to include
gender-based violence as an area of crime that meets the criteria specified in Article 83(1)
TFEU (so-called ‘EU crime’). If adopted with unanimity at the Council, this proposal would
establish a new legal base, which the Commission could subsequently use to propose a
directive to prevent and combat all forms of gender-based violence. The new legal base would
enable the EU to approximate criminal definitions and sanctions related to all forms of
violence against women and domestic violence, and more broadly of gender-based violence.
The establishment of a new EU crime has been assessed as a possible measure under the
access to justice problem area of policy option 2B, because it would differ from the current
40
directive by creating a legal bases for more extensive measures in that problem area. This is
where the report discusses whether a new legal base would create added value or amount to
unnecessary duplication of Member State efforts in comparison to the existing legal bases,
which leave considerable scope for supplementary EU-level criminalisations and allow the
current initiative to fill gaps in this problem area without a new EU crime.
5.3.5.3. Description of the policy options
In line with the political mandate to propose legislative measures with the same aims as the
Istanbul Convention (within the limits of EU competence), the Convention’s standards have
been used as the point of departure for the development of the policy options.
Two policy options are retained for assessment, both of which include a package of minimum
standards aimed at addressing the gaps identified in the prevention and combatting of violence
against women and domestic violence:
Policy option 1 (moderate). This option consists of targeted measures to fill gaps in
the prevention and combatting of violence against women and domestic violence
based on the level of protection required by the Istanbul Convention (in the areas
of EU competence).
Policy option 2 (comprehensive): This policy option builds on the measures outlined
in the moderate option and introduces more comprehensive and detailed measures to
ensure higher minimum standards and facilitate their enforceability and to address
additional gaps, including on cyber violence against women and sexual harassment.
The distinction between sub-option 2A and sub-option 2B consists of further-
reaching obligations, in the latter sub-option, on sexual harassment, access to justice,
victim protection and data collection.
The policy options are built around the five problem areas of prevention, protection from
violence, access to justice, victim support and coordination. This is in line with the
approach followed by the Council of Europe and the United Nations183
, as well as various
Member States184
, and is based on the expert view that coordinated action in these five areas
is necessary to effectively tackle this kind of violence and safeguard the fundamental rights of
victims. The specific measures included in the five problem areas have been chosen in
response to the gaps identified in the various studies and consultations and narrowed down to
those where EU could add value.
Policy option 1 implements the policy measures of the Istanbul Convention at EU level,
ensuring application of its standards (insofar as within EU competence) in all Member States
and addressing gaps identified in existing Member State measures. In the field of prevention,
it requires the Member States to conduct awareness-raising and research towards the general
public and provide information on violence against women and domestic violence; it further
183
See in particular CEDAW, General Recommendations no. 19 and 35; Istanbul Convention, https://rm.coe.int/coe-
istanbulconvention-brochure-en-r03-v01/1680a06d4f.
184
EELN 2021, at 12, 156. The targeted consultation with Member States shows that up to 25 Member States have national
action plans or similar policy instruments in place that apply to violence against women and domestic violence (see Annex
2). Several cover measures from several problem areas (AT, BE, CY, CZ, EE, FI, HR, FR, IE, IT, PT, RO, SE, SI, ES).
41
obliges Member States to set up or maintain perpetrator programmes for participation on a
voluntary basis. Member States would be required to provide specialised training and
information to professionals likely to come into contact with victims of such violence. In the
area of protection, it aims to increase the effectiveness of the cross-border protection
instruments by increasing the effectiveness of national protection measures. To this end, it
includes minimum standards on the availability of emergency barring orders and protection
orders and supplements the Victims’ Rights Directive’s individual needs assessment by
requiring the authorities to assess the seriousness of the threat posed by a reported perpetrator
on a victim’s health and safety. Concerning children, this option requires the Member States
to take into account the best interest of child victims and witnesses in cases of violence
against women and domestic violence, in particular by providing psychosocial counselling,
thus being more explicit than the Victims’ Rights Directive. With regard to the reporting of
violent episodes to the authorities, policy option 1 enhances third party reporting of such
violence and reporting by the relevant professionals. In the area of victim support, policy
option 1 supplements Articles 8 and 9 of the Victims’ Rights Directive by requiring Member
States to provide comprehensive specialised support to this group of victims. It requires them
to establish rape crisis centres to victims of sexual violence, provide for shelters and establish
and maintain a national helpline for victims of violence against women. As regards
coordination, policy option 1 encourages Member States to participate in regular survey data
collection at EU-level following up on the FRA 2014 violence against women survey and the
ongoing Eurostat survey on gender-based violence. It likewise obliges them to regularly
collect relevant administrative data. Finally, policy option 1 encourages cooperation between
and multi-agency service provision by the relevant national authorities and non-governmental
organisations.
Policy option 2A includes the measures of policy option 1, but goes further in introducing
obligations in the area of cyber violence against women and in intimate partnerships, which is
not explicitly covered by the Convention’s wording. It additionally introduces further rules on
sexual harassment, thus aligning EU law also with the standards set by the ILO Violence and
Harassment Convention.
Sub-option 2A additionally strengthens some of the obligations and enables political choice
exceeding the level of the Istanbul Convention. In particular, policy option 2A makes
perpetrator programmes mandatory for reoffenders. It makes the targeted training of relevant
categories of professionals mandatory, and requires Member States to ensure that managers
undergo training on preventing and combatting sexual harassment at work. They would
likewise be obliged to ensure that such harassment is addressed in national policies and risk
assessments. Sub-option 2A strengthens the efficiency of the standards by including minimum
standards on the issuance, conditions and enforcement of emergency barring orders and
protection orders, aimed at enhancing their effectiveness at national level. With regard to
ensuring the safety of children in situations of violence, policy option 2A requires Member
States to establish specific safe places where meetings can be organised between a child and a
family member with regard to whom allegations of this kind of violence have been made. The
option strengthens the reporting measures by requiring Member States to establish easy and
accessible reporting mechanisms, including in an online format and in a child-friendly
manner. In the area of access to justice, the option builds on the procedural rights of the
42
Victims’ Rights Directive and establishes the right of victims to obtain full compensation
from the perpetrator in a single procedure.
Concerning support services, policy option 2A requires Member States to facilitate access to
specialised support for groups at a higher risk of such violence, such as victims with
disabilities and migrant and asylum seeking victims, as well as to organise support in a child-
friendly manner. It likewise contains obligations on victim support in cases of sexual
harassment at work and cyber violence against women. Policy option 2A deepens the data
collection obligations by making participation into regular EU-level survey data collection
obligatory, and introducing minimum requirements on harmonised administrative data
collection. In the field of coordination, policy option 2A requires coordinated one-stop
information provision on the relevant services.
Lastly, policy option 2B further builds on the previous policy options and supplements some
of the previous measures with a view to reaching utmost effectiveness. In the area of access to
justice, the policy option aims to create a new legal base for minimum rules with regard to the
definition of offences and sanctions by proposing to add gender-based violence on the list of
the so-called EU crimes in Article 83(1) TFEU. It would moreover strengthen the existing
obligations on state compensation to victims, establish a binding threshold for shelter
provision and oblige Member States to provide the relevant services through a one-stop
mechanism.
The main policy measures contained in each option are set out in more detail below.
43
Table 5.1.: Summary of options considered in addition to the baseline, with main measures
Problem
area
Option 1 – Moderate measures Option 2 – Comprehensive measures
N.B. All measures come in addition to the baseline and the measures under
option 1
Sub-option 2A
Sub-option 2B
Measures
1.Ensuring
effective
prevention
of
VaW/DV
Obligation on MS to provide
targeted information to and raise
awareness of the general public.
Obligation on MS to provide targeted
information to and raise the awareness of
groups at risk185
.
Same as 2A
Obligation on MS to have
perpetrator programmes in place.
Obligation on MS to make available
voluntary perpetrator programmes to all
those at risk of offending and mandatory
programmes for re-offenders.
Obligation on MS to make available
voluntary perpetrator programmes to
all those at risk of offending and
mandatory programmes for all
offenders.
Obligation on MS to provide
specialised training and targeted
information to professionals
likely to come into contact with
victims and managers.
Obligation on MS to provide -
specialised, regular and mandatory
training to professionals likely to come
into contact with victims; and -
mandatory training to managers on
sexual harassment at work and the
effects of domestic violence on the
workplace.
Same as 2A
Obligation on MS to ensure that sexual
harassment at work is addressed in
national policies. Obligation on MS to
ensure that company risk assessments
cover sexual harassment at work.
Same as 2A
2.Protection
Obligation on MS to ensure
availability of emergency barring
orders and protection orders.
Obligation on MS to ensure efficiency
through minimum standards on the
issuance, conditions and enforcement
of emergency barring orders and
protection orders.
Same as 2A
Obligation on MS to conduct risk
assessments on the seriousness of
the threat of violence to victims.
Obligation on MS to conduct risk
assessments speedily and in cooperation
with support services.
Same as 2A
Obligation to provide age-
appropriate psychosocial
counselling to child victims and
witnesses of domestic violence
Obligation on MS to ensure the
protection of children by providing for
surveyed safe places for visits in case of
allegations of domestic violence.
Same as 2A
3.
Ensuring
effective
access
to
justice
in
cases
of
VaW/DV
EU-level criminalisations:
Additional approximation of criminal
definitions and sanctions on the basis of
the legal bases of computer crime (ICT-
facilitated cyber violence), sexual
exploitation (certain forms of sexual
violence), and serious forms of sexual
harassment.
EU level criminalisations:
Introduction of violence against
women and domestic violence as a
new EU crime.
185
As defined in Section 2.2.1.
44
Obligation on MS to encourage
reporting of violence by third
parties
Obligation on MS to ensure easy and
accessible reporting, including child
friendly reporting mechanisms and
online reporting.
Same as 2A
Right of victims to obtain full
compensation from the perpetrator in one
single procedure and within adequate
time limits.
Suboption A + Obligation on MS to
provide state compensation in cases
where victims cannot obtain
compensation from the perpetrator or
other sources.
4.
Ensuring
effective
victim
support
in
VaW/DV
Beside general support services,
obligation on MS to ensure a
comprehensive and holistic
specialised support to victims
(including rape crisis centres,
shelters and national helpline).
Obligation on MS to facilitate access to
specialised support services to groups at
risk, such as children, migrant and
asylum seeking women and women with
disabilities. Connect national helplines to
EU-level helpline
Suboption A + Obligation on MS to
provide 1 shelter space for 10,000
inhabitants.
Obligation on MS to provide specific
support to victims of sexual harassment
at work (including medical care and
complaint mechanisms).
Suboption A + obligation on MS
special compensated leave for
workers victim of violence against
women or domestic violence.
Obligation on MS to establish both on-
and offline support for victims of cyber
violence against women.
Same as 2A
5.
Ensuring
strengthened
coordination
in
preventing
and
combatting
VaW/DV
Measures strengthening multi-
agency cooperation.
Obligation to provide one-stop online
access to relevant protection and
support services. Encouragement to
locate support services in the same
premises.
Obligation on MS to locate multi-
agency support services for victims
in the same premises.
Voluntary participation in surveys
coordinated at EU-level.
Obligatory participation in surveys
coordinated at EU-level
Same as 2A
Obligation to regularly collect
disaggregated relevant
administrative data.
Data collection:
Obligation to regularly collect
disaggregated relevant administrative
data in line with a number of harmonised
minimum requirements.
Data collection:
Integrated centralised data collection
system at national level.
While option 1 would limit EU action to implementing Istanbul Convention standards through
EU law, in matters relating to EU competence, the added value of option 2 (under both sub-
options 2A and 2B) is double. First of all, option 2 contains targeted measures on cyber
violence against women and sexual harassment at work, which are not specifically
addressed in the Istanbul Convention. Secondly, the measures under option 2 have been
developed in comparison to the standards of the Istanbul Convention in order to ensure a
better implementation in line with good practices and recommendations recognized by
international experts in the field and international bodies such as GREVIO and in the UN.
With respect to the first main added value, since the drafting of the Istanbul Convention,
cyber violence against women and in intimate partnerships has become a common
phenomenon which requires targeted action. Such violence is also an area where legal gaps
have been identified in the legal network study. Finally, action in this area is needed to ensure
effective implementation of the future DSA. While the DSA regulates online platforms’
responsibilities, including with regard to illegal content, it does not define such content. By
45
including a definition of cyber violence against women and between intimate partners at EU
level186
, including of offences concerning non-consensual sharing of intimate or private
images, content and cyber stalking, the initiative would ensure that the requirements foreseen
by the DSA can be fully applied to this kind of illegal content across the EU.
With respect to sexual harassment at work, a more targeted action than that contained in the
Istanbul Convention is triggered by the adoption, in 2019, of the ILO Convention no. 190.
The inclusion of specific measures on this matter therefore aim at bringing EU law more in
line with recent international standards.
Regarding the second main added value, i.e. a better implementation of the standards of
the Istanbul Convention in line with good practices and recommendations identified by
experts and expert bodies from the Council of Europe (GREVIO) and the United Nations, the
measures have been designed in the five problem areas because of two main reasons. Firstly,
gaps have been identified in all five areas, going from a lack of effective prevention
measures such as targeted information provision and access to perpetrator programmes, to
prosecutorial guidelines on this kind of violence for judges or access to shelters. Secondly, as
recognized in the Istanbul Convention and all stakeholders, all five areas must be addressed to
ensure a comprehensive approach to tackle gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence, as well as to protect and support the victims and survivors.
In light of the above, the presented policy packages present the most relevant, comprehensive
and coherent approach to address violence against women and domestic violence in areas of
EU competence and with regard to identified gaps. They present the political choice of
adopting in EU law the level of the standards of the Istanbul Convention (defined by what has
been feasible at the international level in 2010) or deciding to take into account recent
developments in the areas of cyber violence against women and in intimate partner relations
and sexual harassment as well as good practices and recommendations resulting from a
review of the existing implementations. Within this latter option, the two sub-options present
the choice between less or more far-reaching measures.
6. 6. What are the impacts of the policy options?
This chapter assesses the impacts of the two policy options (and sub-options) in terms of their
fundamental rights impact, social impact and economic impact. Some tangible impacts can be
assessed quantitatively, but the central aspect of this initiative is to strengthen the fundamental
rights of those affected by violence against women and domestic violence, some elements of
which cannot be monetised. The aim of the initiative is not only to reduce prevalence of
violence through prevention, but also to ensure fundamental rights of the women victims
of violence and victims of domestic violence and to diminish negative societal impacts and
improve victims’ quality of life.
186
The envisaged definition would refer to any act of gender-based violence against women that is committed in part or fully
by the use of information and communication technologies, such as mobile phones and smartphones, the internet, social
media platforms or e-mail. It draws on the upcoming General Recommendation on the digital dimension of violence against
women of GREVIO, to be issued later this year and is based on the work of the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention
Committee “Working Group on cyberbullying and other forms of online violence, especially against women and children”.
46
6.1.6.1. Fundamental rights
Violence against women and domestic violence have been recognised to impact negatively a
number of human rights.187
Pursuant to Article 6(3) of the TEU, fundamental rights, as
guaranteed by the ECHR, constitute part of EU law as general principles;188
moreover, the
European Court of Human Rights’ (‘ECtHR’) jurisprudence is taken into account in
interpreting corresponding rights of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (‘CFR’). The ECtHR
has established comprehensive obligations on states parties to prevent, investigate and punish
this kind of violence and effectively protect victims.
All policy options are expected to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights, but to a
different degree. Negative fundamental rights impacts have not been identified for either
option or sub-option.
Option 1 builds on the rights provided to crime victims under EU law and specifies their
modalities of application to victims of violence against women and domestic violence in line
with international obligations. Option 2 sets out more extensive obligations, thus providing
more extensive protection to victims. It includes specific measures against cyber-violence and
sexual harassment, in particular at work. Sub-option 2B foresees further-reaching obligations
as for victims compensation and support that increase the positive impact on fundamental
rights. The impact of the two options and the sub-options on individual fundamental rights is
summarised in the table below, with ‘(+)’ pointing to a slightly better performance than the
baseline, and ‘+++’ pointing to the the best performance among the options.
Fundamental Rights Policy
option 1
Policy option 2
Sub-option A Sub-option B
Right to life + ++ ++(+)
Right to integrity/prohibition of degrading
treatment; right to private and family life
+ ++ +++
Rights of the child + ++ ++
Prohibition of discrimination + ++ ++
Rights of older people and people with
disabilities
+ ++ ++
Right to social assistance and healthcare + ++ ++
Right to an effective remedy and a fair trial + ++ +++
Right to fair and just working conditions + ++ +++
Right to life (Article 2 CFR), right to integrity (Article 3 CFR) and prohibition of
inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4 CFR), right to private and family life
187
The United Nations consider violence against women as a form of gender-based discrimination and invited UN Member
States to exercise ‘due diligence to prevent, investigate and, in accordance with national legislation, punish acts of violence
against women, cf Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women. Proclaimed by General Assembly resolution
48/104 of 20 December 1993, available at:
(https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/violenceagainstwomen.aspx); R.J.A. McQuigg, “Domestic Violence as
a Human Rights issue: Rumor v. Italy”, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 26(4), 2016, pp. 1010-1012, 1016,
1021.
188
Articles 51(1), 52(3) of the Fundamental Rights Charter.
47
(Article 7 CFR): These rights are particularly relevant for acts of this kind of violence, in
particular in cases of physical VaW/DV which, at most serious, can lead to the death of the
victim. Both policy options would have a positive impact on these rights because they foresee
measures to strengthen the protection of persons at risk of violence against women and
domestic violence. Both options would require Member States to conduct a risk assessment of
the seriousness of the threat posed by a prospective perpetrator to the potential victim, taking
into account all relevant circumstances, e.g. if the perpetrator owns weapons. Both options
also oblige Member States to ensure the availability of protection orders for all forms of this
kind of violence.189
Option 2 would further improve the efficiency of national protection
orders by establishing minimum standards for the issuance, conditions and enforcement of
emergency barring orders in case of imminent threats to the victim’s life or integrity. Both
options would likewise contribute to establishing effective criminal law provisions on
violence against women and domestic violence, thereby deterring offences and allowing for
effective punishment; the ECtHR considers that this is a key part of Member States’
obligations to ensure protection of the above-mentioned rights.190
Option 2A would
criminalise at EU level certain forms of violence against women and domestic violence on
existing legal bases. Option 2B would also introduce violence against women and domestic
violence as a new area of EU crime under Article 83 TFEU, which can be expected to have a
deterrent effect on potential perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence.
Moreover, both options include training for professionals likely to come into contact with
victims of violence against women and domestic violence, thereby increasing their ability to
recognise this kind of violence and to respond with diligence.191
Option 2 would go further
by making the training mandatory and regular. Both options would facilitate the reporting of
violence against women and domestic violence by encouraging reporting by third parties.
Rights of the child (Article 24 CFR): Article 24 CFR grants children the right to such
protection and care as is necessary for their well-being, and provides that the child's best
interests have to be a primary consideration in all actions relating to children, as well as the
right of the child to be heard and to maintain on a regular basis a personal relationship and
direct contact with both parents, unless that is contrary to the child’s interests.192
Both options
can be expected to have a positive impact on these rights by imposing specific measures to
protect and support child victims and witnesses of violence against women and domestic
violence. Both options require Member States to handle cases of violence against women and
domestic violence in a manner that ensures the best interest of the child, to recognise child
189
The ECtHR found violations of the right to life in cases of domestic violence, when the authorities knew or ought to have
known of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual, and failed to take measures within
their powers which, judged reasonably, might have avoided that risk, see: ECtHR, Opuz v. Turkey, Application No.
33401/02, Judgment, 9 June 2009, §128; ECtHR, Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, Application No. 25965/04, Judgment, 7
January 2010, §§218-219; ECtHR, Branko Tomašić and Others v. Croatia, Application No. 46598/06, Judgment, 15 January
2009, §§ 49-51.
190
ECtHR, Buturugă v. Romania, application No. 56967/15, judgment of 11 February 2020. Also ECtHR, Volodina v.
Russia (no. 2), application no. 40419/19, judgment of 14 September 2021, at 50, 56-58, 68, finding e.g. that certain acts of
cyberviolence can be sufficiently serious to require a criminal-law response.
191
ECtHR, Opuz v. Turkey, Application No. 33401/02, Judgment, 9 June 2009, §200; ECtHR, Tërshana v. Albania,
Application No. 48756/14, Judgment, 4 August 2020, §160; ECtHR, Kurt v. Austria, Application No. 62903/15, Judgment,
15 June 2021 (Grand Chamber), §172.
192
Also Article 19 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
48
witnesses as victims of violence against women and domestic violence and to provide age-
appropriate psychosocial counselling, which will positively impact on the right of the child to
be heard. Option 2 additionally obliges authorities to ensure that visits of children can take
place in surveyed safe spaces outside the home of an alleged perpetrator. Such arrangements
would have a strong positive impact on safeguarding the best interests of the child.
Right to an effective remedy and a fair trial (Article 47 CFR): Both options strengthen the
right to an effective remedy for victims of violence against women and domestic violence. In
addition to introducing EU-level criminalisations as discussed above, both options foresee
measures to ensure more effective investigation and prosecution of violence against women
and domestic violence. Both options provide, for EU-level criminalisations, that prosecuting
authorities should pursue certain offences of violence against women and domestic violence
on their own motion and as a matter of public interest, even if the victim does not lodge a
complaint or withdraws the initial complaint in the course of the proceedings.193
Together
with the protection measures, these can be expected to further tackle the delays in
investigation, prosecution and adjudication of violence against women and domestic violence
cases. In addition, option 2 obliges Member States to issue guidelines on violence against
women and domestic violence to law enforcement and judicial authorities, which would help
them to more effectively address it, apply consistent procedures and strengthen cooperation
with other agencies to ensure safety and offender accountability. Together with the training
for professionals, these measures can be expected to facilitate victims’ access to justice.
Both options likewise improve the availability of compensation to victims. Option 1 requires
Member States to provide information on how compensation may be accessed. Option 2A
would strengthen the right by establishing a right to full compensation from the perpetrator
and ensure that victims can obtain compensation in one single procedure (avoiding secondary
victimisation). Option 2B would ensure access to compensation by the state where no
compensation can be obtained from the perpetrator or other sources, beyond what currently
exists in EU law. Option 2 also introduces low-threshold online reporting of incidents of
violence against women and domestic violence, which would facilitate the reporting by
victims.
Non-discrimination and equality between women and men (Articles 21 and 23 CFR):
Both options acknowledge violence against women and domestic violence as prohibited
discrimination between women and men, thereby aligning EU law with international
standards,194
and expanding victim’s access to anti-discrimination law remedies. Both options
would also have a positive impact in mitigating the risk of this kind of violence for persons in
vulnerable situations and groups at a heightened risk195
through the improved protection,
support and access to justice. Additionally, option 2 obliges authorities to conduct targeted
awareness-raising and information provision activities to reach out to groups at risk and to
193
See ECtHR, cf Opuz v. Turkey, §145.
194
CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 19; CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 35; ECtHR, Opuz v. Turkey, cited
above, §200.
195
Such as women from ethnic minorities, women living in rural areas, women migrants and asylum seekers, women sex
workers and women detainees, see e.g. Council of Europe, Combating violence against women: minimum standards for
support services, 2008, pp. 8-13.
49
facilitate their access to support services. It would therefore have a more positive impact on
the right to non-discrimination. In the same way, both options would strengthen, for example,
the rights of older persons in cases of intergenerational domestic violence (Article 25 CFR),
and the integration of persons with disabilities (Article 26 CFR), again with option 2
having a more positive impact for the reason set out just above.
Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35 CFR): Option 1 requires
Member States to provide specialist services to women victims of violence against women
and domestic violence such as immediate medical support, the collection of forensic medical
evidence in cases of rape and sexual assault, short and long-term psychological counselling
and trauma care. This reinforcement of specialist services would have high positive impacts
on the rights to social assistance and health care. Both options require Member States to
provide specialist support services to victims of sexual violence, which can be expected to
significantly contribute to the effective access to these services by victims of violence against
women. The effectiveness of the measures would be further enhanced by the guidelines to
health and social service providers foreseen in option 2. In response to the widely noted
shortage of shelters, particularly in remote and rural areas, option 1 and option 2A oblige
Member States to provide shelters in sufficient numbers and in an accessible manner, without
imposing a minimum threshold. Option 2B specifies that Member States shall provide 1
shelter space per 10,000 inhabitants (as recommended by the Council of Europe). Since the
provision of shelters plays a vital role to protect victims from (further) acts of violence, option
2B, to the extent that Member States would not have voluntarily reached the threshold, would
provide higher protection for victims in this regard. Option 2B would also have a higher
impact on access to social assistance and health care by granting special compensated leave
from work for victims of violence against women and domestic violence and ensuring that
victims can access all relevant services in the same premises.
Right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31 CFR): Both sub-options of option 2
would reinforce the victims’ right to fair and just working conditions by introducing specific
provisions on sexual harassment at work. The combination of awareness raising and Member
State obligations on reporting would encourage more victims to report harassment and seek
redress, thereby discouraging such behaviour in the long-term.
Other rights: The measures on access to justice elements would carefully take into account
the presumption of innocence and right of defense (Article 48 FRC), in particular
regarding the approximation of definitions and sanctions at EU-level. Both options take into
account the perspective of suspected and accused persons and do not affect the application of
defense rights by national courts.196
Both options are likewise in line with the principles of
legality and proportionality of criminal offences and penalties (Article 49 FRC).
196
See Council of Europe, Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Right to a fair trial (criminal
limb), available at https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_6_criminal_ENG.pdf, at 525-529, finding that while a fair
balance must be struck between the parties, in criminal proceedings concerning sexual offences, rights of the defense do not
prevent measures being taken for the protection of victims as regards in particular the examination of witnesses and other
victim protection measures.
50
6.2.6.2. Social impacts
All policy options contribute to alleviating the social impacts of violence against women and
domestic violence described in Chapter 2 to a different degree. These positive impacts affect
various stakeholders, namely victims, witnesses, perpetrators, companies, national authorities
and the wider society. Social impacts are assessed in this section only qualitatively by
stakeholder. A detailed description by measure is in Annex 5. Estimates of some of these
outcomes are included in the next section on the economic impacts, where the benefits of the
options are quantified as the induced reduction of the current socio-economic costs of
violence against women and domestic violence (see section 6.3.1).
Both options would improve the baseline and improve victims’ health, safety and quality of
life (especially through the measures on protection and support), while contributing to
changing harmful social norms and behaviors through prevention. This would result for
instance in a reduction of psychological trauma for victims and better psychological,
behavioural and physical consequences for survivors, since violence against women and
domestic violence victimisation is associated with increased smoking, substance use, and
risky sexual behaviours. It can also lead to depression, post-traumatic stress and other anxiety
disorders, sleep difficulties, eating disorders, and suicide attempts. Finally, intimate partner
violence in pregnancy also increases the likelihood of miscarriage, stillbirth, pre-term delivery
and low birth weight of babies.197
All options would increase victims’ and witnesses’ awareness of and access to relevant
information on the available protection and support, and facilitate more active participation in
society, including in the labour market, including entrepreneurship. This could be particularly
beneficial for people from disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds or victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination, e.g. due to migrant background or disability. Targeted
protection measures and support services to child victims and witnesses are expected to
decrease violence against women and domestic violence against these groups.198
All options would ensure that support services provided to victims of violence against women
and domestic violence be based on an understanding of the victim’s specific needs and be
available and accessible for all victims. Measures, such as specialist support services for
survivors of sexual violence and ensuring a sufficient amount of beds in shelters, may be
expected to have significant social impact. Option 2B would have the greatest impact in that it
would set a mandatory standard on shelter availability.
Measures on intervention programmes for perpetrators are expected to have a positive
impact on the latter’s attitudes and behaviour. Also more appropriate sanctions against illegal
behaviour would act as a deterrent to those at risk of offending. Option 2 would have a
stronger impact on perpetrators, because it would foresee not only voluntary treatment
programmes but also mandatory participation for repeated offenders or (option 2B) all
197
Research and Statistics Division Department of Justice Canada, Nadine Wathen, 2012, “Health Impacts of Violent
Victimization on Women and their Children”. A. Morrison, M. Ellsberg & S. Bott (2007), Addressing Gender-Based
Violence: A Critical Review of Interventions.
198
UNODC, INSPIRE: Seven Strategies for Ending Violence Against Children.
51
offenders. In addition, it would specifically address the growing phenomenon of cyber
violence, as well as sexual harassment, thus providing a more targeted approach than option 1.
Measures on sexual harassment, in particular at work (option 2) would increase awareness,
better understanding and support for workers who are victims of harassment and abuse. This
would allow developing a safe work environment and therefore have positive impact on
productivity, also linked to lower sick leaves. These benefits are expected to be higher than
the limited costs linked to the implementation of the envisaged measures (see section 6.3.2).
Even already functional and respectful workplaces would benefit from recognition of a
broader support offered to employees and a better work environment.
Finally, both options are likely to have a positive impact for national authorities. They
would bring about clear political messaging concerning the social unacceptability of violence
against women and domestic violence and address the problem of legal fragmentation and
uncertainties. They would ensure a strong policy framework, based on strengthened
coordination and cooperation between the law enforcement, the judiciary and the social and
health services. The expected benefits largely offset the costs linked to the implementation of
some of these measures (see section 6.3). Option 1 is likely to have stronger political support,
even if some reluctance because of the cost implications and political discourse around
gender-related matters could be expected, particularly in the countries that have not ratified
the Istanbul Convention. This applies even more to option 2, , as it goes, on some points,
beyond the standards set out in the Istanbul Convention and may therefore require higher
investments in some Member States (see point 6.3 below).
Both options are also expected to have a positive impact on society as a whole, as they would
increase the recognition of abusive behaviour and reduce the acceptance of such behaviour
among the general public, thus contributing to a safer environment for women and other
potential victims, as well as improving public health. Both policy options are also expected to
lead to an increase in cases detected, reported, prosecuted and sanctioned, leading to
improved justice across society.
6.3.6.3. Economic impact
The current cost to society of violence against women and domestic violence amounts to €290
billion per year.199
EIGE computed these costs by extrapolating the costs computed by the
Home Office for UK. The extrapolation of costs to the EU is impacted by differences in
prevalence rates across Member States, both in surveys and in reported cases, and differences
in government expenditures and in the cost of services (and so implicitly by their efficiency)
compared to the UK system. However, the largest part of these costs (around 56%) are due to
199
EIGE, Report on the costs of gender-based violence in the EU,
EIGE (2021), The costs of gender based violence in the European Union: Report, Publications Office of the European Union,
Luxembourg. These costs do not include the societal costs of gender-based cyber-violence, which have been estimated at
€49-89 billion (N. Lomba, C. Navarra, M. Fernandes, Combating Gender-based Violence: Cyber Violence, briefing, EPRS,
European Parliament, 2021) as well as other broader not quantifiable indirect social costs e.g. lack of trust in institutions, fear
of crime,…
52
psychological, emotional and physical damage that are comparable across Member States.200
Moreover, a sensitivity check, based on the relative prevalence of violence against women in
the EU and where Member States are compared to the UK (on which the calculations are
based) allows to verify the overall magnitude of the costs of violence against women.
Weighing the costs of violence against women based on FRA (2014) data, we obtain an
overall cost of €278 billion.
Similar studies have been conducted in single countries. For example, a study on the cost of
violence against women in Italy201
placed this cost at €24.5 billion. Direct costs for healthcare
are relatively bigger than in the UK study, but overall the loss due to emotional and physical
damages represents a bigger share of the total costs (86%). An earlier study on Sweden
(2006), focusing on intimate-partner violence (and not considering loss in the quality of life),
placed the costs at about €330 million.
Both options are expected to reduce the cost of violence by inducing a reduction in the
prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence in the EU through prevention,
protection, access to justice, support and inter-agency coordination. The related cost reduction
is the expected benefit of the intervention and is analysed in the following sections. Further
sections analyse the direct cost implications.
6.3.1 Estimated benefits: reduction of costs of violence
The support study estimates the economic benefits of policy options 1 and 2 (and sub-options)
by assessing the reduction of the different items which make up the overall cost to
society of violence against women and domestic violence: direct cost of services (to
victims or to public service providers); lost economic output; and the physical and
emotional impacts measured as a reduction in the quality of life under two different
scenarios of decrease of violence against women and domestic violence. The expected impact
of the two policy options depends mainly on their potential to reduce the prevalence of
violence against women and domestic violence in the short and the long run.
This approach is aligned with research202
conducted by the European Parliament Research
Service (EPRS). However, other than the EPRS research which focuses on establishing
gender-based violence as a new EU crime, the proposed policy options take a holistic
approach, as advocated by stakeholders,203
and foresee a comprehensive set of measures in the
200
The computation of the unit cost of crimes in 2018 Home office study (Heeks, M., Reed, S., Tafsiri, M. and Prince, S.
(2018), The Economic and Social Costs of Crime – Second edition, Research report 99, Home Office, London) is carried out
for all types of crimes. This lack of specificity means that the relationship between victim and perpetrator is not taken into
account. Since this could be an important element, particularly as for the long term consequences of domestic violence, the
emotional and psychological impact is likely to be underestimated. Moreover, the study computes the loss of productivity of
victims as the value of hours of work lost by employed victims, taking into account the likelihood of them suffering specific
injuries. As a consequence, the long term impact in terms of labour market efficiency is not taken into account.
201
(How much does silence cost? National survey on economic and social costs of violence against women) Quanto costa il
silenzio? Indagine nazionale sui costi economici e sociali della violenza contro le donne, Intervita, 2013.
202
“Gender-based violence as a new area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU - European added value assessment”,
European Parliament Research Service, 2021. The report computes the possible impact of introducing GBV as a new area of
crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU as the expected yearly economic benefits in the short and in the long run due to a
reduction on the social cost of violence against women. The EPRS report assumes that a policy intervention would decrease
GBV/DV prevalence by 10% in the short run (after about five years from the start of implementation) and 20-30% after about
10 years. The reduction is estimated at about €25.1 billion and in the long run of a reduction between €54.4 and €83.9 billion.
203
Various stakeholders from Member States, international organisations, NGOs to social partners were consulted through
targeted consultation during May-July 2021. See Annex 2.
53
areas of prevention, protection, access to justice, support and coordination. They should
therefore in principle lead to a higher reduction of prevalence compared to the option
examined by the EPRS. Nevertheless, this assessment takes a conservative approach due to
the limited research on the impact of legislation on reduction of prevalence of violence
against women and domestic violence. In addition, this approach considers that, due to
underreporting, there is likely to be an increase in reported prevalence rates in the beginning
and therefore lower net benefits. This initial increase in costs is, however, actually a positive
effect of the initiative. To sum up, in order to provide a more realistic assessment, this impact
assessment assumes that the expected impact of the initiative would not exceed the EP’s
estimated overall reduction of violence against women and domestic violence linked to its
potential introduction as a new area of crime.
Given the low number of impact assessments of measures against violence against women
and domestic violence overall and in particular for the EU context, reference is made mostly
to examples from the USA. According to WHO estimates for 2018, the intimate-partner
violence prevalence rates for the US are slightly higher than in the EU27: 26% against an
average for the EU27 countries of around 18% for intimate-partner violence lifetime
prevalence and 6% against 4.4 % for 12 month intimate-partner violence. This suggests that
referring to US outcomes does not overestimate the results for the EU.
The (5-year) short-term impact assumption is based on estimated impact204
of the introduction
of the US Violence Against Women Act of 1994 on annual rates of criminal victimisation of
women. Moreover, protection measures, such as the availability of protection orders and
enhanced reporting opportunities of violence against women and domestic violence, have
been shown to be associated with a 34%205
and 40%206
reduction in the risk of repeated
victimisation through, for example, continuing domestic violence. Similarly, based on an
assessment of the US National Crime Victimization Survey, the use of victim services was
shown to be associated with a 40% reduction in the risk of repeated victimisation.207
The (10 years) long-term assumption is based on an assessment of two main studies:
 Analysis based on Demographic and Health Surveys data for selected countries in the
global south finds that each additional year that a country has had domestic violence
legislation in place208
is correlated with a 2% decrease in prevalence.
 Analysis based on FRA data for 2014 finds that women living in EU Member States
that undertook legislative action before 2005 had a 40% lower probability of
204
Clark, K. A., Biddle, A. K., & Martin, S. L. (2002), 'A cost-benefit analysis of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994',
Violence Against Women, 8(4), pp. 417-428.
205
Protection Orders Protect Against Assault and Injury: A Longitudinal Study of Police-Involved Women Victims of
Intimate Partner Violence: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151113/
206
The Effects of Arrest, Reporting to the Police, and Victim Services on Intimate Partner Violence:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022427816678035
207
Ibid.
208
Klugman et al, Voice and Agency: Empowering Women and Girls for Shared Prosperity, The World Bank, 2014.
54
victimisation compared to women living in EU Member States that took legislative
action more recently.209
Due to lack of evidence quantifying the causal link between the full set of measures under
both policy options, different long-term and short-term impacts were tested.
a) Benefits of option 1
Based on a reduction rate of 15% (short-term) and 20% (long-term) respectively, the expected
total economic benefit of option 1 is estimated to be in the short-term €39.6 billion per year
and €53.1 billion in the long-term (see Annex 5 for more information).
b) Benefits of option 2 – Sub-options 2A and 2B
Option 2A envisages more specific measures on prevention, protection, access to justice and
support, but also more targeted measures on specific types of violence (including cyber
violence and sexual harassment at work) compared to option 1. The expected impact of option
2A (on prevalence) is therefore expected to be higher than the more moderate option 1.
Assuming a decrease in prevalence rates of 20% (short-term) and 30% (long-term)
respectively, the estimated total economic benefit of option 2A amounts to €53.1 billion in
the short term and to €82.7 billion in the long term (see Annex 5 for more information).
Option 2B would include a targeted criminalisations, extended measures for Member States,
the provision of a high number of shelters and centralised services for victims, as well as
special leave from work compensated at the level of sick leave for all victims of violence
against women and domestic violence and centralized administrative data collection. These
measures are expected to bring an even higher reduction of prevalence, which is assumed to
be 22% (short-term) and 33% (long-term) respectively. The estimated total economic benefit
is therefore €57.8 billion in the short term and €87.6 billion in the long term (see Annex 5
for more information).
6.3.2 Administrative and compliance costs for Member States and employers
Both options imply costs for national authorities and some costs for employers. The total
compliance costs of each of the (sub-)options are summarised in the three tables below. Costs
are presented by problem area and distinguished between one-off development costs and
annual running costs for Member States and employers. These costs are overall significantly
lower than the cost to society currently incurred under the present prevalence of violence
against women and domestic violence.
Table 6.1 Total compliance costs of option 1 by problem area
Problem area One-off development cost
(Millions of euros)
Running cost per annum
(Millions of euros)
Prevention 0.6 20.1 – 22,4
Protection negligible 645.5 – 1,684.4
Access to justice negligible negligible
209
Sanz-Barbero B., Corradi C., Otero-García L., Ayala A., and Vives-Cases C., 'The effect of macrosocial policies on
violence against women: a multilevel study in 28 European countries', International journal of public health, 63(8), 2018, pp.
901- 911.
55
Victim support 25.3 127.9-491.4
Coordination negligible negligible
TOTAL 25.9 793.5-2,198.1
Table 6.2 Total compliance costs of option 2A by problem area
Problem area One-off development cost
(Millions of euros)
Running cost per annum
(Millions of euros)
Prevention 2.4 1923.9-1928.5
Protection negligible 769.4 – 2,014.0
Access to justice negligible 328.5
Victim support 13.6 1,925.2 - 2,288.7
Coordination 0.2 21.1
TOTAL 16.1 4,968.3 – 6,581.4
Table 6.3 Total compliance costs of option 2B by problem area
Problem area One-off development cost
(Millions of euros)
Running cost per annum
(Millions of euros)
Prevention 2.4 1,924.6–1,929.1
Protection negligible 769.5 – 2,014.6
Access to justice negligible 1,897.6
Victim support 136.2 2,438.0 – 8,335.7
Coordination 0.2 24.3
TOTAL 138.7 7,054.1 – 14,201.4
Below is an assessment of the compliance costs caused by the different policy measures by
problem area.
Prevention
Under option 1, it is assumed that all Member States would incur additional costs compared to
the baseline for information provision, awareness-raising and training measures, as the
existing measures in place are not sufficiently targeted to violence against women and
domestic violence. The maximum costs of awareness-raising and providing information are
estimated to be around €4 million for the EU-27. Training on violence against women and
domestic violence to professionals dealing with victims or perpetrators is expected to cause
maximum costs of around €19 million. Finally, this option envisages to make available
voluntary programmes for convicted perpetrators. Given their low overall number and an
expected low take up rate, the additional cost for this measure is estimated in the order of €40
thousand. The supporting study and consultations show that no Member State currently
provides sufficient perpetrator intervention and treatment programmes, though almost all
countries already have some programs in place.
Under option 2A, the Member States would provide targeted information to groups at
heightened risk of violence against women and domestic violence. The total maximum cost is
estimated to be €4.4 million. Option 2A also requires mandatory and regular training to
professionals on online violence against women, which is estimated to cost €2 million. Under
this option, the perpetrator programme is also made mandatory for repeated offenders, with
56
consequently higher costs of around €100 thousand. This compares to the cost of mandatory
training for all convicted offenders included under option 2B that has a cost of around €750
thousand.
Finally, the biggest ticket in the prevention area comes from prevention of sexual harassment
at work and it is only foreseen for Option 2. It is related to mandatory training of managers
and an obligation to set up anti-harassment policies. This would be a two hour online training
to be attended once per year. For a single employer, the cost corresponds to two working time
hours for each manager and the total cost per employer will therefore depend on the number
of managers attending the training. The overall cost of training for all employers is estimated
at around €1.9 billion210
. Member States would cover the costs for the development of the
training itself (a cost of €600 thousand). The possible costs for updating the existing risk
assessments has not been included as costs of this initiative since the obligation to have such
assessments in place is already provided under existing EU health and safety legislation,
which covers sexual harassment at work even though this is not expressly spelled out.
Protection
In the consultation phase, over half of the Member States (See annex 2) and all international
organisations highlighted the need for further protection measures, especially of children and
child witnesses of violence against women and domestic violence. The assessment of the gap
analysis concerning the current measures relating to protection orders, risk assessments and
child-friendly measures showed that all Member States have some measures in place, so there
are no expected set-up costs under neither policy option. As the supporting study and
consultations show that current protection measures are not sufficient211
, all Member States
would incur additional costs under both policy options.
As for protection orders, they are available in all Member States, however evidence suggests
that women victims of violence against women and domestic violence do not have sufficient
access to such orders in any Member State. Under option 1, Member States would therefore
need to ensure that protection orders are available for all types of violence against women and
domestic violence. This implies additional costs between €3.3 and 22.8 million for the
EU27212
(see Annex 5 for details). Under option 2, the increased effectiveness and enhanced
access to protection orders may be expected to lead to an increase in the request for such
orders. Costs may arise on the side of the judiciary and law enforcement (issuing/enforcement
of the order). The total cost for this option would then be between around €4 and 25 million.
Under option 1, countries that have services in place for the protection and support of child
victims and witnesses would improve such services, which is expected to lead to an increase
of support to 50% more children compared to the baseline. Countries that need to make
substantial improvements may be expected to have an even higher number of children seeking
support, thus incurring higher costs. Overall costs for this measure is estimated to be a
maximum of €1.6 billion. Under option 2, Member States would ensure that visits of children
210
See Annex 4, 2.13 and Annex 5, measure 1.5 for further details on specific methodology and assessment.
211
See more in Annex 2.
212
Data were not available for Italy and Malta, which are therefore excluded from the computations.
57
can take place in surveyed safe places in cases involving allegations of violence against
women and domestic violence. Such visits could take place in the context of existing
protection and support services. The total maximum costs of protection and support of child
victims and witnesses under this option is therefore estimated to be €1.9 billion.
As for risk assessment measures under option 1, it may be expected that Member State will
provide between 50 and 100% more risk assessments to victims, and that 25% of them will
qualify as high risk and therefore receive an in-depth assessment. The total cost for the EU-27
is approximately €43 million. Under option 2 (both sub-options) additional working time is
considered to manage cases in a timely manner in cooperation with support services. The total
cost is therefore higher at around €47 million.
Access to justice
Costs for access to justice measures fall entirely on public authorities. Based on the
supporting study, under option 1 costs would somewhat increase for law enforcement, the
justice sector and equality bodies, as they would have to deal with more cases of violence
against women and domestic violence, but these costs are expected to be negligible.
Under option 2, compliance costs for access to justice measures would be higher. Concerning
compensation, under option 2A, victims of violence against women and domestic violence
would have the right to full compensation from the perpetrator. As this concerns
compensation for harm resulting from illegal behavior, this should however not be considered
a proper cost and it is therefore not included as such in the computation. Under Option 2B
however the State would intervene to pay for victims that cannot be compensated by the
perpetrators. It is estimated that improved access to compensation could lead to 10% increase
of demand and granting of compensation , 50% of which would not be recovered from the
perpetrator or other sources. Member states would then need to cover such compensation with
an additional overall cost for Member States of €1.6 billion.
Finally, for both options, costs relating to prosecution pro-active information of victims
regarding their right to compensation, and ensuring low-threshold reporting are estimated to
be negligible.
Victim support
Under both policy options, it is expected that all Member States will require additional
expenditure, especially to meet the demand for missing specialist services for survivors of
sexual violence and the missing number of beds in shelters. As for services, the Member
States that do not currently have (i.e. BE, HR, CZ, FR, HU, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SI) a
24/7 free helpline for women victims of violence against women and domestic violence
would incur additional costs to set-up and run such helplines. The total expected expenditure
of such measures is estimated at between €1.4 and €5.6 million for both options, as the
obligation to connect national helplines to the EU-harmonised number is estimated to have a
negligible cost. Concerning specialised support services under option 1, the costs are
estimated to be around €107 million. Under option 2, it is expected that all Member States
will need to step up their specialised services to support groups at a heightened risk of
violence. The costs of this measure is estimated at €118 million.
58
As for shelter provision, option 1 requires the Member States to provide shelters in an
accessible manner and in sufficient numbers. Based on information of the average current cost
of a shelter bed space for a woman (with or without child) in Member States, the estimated
total cost is between €33.1 million and 392.4 million, same as for Option 2A. Option 2B
specifies the obligation to provide at least 1 shelter space for 10,000 inhabitants, which is
estimated to cause a maximum total costs of around €3.9 billion. This is by far the highest
cost per single measure.
In addition, under option 2, the requirement for Member States to provide on- and offline
support for victims of cyber violence against women and in intimate partnerships (incl.
equipping support services with financial and human resources for knowledge-development
and the necessary technology) is estimated to cost around €1.2 billion.
Finally, under option 2B, Member States would also provide for 3 days of special leave for
employees victims of violence against women and domestic violence, to be compensated at
the level of current sick pay compensation under national law. The costs of the measure is
estimated to be between €0.3 and 2.6 billion depending on whether only victims of sexual
violence are covered or all victims of physical violence against women and domestic
violence.
Coordination
This area includes measures regarding data collection and provision of integrated services.
Option 1 is not expected to trigger substantial costs: most Member States already collect some
disaggregated administrative data on violence against women and domestic violence.
Moreover, participation in the survey coordinated at EU level would be voluntary. Finally,
most Member States already provide for some minimum coordination at national level.
Option 2 is expected to trigger limited costs for Member States. This option includes the
provision of a one-stop online access to relevant protection and support services and of
voluntary on-site support services. As for the data collection, it makes the participation in the
EU survey mandatory, as well as the regular collection of administrative data through an
integrated centralized data collection system. Overall, these measures would trigger costs for
€20.9 million. The largest cost is for the regular mandatory survey: each data collection is
costed, based on a sample of on average 5,000 interviews per Member State at a cost of €100
per interview, at €16.8 million. Option 2 would also involve locating services for victims in
the same premises (with a maximum estimated costs when upon obligation in sub-option 2B,
of €3.6 million) and a centralized integrated system of administrative data collection on
violence against women and domestic violence, which would have a negligible cost, as
several Member States have already introduced integrated systems for data processing in the
area.213
6.3.3 Summary of costs and economic benefits
213
This is for instance the case for Spain where since 2006 the State Observatory on Violence against Women collects,
analyses and disseminates periodic, homogeneous and systematic information on gender-based violence from public
administrations, other State bodies with competence in this area and private entities through a reference database with a
system of standardized indicators.
59
Policy options
Assumed
reduction in
prevalence
Economic
benefits
Recurring cost
min
Recurring
cost max
One-off cost
Option
1
(Moderate)
Short-term
(15%)
€ 39.6 billion € 0.8 billion € 2.2 billion € 0.01 billion
Long-term
(20%)
€ 53.1 billion € 0.8 billion € 2.2 billion € 0.01billion
Option
2
(comprehensive)
Sub-option
A
Short-term
(20%)
€ 53.1 billion € 5.0 billion € 6.6 billion € 0.02 billion
Long-term
(30%)
€ 82.7 billion € 5.0 billion € 6.6 billion € 0.02 billion
Sub-option
B
Short-term
(22%)
€ 57.8 billion € 7.2 billion € 14.3 billion € 0.14 billion
Long-term
(35%)
€ 87.6 billion € 7.2 billion € 14.3 billion € 0.14 billion
The total compliance costs of option 1 range between € 0.8 billion to 2.2 billion, with some
additional one-off development costs in the first year of implementation. The estimated total
economic benefits of this option range between a cost reduction of € 39.6 billion (short-
term) to € 53.1 billion (long-term).
The total compliance costs of option 2A range between € 5.0 billion and 6.6 billion with
some additional one-off development costs in the first year of implementation. The estimated
total economic benefits of this sub-option range between a cost reduction of € 53.1 billion
and € 82.7 billion.
The total compliance costs of option 2B range between € 7.2 billion and € 14.3 billion with
some additional one-off development costs in the first year of implementation. The estimated
total economic benefits of this sub-option range between a cost reduction of € 57.8 billion
and € 87.6 billion.
7. 7. How do the options compare?
Table 7.1 below summarises the comparison of options against the criteria of effectiveness,
efficiency and coherence. The comparisons also takes into account the criteria of
proportionality and the risk of cost deviation, which is measured by the range of minimum
and maximum costs. Scores are assigned on a scale from 1 to 3, as no option is expected to
have negative impacts.
Table 7.1.: Summary of comparison of policy options
Legislative Options
Poliy Option 1 Poliy Option 2 Policy Option 2
Sub-option A Sub-option B
1 - Effectiveness 1.75 2.50 1.75
Effectiveness in achieving the objectives
(including impact of fundamental rights) 1 2 2.5
Specific objective 1: Prevention 1 2 2.5
Specific objective 2: Protection 1 2 2
Specific objective 3: Access to justice 1 2 3
60
Specific objective 4: Victim support 1 2 2.5
Specific objective 5. Coordination 1 2 2.5
Proportionality 2.5 3 1
2 - Efficiency 1.75 2.75 2.13
Total average cost (in billion Euros/year) €1.5 €5.8 €10.8
Minimum costs €0.8 €5.0 €7.2
Maximum costs €2.2 €6.6 €14.3
Risk of cost deviation (max-min costs) €1.4 €1.6 €7.1
Net benefit short term €38.8 €48.1 €50.6
Net benefit long term €50.9 €76.1 €73.3
Total net benefits €89.7 €124.2 €123.9
Figures translated to qualitative scale 2 3 1,75
Risk of cost deviation (difference max-min costs) 3 3 0.5
Total net benefits 1 3 3
Social impacts (not quantifiable benefits) 1,5 2,5 2,5
- victims of VaW/DV and particular groups of victims 2 2.5 2.5
- wider society (including perpetrators and national
authorities) 1 2.5 2.5
3 - Coherence 2 2,5 2,5
Internal coherence 2 2 2
External coherence 2 3 3
TOTAL UNWEIGHTED SCORE 1,8 2,6 2,1
Across the board, all options have a positive impact. Option 2 has the strongest effect in terms
of achievement of the policy objectives, impacts on fundamental rights, internal and external
coherence, and net economic benefits. Compared to sub-option 2B, sub-option 2A scores
better on all three assessment criteria - effectiveness, efficiency and coherence. The
comparative analysis below discusses these differences in further detail. A sensitivity
analysis confirms this result under different weights assigned to the three criteria (See Annex
3.4).
7.1.7.1. Effectiveness
All options will contribute to achieving the policy objectives of the initiative. A single
legislative instrument based on the most effective practices from different Member States and
on the most effective measures already applied at the EU level in the neighboring policies,
will contribute to a focused, coordinated approach targeting violence against women and
domestic violence in all Member States.. Compared against the current regulatory
fragmentation, evaluated as ineffective in the gap analysis, this is in itself an improvement
and a positive contributing factor to the effectiveness of both options. Both options will also
contribute to the effectiveness of safeguarding fundamental rights. To the extent that similar
measures are already applied in the Member States, the effects of the measures will vary
across the Union.
a
)
Preventi
on
61
The prevention measures proposed under option 1 would contribute to challenging negative
gender stereotypes and attitudes towards women and men, as well as raising the awareness of
the general population and relevant professionals, and contributing to the specific knowledge
of the latter. Option 2 is expected to make a greater contribution to ensuring effective
prevention of violence against women and domestic violence, as it adds prevention measures
targeting groups at risk, and opens up treatment programmes to those at risk of offending.
Moreover, while option 1 does not focus on victims of sexual harassment and cyber violence
against women, option 2 goes a step further by introducing specific standards, thus providing
more comprehensive and effective measures to address those specific types of violence.
The measures of option 2 are built on good practices in the Member States. In its baseline
evaluation report on Austria, GREVIO commended that the two-year basic initial training of
law-enforcement officers encompassed the issue of domestic violence, including its gender-
based dimension and that the specific nature of this type of violence and the relevant police
measures are an important element of this training.214
Another promising practice identified
by GREVIO in its baseline evaluation report on Denmark is the awareness-raising campaigns
on stalking and rape, which included components that specifically targeted professionals such
as law enforcement agents and social workers.215
This approach has led to improvements in
the professionals’ response to such violence and demonstrates the importance of such
measures. Stakeholder views: Expanding prevention measures is supported by various
stakeholders, such as NGOs and Member States.216
Particularly measures on tackling cyber
violence and sexual harassment at work are supported by social partners, international
organisations and employer associations respectively. NGOs highlighted the need for
trainings for professionals across sectors to provide effective support to victims, particularly
with police and judicial authorities.217
b
)
Pro
tection
The measures in option 1 on the availability of protection orders, risk assessments and better
protection of child victims and witnesses are expected to address significant shortcomings in
the area of protection of victims from violence against women and domestic violence. While
these measures are expected to have positive effects, they however remain very close to the
baseline and do not effectively address some of the legal and practical barriers for effective
protection.
Option 2 adds several valuable elements in the area of protection that address these remaining
barriers, thus enhancing its effectiveness compared to option 1. In particular the measure
introducing harmonised minimum standards regarding emergency barring orders is expected
214
See GREVIO's baseline evaluation report on Austria, paragraph 76.
215
See GREVIO's baseline evaluation report on Denmark, paragraphs 65-66
216
Various stakeholders from Member States, international organisations, NGOs to social partners were consulted through
targeted consultation during May-July 2021. See more in Annex 2.
217
Ibid.
62
to improve their timeliness (within 24 hours) and effectiveness in terms of access and
enforcement. Minimum harmonized standards may be expected to facilitate their cross-border
effect, thus improving the mechanism set out in the existing mutual recognition
instruments.218
Option 2 also foresees measures specifically aimed at child witnesses,
including surveyed safe places where children can continue to meet their parents particularly
in cases of domestic violence, thereby preventing repeated victimisation.
These measures build on good practices in the area of protection in Member States. For
example, in Portugal risk assessment is mandatory in cases of domestic violence, and it is
based on standardised forms. After the risk assessment has been completed, a safety plan is
developed for the victim, an application for protective measures is made, and the seizure of
weapons is also provided.219
Stakeholder views: The need for further protection measures was supported by over half of
the Member States with the international organisations highlighting the need for further
protection measures, especially of children and child witnesses of violence against women
and domestic violence. NGOs stressed the need to increase resources for issuing emergency
barring orders. 14 Member States have responded that further measures would be useful to
make national protection orders more effective in practice.
c
)
Access to
justice
Measures proposed under option 1 will improve access to justice by introducing
approximation of criminal definitions and sanctions at EU-level of certain forms of violence
against women and domestic violence, access to compensation and improved reporting by
third parties. The positive effects are expected to be the strongest in the six Member States
which have not yet ratified the Istanbul Convention. Nevertheless, they may not sufficiently
address arising problems in all Member States, such as access to justice for victims of cyber
violence against women and in intimate partnerships.
Sub-option 2A includes additional elements to address the gaps. Concerning compensation,
under option 2A the right of victims of violence against women and domestic violence to
claim full compensation from the perpetrator does not cause costs to the Member State; it
ensures compensation for harm by the perpetrator caused by illegal behaviour. On the
contrary, under option 2B the obligation on Member States to provide state compensation in
cases where victims cannot obtain compensation from the perpetrator or other sources, would
create further costs; in addition, it would require an additional legal basis incompatible with
that of this initiative. Policy option 2A further ensures the approximation of criminal
definitions and sanctions at EU-level, within the existing legal bases, of conduct relating to
serious forms of sexual violence, cyber violence against women and in intimate partnerships,
218
Directive 2011/99/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the European Protection
Order; Regulation (EU) No 606/2013 of the European Parliament and of The Council of 12 June 2013 on mutual recognition
of protection measures in civil matters.
219
See more in the Gap Analysis in Annex 8.
63
and sexual harassment at work. It also lowers the threshold for reporting violence against
women and domestic violence, which is expected to increase prosecutions and convictions.
Importantly, the expansion of the offences will ensure that a wider group of victims is eligible
for protection. Sub-option 2B would go the furthest in terms of approximation of criminal
definitions and sanctions, ensuring that in the future all forms of gender-based violence could
be approximated by EU legislation by defining gender-based violence as a new area of crime
under Article 83(1) TFEU. While this would ensure the most effective combatting of this kind
of violence, such approximation would to a large extent overlap with national
criminalisations, which already cover the overwhelming majority of forms of violence against
women and domestic violence. This sub-option is therefore considered disproportionate at this
time.
The measures build on good practices in the area of access to justice implemented in the
Member States. For example in Finland, in 2015, the law was amended to allow
professionals, who had previously been bound by confidentiality rules, to notify statutory
agencies where they suspect a risk to the life of a woman or child in the context of domestic
violence.
Stakeholder views: All measures on access to justice have been supported by stakeholders.
NGOs have highlighted the need to improve in particular prosecution and compensation
measures. This is supported by research highlighting that training of the police and the
judiciary on violence against women and domestic violence is likely to increase the number of
prosecutions and convictions.220
Measures to address sexual harassment are aligned with
views of the social partners, which highlighted the need for further action. Employer
associations underlined the need to take into the consideration the different capacity of large
employers and SMEs, which has been taken into consideration with the proposed measures.
They also stated that an understanding of the challenges posed by sex-based harassment and
the illegal nature of it is well established and understood, but practical implementation
remains a challenge (see Annex 2).
d
)
Vict
im
support
Both policy options are expected to increase the availability and access to support for victims
of violence against women and domestic violence. The measures proposed under option 1,
such as the obligation on Member States to ensure availability and adequate resourcing of
general support services and specialised support services with adequate geographical
coverage, including shelters in an accessible manner and sufficient numbers, are expected to
increase the support for victims at a moderate rate. Specifications of the content of general
and specialist support services are expected to enhance the quality and capacity of existing
services and further expand them, thus also increasing overall accessibility. The same applies
220
UNODC (2014), Handbook on effective prosecution responses to violence against women and girls. Council of Europe &
EU, Training Manual for judges and prosecutors on ensuring women’s access to justice.
64
for the helplines, as they will be able to offer assistance to those who want to seek advice on
violence against women and domestic violence, including those who may be hesitant to
identify themselves as victims. Although the impact of the measures will depend on the
current level of services offered in Member States, the study shows that the measures may be
expected to have effect in all Member States, also in those that have ratified the Istanbul
Convention. Nevertheless, under this option, some categories of victims may not be
sufficiently protected, namely groups at a heightened risk of violence and victims of sexual
harassment especially at work. Also, much discretion is left to Member States in interpreting
the rules, for example, to provide shelters ‘in sufficient numbers’.
Option 2 is expected to ensure more effectively the availability and accessibility of support
measures, boost the quality and capacity of existing services, further expand them to cover
specific groups of victims with a higher risk of violence. It would ensure the availability of
such services also for victims experiencing sexual harassment at work. Sub-option 2B brings
added value with a mandatory amount of available shelter space and compensated special
leave for workers victim of violence against women and domestic violence. However, both
options are very expensive, and thus suggest a disproportionate solution.
The measures build on good practices identified in the area of victim support. For example, in
Greece, a special innovative, coordinated, and gender-sensitive network offers services for
vulnerable refugee women who are victims of violence against women and domestic violence
and their children..221
In Denmark, guidelines have been developed for social workers on
how to assist victims of domestic violence. For a woman seeking refuge at a shelter, the
municipality is obliged to provide initial and coordinated counselling to identify their needs
and offer solutions.222
This shows how improving general and specialist support measures is
needed to support victims of violence against women and domestic violence, particularly
concerning vulnerable groups.
Stakeholder views: Improving victim support services has been seen as a key area of action
by various stakeholders, with especially NGOs highlighting the need to estimate the cost of
violence and benefits achieved through support measures. NGOs stressed the importance of
Member States providing both general and specialised support services.
e
)
Coo
rdination
Both policy options are assessed to be effective in improving coordination structures across
the Member States. Option 1 would be moderately effective. Training and information
provision to professionals is expected to enhance cooperation between agencies. Data
collection would be somewhat improved, but participation in the EU-level survey would not
be ensured (currently only 18 Member States participate). Administrative data collection
would be ensured, but further convergence towards the production of comparable data across
221
https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/mlp-gender-equality-seminar-support-services-victims-violence-asylum-and-
migration-february-2018-greece_en.
222
Ibid.
65
the EU would not happen as no harmonised minimum standards of data disaggregation and
collection would be set.
Option 2 is expected to be more effective in ensuring more robust coordination structures in
relation to violence against women and domestic violence, including on multi-agency
cooperation. Participation in the EU-level survey would be mandatory ensuring comparable
EU-level data on the prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence. Minimum
standards on administrative data collection would ensure progress toward comparability at EU
level. Sub-option 2B could be more effective in ensuring the centralization of administrative
data of all services at national level (police, judiciary, health, social), but this measure is
operationally complex, putting a burden on the public authorities which may be
disproportionate particularly at this time.
The measures build on good practices concerning coordination. For example, Spain has
created and implemented an Integrated Monitoring System for cases of Gender-based
Violence (VioGen). In Portugal, data from law-enforcement bodies and the judiciary must be
collated throughout the entire criminal proceedings chain, from the filing of the complaint to
the delivery of the judgment. A standard form is used to record domestic violence..
Stakeholder views: The need for comparable and comprehensive disaggregated data
collection has been highlighted by all stakeholders as crucial for better policy development.
Member States also recognised in the consultations the value of multi-agency cooperation
with 14 Member States stating it could be strengthened. Research also shows that effective
multi-agency service provision and coordination can help professionals respond to violence
against women and domestic violence due to more effective use of resources, increased
awareness and understanding of violence against women and domestic violence, and peer
support.223
7.2.7.2. Efficiency
Both policy options are expected to incur substantial compliance costs, but these costs are
always exceeded by the potential economic benefits (measured in terms of reduction in costs
of violence against women and domestic violence). The compliance costs for each problem
area are higher in option 2A (see Table 6.2) compared to option 1 (Table 6.1). Overall, the
total administrative and compliance costs for option 2A are between €4.2 – €4.4 billion higher
than for option 1. The total administrative and compliance costs for option 2B (Table 6.3) are
between €2.2 and 7.7 billion higher than option 2A.
The difference in costs is largely driven by the running costs per year of the various measures.
In particular, the most substantial differences are observed in the running costs for measures
related to access to justice and victim support. In addition, the cost of new measures against
cyber violence against women and in intimate partnerships, effective remedies in case of
sexual harassment at work and public prosecution of the new EU-crimes increases the
compliance costs of this option. The costs for victim support of option 2A are around up to
223
M. Naudi, M. Clark & H. Saliba, 2018, Full Cooperation: Zero Violence – Barriers to help-seeking in gender- based
violence against women: a research study. Also NSW Ombudsman 2006, Domestic violence: improving police practice.
66
€4.0 billion higher than in option 1, which is mainly driven by the cost of measures to support
victims of cyber violence against women or in intimate partnerships or victims of sexual
harassment at work.
In conclusion, Option 1 offers the best cost to benefit ratio, but having also much lower
benefits, choosing this option would result in missing out on net benefits compared to both
option 2A and 2B (around €9 and over 20 billion respectively in the short and in the long
period). Option 2A is preferable to Option 2B as it offers the highest net benefit in the long
term and, although it has slightly lower net benefits in the short term, it achieves the benefits
at much lower costs.
Efficiency (in billion Euro) Option 1 Option 2A Option 2B
Total average, and minimum and maximum costs
1.5
(0.8-2.2)
5.8
(5.0-6.6)
10.8
(7.2-14.3)
Of which one off costs 0.014 0.016 0.138
Average running costs per year 1.5 5.8 10.8
Benefits: Reduction in costs of violence
Short term benefits (up to 5y) 39.6 53.1 57.8
Long term benefits (10 y +) 53.1 82.7 87.6
Overall economic impact/Net benefit
Short term net benefit 38.8 48.1 50.6
Long term net benefit 50.9 76.1 73.3
7.3.7.3. Coherence
The coherence of both policy options (and sub-options) is assessed positively, as they are
expected to address some of the key problems identified, namely the highly fragmented nature
of the current EU legal framework, the lack of systematic, focused measures on violence
against women and domestic violence and a number of the gaps in the framework identified in
the gap analysis (Annex 8). Option 2 has a more positive impact on coherence as it sets
specific standards in areas not specifically addressed by the Istanbul Convention (e.g.
measures against cyber violence and sexual harassment).
Both options would be fully internally coherent with other actions at EU level, in
particular the Victims’ Rights Strategy and the Rights of the Child Strategy by introducing
detailed standards on victims’ rights and the rights of the child. Option 2 would also increase
coherence with the DSA proposal because the minimum harmonisation of what constitutes
criminal and illegal forms of cyber violence will ensure that the obligations in the DSA will
be applicable to these forms of violence (for example orders, notice and action, trusted
flaggers, risk assessments etc.). Also, Option 2 will supplement the DSA on prevention,
protection, and support for victims of such cyber violence.With regard to the Victims’ Rights
Strategy, the initiative will introduce specialised violence against women and domestic
violence measures which will supplement the existing general victims’ rights standards at
EU level, in the same way as specific measures have been adopted in regard to victims of
terrorism and trafficking.
Similarly, both policy options will contribute to enhancing external coherence by aligning
EU law to the standards of the Istanbul Convention, but option 2 will in addition align EU law
67
to the standards of the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention no. 190. Both policy
options will also enhance coherence with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
7.4.7.4. Preferred option
Following the comparative assessment of the effectiveness, efficiency and coherence of the
policy options, the preferred option proposed for political endorsement is option 2A. The
superiority of this option comes from its better performance in contributing to enforcing
fundamental rights and improving social impact compared to option 1 and providing a higher
net benefit in the long term compared to sub-option 2B (and to Option 1) while having lower
costs.
Most importantly, option 2A is expected to provide extensive protection of fundamental
rights and improve the social situation of victims and society at large compared to option 1
due to its comprehensive set of obligations. It follows the principle of proportionality and
necessity of an intervention at EU level: it will remove the fragmented approach across
Member States, enhance legal certainty and effective enforcement and protection of victims.
It establishes, for the first time at EU level, a targeted and coordinated approach to tackle
violence against women and domestic violence through a set of harmonised standards. The
effectiveness and proportionality of the option in reaching the objectives is superior, not only
in light of strengthening the fundamental rights, but also in tackling gaps such as on cyber
violence against women and in intimate partnerships and sexual harassment.
In economic terms, Option 2A is expected to achieve, through reduced prevalence of violence
against women and domestic violence, economic benefits of around €53.1 billion with
potential to reach to around €82.7 billion in the longer-term with a net benefit
respectively of €48.1 and 76.1 billion.
Option 2A best meets the objectives of the intervention in a proportionate manner and it is
therefore likely to receive better political acceptance overall.
8. 8. How will actual impacts be monitored and evaluated?
The main objective of the initiative is the enforcement of fundamental rights. The
achievement of this objective would be reflected in a decrease of prevalence rates and a
decrease of the needs for protection and support. i.e. in the number of people who do not
enjoy their fundamental rights.
The lack of monitoring and insufficient enforceability with regard to victims of violence
against women and domestic violence is one of the key weaknesses identified in the
application of the EU legal framework. Even though data indicate that this kind of violence is
prevalent in all Member States, more comparable data, including on underreporting of these
crimes, is needed to assess changes in prevalence rates and the effectiveness of the proposed
measures.
Considering that prevalence rates reflect structural data that tend to change very slowly over
time, it is likely that in the short term, this first evaluation will show progress mostly as for
the implementation and setting up of processes. These could be monitored through the
number of requests for victim support measures, number of prevention measures (e.g.
awareness campaigns), VAW and DV cases registered by domestic law enforcement and
judicial authorities and reported coordination efforts. Most data in this respect will be
68
provided to the European Commission by Member States through the implementation reports
which will feed into an evaluation to be carried out in about 5 years’ time.
A visible impact in terms of a reduction in prevalence rates in the previous years can
realistically be expected only in the long run. An increased reporting, and therefore apparently
higher prevalence rates, could actually be considered an indicator of success in the shorter
term.
In this respect the provision regarding data collection will offer regular, comparable and, as
for administrative data, also timely data.
The preferred policy option will introduce further harmonisation in the collection of
disaggregated administrative data (including from law enforcement agencies, the judiciary,
social and health services) at regular intervals based on the ongoing work by EIGE, and the
obligatory regular survey coordinated at EU-level (following up on the EU survey on violence
against women and domestic violence coordinated by Eurostat). These strengthened data
collection requirements form the basis for the monitoring and evaluation of the impact of the
initiative against its specific objectives.
The monitoring will be based on a series of measurable outcomes (see Annex 7). With a view
to avoiding unnecessary duplication of efforts, monitoring will in as much as possible be
based on the harmonised indicators already developed.224
The most important indicator, but
not the only, for successful implementation are the prevalence rates of violence against
women and domestic violence.
The need for a policy review will be assessed following the first round of Member State
reporting on the directive’s implementation, foreseen to take place about five years after the
entry into force of the directive. Reporting would be carried out at regular intervals in the
form of a questionnaire to the Member States. The details will be described in a monitoring
and enforcement plan.
Member States would be able to draw on the information they provide to international human
rights bodies under periodic reporting obligations. This would ensure that overlap in reporting
and additional administrative burden is avoided. Unnecessary duplication will also be avoided
by drawing on data already available under other relevant policy areas, such as on victims’
rights. Future synergies may be identified with the implementation of the EU strategies on the
rights of the child, the rights of persons with disabilities and LGBTIQ equality, as well as the
hate speech and hate crime initiative. Additional information on the implementation measures
and their effectiveness is expected to be received from stakeholders, such as EIGE, FRA and
NGOs.
224
Key outcomes are published by EIGE as well as in the monitoring tool developed for the Gender Equality Strategy, see
https://composite-indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ges-monitor/maps.
69
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1: Procedural information
LEAD DG, DECIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES
This Staff Working Document was prepared by the Directorate-General for Justice and
Consumers (DG JUST).
The Decide reference of this initiative is PLAN/2020/9290.
This document includes annexes to the Impact Assessment Report.
ORGANISATION AND TIMING
The Impact Assessment Report was prepared by DG JUST as the lead Directorate-General.
The Inter-Service Steering Group on preventing and combatting violence against women and
domestic violence established for the work was associated and consulted in the process, under
the coordination of the Secretariat-General, including the following services: DG CONNECT
(DG for Communications Networks, Content and Technology), DG EAC (DG for Education,
Youth, Sport and Culture), DG EMPL (DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion), DG
ESTAT (Statistical Office of the European Union), DG HOME (DG Migration and Home
Affairs), DG SANTE (DG for Health and Food Safety) and SJ (Legal Service). In addition,
the equality coordinators from the European Commission’s Equality Task Force from each
DG were invited to follow the meetings to facilitate equality mainstreaming work in their
policy areas.
The last meeting of the ISSG on the draft Impact Assessment Report, chaired by the
Secretariat-General of the European Commission was held on 1 September 2021. Finally, the
ISSG was consulted on the revised version of the impact assessment on 26 November 2021.
CONSULTATION OF THE RSB
The Regulatory Scrutiny Board gave a negative opinion on the draft Impact Assessment
Report submitted on 15 September 2021 and discussed in the hearing that took place on 13
October 2021. To address the feedback given by the Regulatory Scrutiny Board, the following
changes were made in the Impact Assessment Report and its annexes:
Findings of the Board Main modifications made in the report to address them
1. The report is not
sufficiently clear on what
categories of victims and
types of violence would
be covered by the
initiative, and what
would justify limiting the
application of certain
measures specifically to
The problem definition chapter of the impact assessment now
clarifies upfront the scope of the initiative, i.e. violence against
women and domestic violence against any person. This reflects
the intention to pursue the same objective as the Istanbul
Convention - to ensure that EU Member States have effective
measures in place to prevent and combat violence against
women and domestic violence.
The report better explains the choice of scope: while violence
may affect both women and men, violence against women is a
70
women. It does not
sufficiently justify and
substantiate with
evidence the problems
related to cyber-based
violence and harassment
in the workplace.
specific phenomenon in that its drivers are different as explained
in the Explanatory Report to the Istanbul Convention225
and it
has specific consequences. Furthermore, the large majority of
acts of gender-based violence are perpetrated against women and
girls. Domestic violence additionally covers not only women,
but any person living in the household, including men and boys.
The report justifies why specific measures are required for the
protection of these particular groups of victims.
The report also explains why violence based on other grounds of
discrimination is excluded from the scope, while taking into
account the intersection with other grounds of discrimination:
special measures are foreseen, within the group of victims of
violence against women and domestic violence, for especially
vulnerable groups, such as women with racial or ethnic origin,
disability or sexual orientation.
The problems related to cyber violence against women and
sexual harassment have been better justified and substantiated.
2. The report does not
sufficiently reflect the
evolving legislative
context, in particular the
recent Court of Justice
Opinion on the legal
base and modalities of
the Istanbul Convention.
The report now reflects better the evolving legislative context in
Sections 3 and 5.1.
In particular, the report was updated and aligned with the CJEU
opinion on the modalities of EU accession of 6 October 2021,
taking this opinion into account as regards the possible
developments in relation to the EU’s accession (see, in particular
the dynamic baseline (see point 3) and as regards the
competence to act in the areas covered by the initiative.
3. The report does not
present a complete
baseline. It is not
sufficiently clear on the
future effects of more
recent measures taken
by the Member States. It
does not assess the
impacts that would
result from further
Member State
implementation efforts
of the Istanbul
Convention obligations
in the absence of further
EU action. The
remaining scale of the
problems and the need
for further EU action is
not sufficiently clear.
The report clarifies that the baseline takes into account the
legislative and policy measures taken by Member States, as
gathered through the studies conducted to support the initiative
– in particular the study from the European Network of Legal
Experts and the ICF study - and subsequently in the evaluation
of gaps, as well the targeted consultation of stakeholders. A key
source of information concerning the measures taken by the 21
Member States in the field of preventing and combatting this
kind of violence is the periodic reporting these countries
conduct to the Council of Europe’s monitoring body
GREVIO, and GREVIO’s ensuing baseline reports.
All this information has been distilled into a new annex 8,
which (in its section 2) analyses the remaining gaps in the
Member States and highlights good practices in this area.
Moreover, a dedicated section has been added in chapter 5
setting out a dynamic baseline for the Member States. The
report acknowledges that Member States are likely to take some
additional measures on violence against women and domestic
violence, in particular following recommendations by GREVIO.
The section also explains, however, why these measures are
225
https://rm.coe.int/16800d383a
71
likely to be insufficient to meet the objective in the short and
medium term for two main reasons. First, GREVIO monitoring
is a lengthy and reiterative process, which does not cover all
parties at a single point in time; moreover, there is no sanction
for non-compliance with recommendations, since international
law like the Istanbul convention lacks the effective enforcement
mechanisms of European law; second, not all Member States are
parties to the Istanbul Convention.
In light of the above, in order to define the scale of the
problem, the report more clearly explains the magnitude of the
problem. While the report can acknowledge that the Istanbul
Convention and the #MeToo movement have raised awareness
of the problem and triggered action, there is no evidence that this
has translated into a reduction of prevalence. Therefore, without
further action, limited progress over time is expected.
4. The report does not
bring out clearly enough
the available policy
choices, the rationale
behind options and the
content of the measures.
The description of policy options and discarded policy options
now better explains the available policy choices. The impact
assessment now also clarifies the rationale behind the options
and the content of the measures, presented in a more concise
way.
While option 1 would limit EU action to implementing Istanbul
Convention standards through EU law, in matters relating to EU
competence, the added value of option 2 (under both sub-
options 2A and 2B) is double. First, option 2 contains targeted
measures on cyber violence against women and sexual
harassment. Secondly, the measures under option 2 have been
developed in comparison to the standards of the Istanbul
Convention in order to ensure a better implementation in line
with best practices and recommendations recognized by
international experts in the field and international bodies such as
GREVIO and in the UN.
With respect to the first main added value, since the drafting of
the Istanbul Convention, cyber violence against women has
become a common and growing phenomenon which requires
targeted action. Such violence is also an area where legal gaps
have been identified in the legal network study. Finally, action in
this area is needed to ensure a more effective implementation of
the EU’s future Digital Services Act. While the DSA proposes to
regulate responsibilities of all intermediary service providers
regarding illegal online content, it does provide definition of
such content but relies on definitions in national and EU laws.
By including a definition of cyber violence against women and
in intimate partner relations at EU level226
, including offences
226
The envisaged definition would refer to any act of gender-based violence against women that is committed in part or fully
by the use of information and communication technologies, such as mobile phones and smartphones, the internet, social
media platforms or e-mail. It draws on the upcoming General Recommendation on the digital dimension of violence against
women of GREVIO, to be issued later this year and is based on the work of the Council of Europe Cybercrime Convention
Committee “Working Group on cyberbullying and other forms of online violence, especially against women and children”.
72
concerning non-consensual sharing of images and content and
cyber stalking of women, the initiative ensures that the
requirements foreseen by the DSA can be fully applied to this
kind of illegal content across the EU.
With respect to sexual harassment, a more targeted action than
that contained in the Istanbul Convention is triggered in
particular by the adoption, in 2019, of the ILO Convention no.
190. The report clarifies that the inclusion of specific measures
on this matter aim at bringing EU law in line with recent
international standards.
Regarding the additional added value, i.e. a better
implementation of the standards of the Istanbul Convention
in line with best practices and recommendations identified by
experts and expert bodies from the Council of Europe
(GREVIO) and the United Nations, the report better explains
that the measures have been designed in the five problem areas
of prevention, protection, access to justice, support and
coordination (as in the Istanbul Convention) because gaps have
been identified in all five areas and all five areas must be
addressed to ensure a comprehensive approach to tackle
violence against women and domestic violence, as well as to
protect and support the victims and survivors. The report
explains that the aim of the initiative is not only to reduce
prevalence of violence through prevention, but also to ensure
fundamental rights of the women victims of violence against
women and victims of domestic violence and to diminish
negative societal impacts and improve victims’ quality of life.
5. The report is not
sufficiently clear on the
costs and benefits of the
option packages. The
presentation of the
limitations and
uncertainties in assessing
these and the resulting
benefit-to-cost ratios is
underdeveloped.
The report better explains that the cost and benefits have been
estimated on the basis of the real cost for similar measures
introduced in other areas (e.g. awareness raising campaigns and
training) when available and best estimates for those specific to
this initiative. The detailed methodology is presented in annex 4.
The report further clarifies that the estimates of the economic
impact have been assessed based on the reduction of the
different items which make up the overall cost of violence
against women and domestic violence to society. These items
have been divided into direct cost of services to victims or to
public service providers; lost economic output; and the physical
and emotional impacts measured as a reduction in the quality of
life. The expected impact of the policy options depends mainly
on their potential to reduce the prevalence of VaW/DV in the
short and long-term. This approach is aligned with research
conducted by the European Parliament Research Service.
The report better highlights the challenges in estimating the
economic impact of the proposed measures due to the low
number of impact assessments of measures against this kind of
violence in the EU context and the need, therefore to refer
mostly to examples from the United States. It explains why
referring to US outcomes should not cause an overestimation of
the results for the EU.
The report better explains the apparent contradiction that
73
measures developed and implemented in the Member States are
considered to have been insufficient while at the same time
similar measures are proposed at EU level. It clarifies that
national measures have lacked the integrated framework and
minimum standards that this initiative aims to provide.
Minimum standards and guidance set by EU level legislation
enables the coverage of remaining gaps and ensures EU level
implementation of the measures in line with best practices and
recommendations of experts and international expert bodies. In
addition, it ensures monitoring and enforcement at a level which
is impossible by international bodies.
Concerning the costs for business and national authorities,
including substantive compliance costs and administrative
costs, the relevant tables in the Impact Assessment itself and the
accompanying annexes have been revised to make those clear.
6. The report does not
sufficiently assess the
effectiveness and
proportionality of the
preferred option. It is
not clear why only a
small part of the
investments is foreseen
for prevention measures
and why the option with
the best benefit-to-cost
ratio is not selected.
The report clarifies that the effectiveness of the initiative is not
only measured in terms of reducing the number of victims of
violence, but also, and mainly, to protect victims’
fundamental rights.
The report better explains that, while the most costly measures
included under the comprehensive options are not in the area of
prevention, a number of measures under other areas e.g.
guidelines to health and social services providers to be issued in
the victims support area, training of relevant professionals and
risk assessments, can also have a preventative effect, particularly
on secondary victimisation. Moreover, the larger benefits are
expected in terms of reduced cost on current victims. While the
initiative targets also potential (future) victims of violence, the
aim of prevention measures is also to increase awareness on
abusive behaviours that might go unreported and to encourage
victims to look for support. Finally, effectiveness (in terms of
cost reductions) is not necessarily proportional to costs: the most
severe cases require higher costs for treatment and might not
yield proportional benefits.
For the same reason, prevention measures can still be effective
even with only a 5% of total investment costs. Prevention
measures like training and awareness-raising activities tend to
cost less than, for example, specialised support services for
victims of sexual violence or increasing capacity of shelters due
to a lighter burden on human resources. In the long-term, the
impact of prevention measures can have a significant impact on
changing harmful norms, stereotypes and behaviour. Effective
prevention measures therefore offer a good cost-benefit ratio to
address gender-based violence against women and domestic
violence.
Longitudinal studies show that protection measures, such as on
protection orders and enhanced reporting opportunities, are
associated with a 34% and 40% reduction in the risk of re-
victimisation due to, for example, continuing domestic violence.
Similarly, based on an assessment of the US National Crime
Victimization Survey, the use of victim services has been shown
to be associated with a 40% reduction in the risk of re-
74
victimisation.
For a long time, violence against women and domestic violence
have been tacitly accepted in the society. Legislation in this area
gives a message to the society that gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence is a criminal act and will not go
unpunished. Evidence (e.g. FRA) supports the estimation that
legislation in this area has a long-term impact on reducing this
type of violence.
The moderate option has very low costs compared to its benefits
(though the expected benefits are largely lower than in the other
options). It leaves however out important areas of intervention
and offers a more limited strategic framework. For instance, it
does not include specific measures on cyber violence against
women or sexual harassment, thus failing to take into account
the gaps and recent developments in these areas. In addition, the
moderate option remains at the level of broad and rather vague
obligations which could be agreed on at international level, thus
leaving aside the opportunity for a more robust framework based
on stronger minimum standards at EU level. This is why option
2, and more specifically option 2A is the preferred option. The
contribution of the different criteria to the overall score is now
better illustrated in the table comparing the options, including
with reference to proportionality.
EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY
1.3.1. Studies commissioned or supported by the European Commission
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination (2021).
Criminalisation of gender-based violence against women in European States, including ICT-
facilitated violence. A special report, available at:
https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/5535-criminalisation-of-gender-based-violence-
against-women-in-european-states-including-ict-facilitated-violence-1-97-mb.
European Institute for Gender Equality (2021). The costs of gender-based violence in the
European Union, available at: https://eige.europa.eu/publications/costs-gender-based-
violence-european-union.
ICF (2021). Study conducted in support of the impact assessment report [upcoming, reference
to be added].
Eurobarometer - TNS. (2016). Special Eurobarometer 449: Gender-based violence.
1.3.2. Selective list of relevant case law
CJEU, Case C-105/03 – Maria Pupino, ECLI:EU:C:2005:386, 16 June 2005.
CJEU, Case C-467/05 – Dell’Orto, ECLI:EU:C:2007:395, 28 June 2007.
CJEU, Case C-404/07 – Katz, ECLI:EU:C:2008:553, 9 October 2008.
CJEU, Case C-205/09 – Eredics and Sápi, ECLI:EU:C:2010:623, 21 October 2010.
CJEU, Joined Cases C-483/09 and C-1/10 – Magatte Gueye and Valentín Salmerón Sánchez,
ECLI:EU:C:2011:583, 15 September 2011.
75
CJEU, Case C-348/09 – P.I. v. Oberbürgermeisterin, ECLI:EU:C:2012:300, 22 May 2012.
CJEU, Case C-115/15 – Secretary of State for the Home Department v. NA,
ECLI:EU:C:2016:487, 30 June 2016.
CJEU, Joined Cases C-511/18, C-512/18 and C-520/18 – La Quadrature du Net and Others
v. Premier Ministre and Others, ECLI:EU:C:2020:791, 6 October 2020.
ECtHR, X and Y v. the Netherlands, Application No. 8978/80, Judgment, 26 March 1985.
ECtHR, M.C. v. Bulgaria, Application No. 39272/98, Judgment, 4 December 2003.
ECtHR, Kontrová v. Slovakia, Application No. 7510/04, Judgment, 31 May 2007.
ECtHR, Bevacqua and S. v. Bulgaria, Application No. 71127/01, Judgment, 12 June 2008.
ECtHR, Branko Tomaşić and Others v. Croatia, Application No. 46598/06, Judgment, 15
January 2009.
ECtHR, Opuz v. Turkey, Application No. 33401/02, Judgment, 9 June 2009.
ECtHR, E.S. and Others v. Slovakia, Application No. 8227/04, Judgment, 15 September 2009.
ECtHR, Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia, Application No. 25965/04, Judgment, 7 January 2010.
ECtHR, A. v. Croatia, Application No. 55164/08, Judgment, 14 October 2010.
ECtHR, Hajduová v. Slovakia, Application No. 2660/03, Judgment, 30 November 2010.
ECtHR, V.C. v. Slovakia, Application No. 18968/07, Judgment, 8 November 2011.
ECtHR, P.M. v. Bulgaria, Application No. 49669/07, Judgment, 24 January 2012.
ECtHR, Kalucza v. Hungary, Application No. 57693/10, Judgment, 24 April 2012.
ECtHR, A.A. and Others v. Sweden, Application No. 14499/09, Judgment, 28 June 2012.
ECtHR, D.J. v. Croatia, Application No. 42418/10, Judgment, 24 July 2012.
ECtHR, Valiuliene v. Lithuania, Application No. 33234/07, Judgment, 26 March 2013.
ECtHR, Eremia and Others v. the Republic of Moldova, Application No. 3564/11, Judgment,
28 May 2013.
ECtHR, Mudric v. the Republic of Moldova, Application No. 74839/10, Judgment, 16 July
2013.
ECtHR, B. v. the Republic of Moldova, Application No. 61382/09, Judgment, 16 July 2013.
ECtHR, N.A. v. the Republic of Moldova, Application No. 13424/06, Judgment, 24 September
2013.
ECtHR, W. v. Slovenia, Application No. 24125/06, Judgment, 23 January 2014.
ECtHR, T.M. and C.M. v. the Republic of Moldova, Application No. 26608/11, Judgment, 28
January 2014.
ECtHR, O’Keeffe v. Ireland, Application No. 35810/09, Judgment, 28 January 2014.
ECtHR, Durmaz v. Turkey, Application No. 3621/07, Judgment, 13 November 2014.
ECtHR, W.H. v. Sweden, Application No. 49341/10, Judgment, 8 April 2015.
ECtHR, Y. v. Slovenia, Application No. 41107/10, Judgment, 28 May 2015.
ECtHR, R.H. v. Sweden¸ Application No. 4601/14, Judgment 10 September 2015.
ECtHR, I.C. v. Romania, Application No. 36934/08, Judgment, 24 May 2016.
ECtHR, Halime Kiliç v. Turkey, Application No. 63034/11, Judgment, 28 June 2016.
76
ECtHR, J. and Others v. Austria, Application No. 58246/12, Judgment, 17 January 2017.
ECtHR, Talpis v. Italy, Application No. 41237/14, Judgment, 2 March 2017.
ECtHR, B.V. v. Belgium, Application No. 61030/08, Judgment, 2 May 2017.
ECtHR, Bălşan v. Romania, Application No. 49645/09, Judgment, 23 May 2017.
ECtHR, E.B. v. Romania, Application No. 49089/10, Judgment, 10 March 2019.
ECtHR, Kurt v. Austria, Application No. 62903/15, Judgment, 4 July 2019.
ECtHR, Volodina v. Russia, Application No. 41261/17, Judgment, 9 July 2019.
ECtHR, Buturugă v. Romania, Application No. 56867/15, Judgment, 11 February 2020.
ECtHR, S.M. v. Croatia, Application No. 60561/14, Judgment, 25 June 2020.
ECtHR, X and others v. Bulgaria, Application No. 22457/16, Judgment, 2 February 2021.
ECtHR, E.G. v. Moldova, Application No. 37882/13, Judgment, 13 April 2021.
ECtHR, J.L. v. Italy, Application No. 5671/16, Judgment, 27 May 2021.
ECtHR, Volodina v. Russia (no. 2), Application No. 40419/19, Judgment, 14 September 2021.
1.3.3. Selective bibliography
EU legal acts
Council Directive 89/391/EEC on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in
the safety and health of workers at work;
Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in
employment and occupation and the European framework agreement on harassment
and violence at work;
Council Directive 2004/80/EC relating to compensation to crime victims;
Council Directive 2004/81/EC on the residence permit issued to third-country nationals who
are victims of trafficking in human beings;
Council Directive 2004/113/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between men
and women in the access to and supply of goods and services;
Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and
enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental
responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000;
Council Regulation (EU) 2019/1111 on jurisdiction, the recognition and enforcement of
decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on
international child abduction;
Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification;
Directive 2004/38/EC on the right of citizens of the Union and of their family members to
move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States;
Directive 2006/54/EC on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities and equal
treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation (recast);
Directive 2008/115/EC on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning
illegally staying third-country nationals;
77
Directive 2009/52/EC providing for minimum standards on sanctions and measures against
employers of illegally staying third-country nationals;
Directive 2010/41/EU on the application of the principle of equal treatment between men and
women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity;
Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and
protecting its victims;
Directive 2011/93/EU on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and
child pornography;
Directive 2011/95/EU on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless
persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or
for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection
granted;
Directive 2011/99/EU on the European protection order;
Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection
of victims of crime;
Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international
protection (recast) asylum procedures directive;
Directive 2013/33/EU laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international
protection (recast).
Directive (EU) 2016/800 of the European Parliament and of the Council on procedural
safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings;
Directive (EU) 2018/1808 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 November
2018 amending Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid
down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the
provision of audiovisual media services (Audiovisual Media Services Directive) in
view of changing market realities;
European framework agreement on harassment and violence at work (COM(2007) 686 final).
Regulation (EU) No 606/2013 on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters.
Commission documents
European Commission, Guidance Document related to the transposition and implementation
of Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October
2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims
of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, 19 December
2013, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/13_12_19_3763804_guidance_victims_rig
hts_directive_eu_en.pdf).
European Commission, Proposal for a Council Decision on the signing, on behalf of the
European Union, of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating
violence against women and domestic violence, COM(2016) 111 final, 4 March 2016,
available at: (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52016PC0111).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament
and the Council. Reporting on the follow-up to the EU Strategy towards the
Eradication of trafficking in human beings and identifying further concrete actions,
78
COM(2017) 728 final, 4 December 2017, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/anti-
trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/20171204_communication_reporting_on_follow-
up_to_the_eu_strategy_towards_the_eradication_of_trafficking_in_human_beings.pdf
).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions on the EU Strategy on Combatting Trafficking in Human Beings 2021- 2025,
final 14 April 2021, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/home-
affairs/sites/default/files/pdf/14042021_eu_strategy_on_combatting_trafficking_in_hu
man_beings_2021-2025_com-2021-171-1_en.pdf)
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions. A Union of Equality: Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, COM(2020) 152
final, 5 March 2020, available at: (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2020:152:FIN).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions. EU Strategy on victims’ rights (2020-2025), COM(2020) 258 final, 24 June
2020, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/law/2_en_act_part1_v10.pdf).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions. EU strategy for a more effective fight against child sexual abuse,
COM(2020) 607 final, 24 July 2020, available at: (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM:2020:607:FIN).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions on achieving the European Education Area by 2025, COM(2020) 625 final,
30 September 2020, available at: (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0625).
European Commission, Report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human
beings (2016) as required under Article 20 of Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing
and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, COM(2016)
267 final {SWD(2016) 159 final}, 19 May 2016, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/anti-
trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/report_on_the_progress_made_in_the_fight_again
st_trafficking_in_human_beings_2016.pdf).
European Commission, Second report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in
human beings (2018) as required under Article 20 of Directive 2011/36/EU on
preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims,
COM(2018) 777 final {SWD(2018) 473 final}, 3 December 2018, available at:
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/ALL/?uri=COM%3A2018%3A777%3AFIN).
European Commission, Third report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in
human beings (2020) as required under Article 20 of Directive 2011/36/EU on
preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims,
COM(2020) 661 final {SWD(2020) 226 final}, 20 October 2020, available at:
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0661).
79
European Commission, Report on the implementation of Directive 2012/29/EU of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum
standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing
Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, COM(2020) 188 final, 11 May 2020,
available at: (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2020%3A188%3AFIN).
European Commission, Report on the implementation of Directive 2011/99/EU of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the European
protection order, COM(2020) 187 final, 11 May 2020, available at:
(https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/770f93b9-9369-11ea-aac4-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions. On the European democracy action plan, COM(2020) 790 final, 3 December
2020, available at: (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0790&from=EN).
European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,
the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the
Regions on the EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child, COM/2021/142 final, 24
March 2021, available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52021DC0142
Academic literature
Antecol, H., Barcus, V. & Cobb-Clark, D., “Gender-biased behavior at work: Exploring the
relationship between sexual harassment and sex discrimination”, Journal of Economic
Psychology, Vol. 30(5), 2009, pp. 782-792.
Arenas-Arroyo, E., Fernández-Kranz, D. & Nollenberger, N., “Can’t Leave You Now!
Intimate Partner Violence under Forced Coexistence and Economic Uncertainty”,
Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 194, 2020, 1-15.
Bandura, A., Aggression: A social learning analysis, Prentice Hall, 1973.
Bohner, G., et al., “Rape myth acceptance: Cognitive, affective and behavioural effects of
beliefs that blame the victim and exonerate the perpetrator”, in Horvath, M. & Brown,
J. (eds.), Rape: Challenging contemporary thinking, 2009, 17-45.
Bowlus, A.J. & Seitz, S., “Domestic Violence, Employment, And Divorce”, International
Economic Review, Vol. 47(4), 2006, 1113-1149.
Bowstead, J.C., “Women on the move: administrative data as a safe way to research hidden
domestic violence journeys”, Journal of Gender-Based Violence, Vol. 3(2), 2019, 233-
248.
Campo, M. & Tayton, S., Intimate partner violence in lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex
and queer communities, CFCA Practitioner Resource, 2015, available at:
(https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/intimate-partner-violence-lgbtiq-communities).
Cancedda, A., De Micheli, B., Dimitrova, D. & Slot, B., Study for the European Commission:
Study on high-risk groups for trafficking in human beings, 2015, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/anti-
80
trafficking/sites/default/files/study_on_children_as_high_risk_groups_of_trafficking_i
n_human_beings_0.pdf).
Clark, K. A., Biddle, A. K., & Martin, S. L. (2002), “A cost-benefit analysis of the Violence
Against Women Act of 1994”, Violence Against Women, Vol. 8(4), 2002, 417-428.
Colagrossi, M., Deiana, C., Geraci, A. & Giua, L., “Hang Up on Stereotypes: Domestic
Violence and Anti-Abuse Helpline Campaign”, HEDG Working Paper Series, 2020.
Dobash R.P., Dobash R.E., Cavanagh, K., Lewis, R., “Separate and Intersecting Realities: A
Comparison of Men’s and Women’s Accounts of Violence Against Women”, Violence
Against Women, Vol. 4(4), 1998, 382-414.
Dolan, P., “Estimating the intangible victim costs of violent crime”, British Journal of
Criminology, Vol. 45(6), 2005, 958–976.
Elbers, N.A., et al., "Fair and Appropriate? Compensation of Victims of Sexual Violence in
EU Member States: Greece, Italy, Latvia, the Netherlands and Spain. Part II: State and
Offender Compensation: Survey, Good Practices and Recommendations”, FAIRCOM
Report Part II, 2020, available at:
(https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3732186).
Gracia, E., “Unreported cases of domestic violence against women: towards an epidemiology
of social silence, tolerance, and inhibition”, Journal of Epidemiology & Community
Health, Vol. 58(7), 2004, 536-537.
Hanson, L.L.M., Nyberg, A., Mittendorfer-Rutz, E., Bondestam, F. & Madsen, I.E.H., “Work
related sexual harassment and risk of suicide and suicide attempts: prospective cohort
study”, 2020, BMJ, 1-8.
Harris, B. & Vitis, L., “Digital intrusions: technology, spatiality and violence against
women”, Journal of Gender-Based Violence, Vol. 4(3) 2020, 325-341.
Harris, L. & Hodges, K. “Responding to complexity: improving service provision for
survivors of domestic abuse with ‘complex needs’, Journal of Gender-Based Violence,
Vol. 3(2), 2019, 167-184.
Jakupcak, M., Lisak, D. & Roemer, L., “The role of masculine ideology and masculine gender
role stress in men’s perpetration of relationship violence”, Psychology of Men &
Masculinity, Vol. 3(2), 2002, 97–106
Kelly, L. & Westmarland, N., “It’s a work in progress’: men’s accounts of gender and change
in their use of coercive control”, Journal of Gender-Based Violence, Vol. 3(3), 2019,
1-16, available at:
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335205710_'It's_a_work_in_progress'_men'
s_accounts_of_gender_and_change_in_their_use_of_coercive_control).
Kimball, E., “Edleson Revisited: Reviewing Children’s Witnessing of Domestic Violence 15
Years Later”, Journal of Family Violence, Vol. 31(5), 2016, pp. 1-13.
Kothari, C.L., et al., “Protection Orders Protect Against Assault and Injury: A Longitudinal
Study of Police-Involved Women Victims of Intimate Partner Violence”, J Interpers
Violence, Vol. 27(14), 2012, 2845-2868.
Krook, M.L., Violence against women in politics, Oxford University Press, 2020, available at:
(https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190088460.001.
0001/oso-9780190088460).
Lonsway, A., Archambault, J. & Lisak, D., “False Reports: Moving Beyond the Issue to
Successfully Investigate and Prosecute Non-Stranger Sexual Assault”, The National
Center for the Prosecution of Violence Against Women, 2009.
81
Mannel, J. & Hawkes, S., “Decriminalisation of gender-based violence is a global health
problem”, BMJ Global Health, Vol. 2(3), 2017, 1-3.
McQuigg, R.J.A., “Domestic Violence as a Human Rights issue: Rumor v. Italy”, European
Journal of International Law, Vol. 26(4), 2016, 1009-1026.
Mergaert, L., Arnaut, C., Vertommen, T. & Lang, M., Study for the European Commission:
Study on gender-based violence in sport, 2016, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/sport/library/studies/gender-based-violence-sport-
study-2016_en.pdf).
Morrison, A. & Orlando, M., The costs and impacts of gender-based violence in developing
countries: Methodological considerations and new evidence, 2004, available at:
(https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/442281468339624395/pdf/361510Gen
der0b1lence0Costs01PUBLIC1.pdf).
Morrison, A., Ellsberg, M. & Bott, S., “Addressing Gender-Based Violence: A Critical
Review of Interventions”, The World Bank Research Observer, Vol. 22(1), 2007, 25-
52, available at:
(https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/645591468175467081/pdf/453450PUB
00Box327423B01PUBLIC1.pdf).
Naudi, M., Clark, M. & Saliba, H., Full Cooperation: Zero Violence – Barriers to help-
seeking in gender-based violence against women: a research study, 2018, available at:
(https://stopviolence.gov.mt/en/Documents/Docs/Full%20Cooperation%20-
%20Zero%20Violence.pdf).
Rafael Rodrigues Vieira De Almeida, S., et al., JRC Science for Policy Report - Insights from
behavioural sciences to prevent and combat violence against women, 2016, available
at: (https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC103975).
Sanz-Barbero B., et al., “The effect of macrosocial policies on violence against women: a
multilevel study in 28 European countries”, International journal of public health,
Vol. 63(8), 2018, 901- 911.
Walby, S., et al., Study for the European Commission: Study on comprehensive policy review
of anti-trafficking projects, 2016, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/anti-
trafficking/sites/default/files/study_on_comprehensive_policy_review.pdf).
Wethington, H.R., et al., “The Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce Psychological Harm
from Traumatic Events Among Children and Adolescents – A Systematic Review”,
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Vol. 35(3), 2008, 287-313, available at:
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074937970800528X).
Xie, M. & Lynch, J.P., “The Effects of Arrest, Reporting to the Police, and Victim Services
on Intimate Partner Violence”, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol.
54(3), 2017, 338-378.
Studies and reports
Council of Europe, Combating violence against women: minimum standards for support
services, 2008, available at:
(https://www.coe.int/t/dg2/equality/domesticviolencecampaign/Source/EG-VAW-
CONF(2007)Study%20rev.en.pdf).
Council of Europe, Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on
child-friendly justice, 2010, available at:
82
(https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?doc
umentId=09000016804b2cf3).
Council of Europe & European Union, Training Manual for judges and prosecutors on
ensuring women’s access to justice, 2017, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/training-
manual-women-access-to-justice/16808d78c5).
Council of Europe, Gender Matters: Manual on addressing gender-based violence affecting
young people, 2019, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/gender-matters-a-manual-on-
addressing-gender-based-violence-affecting-/16809e1c34).
Council of Europe, Steering Committee for the Rights of the Child (CDENF), available at:
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/children/cdenf).
ECOSOC, Resolution 2004/27 – Guidelines on justice for child victims and witnesses of
crime, available at: (https://www.un.org/en/ecosoc/docs/2004/resolution%202004-
27.pdf).
EIGE, Estimating the costs of gender-based violence in the European Union, 2014, available
at: (https://eige.europa.eu/node/393).
EIGE, An analysis of the Victims’ Rights Directive from a gender perspective, 2016, available
at: (https://eige.europa.eu/publications/analysis-victims-rights-directive-gender-
perspective).
EIGE, Gender in transport¸ 2016, available at: (https://eige.europa.eu/publications/gender-
transport).
EIGE, Cyberviolence against women and girls, 2017, available at: (https://eige.
europa.eu/publications/cyber-violence-against-women-and-girls).
EIGE, Report: Gender-specific measures in anti-trafficking actions, 2018, available at:
(https://eige.europa.eu/publications/gender-specific-measures-anti-trafficking-actions-
report).
EIGE, Covid-19 wave of violence against women shows EU countries still lack proper
safeguards, 2020, available at: (https://eige.europa.eu/news/covid-19-wave-violence-
against-women-shows-eu-countries-still-lack-proper-safeguards).
EIGE, The Covid-19 pandemic and intimate partner violence against women in the EU, 2021,
available at: (https://eige.europa.eu/publications/covid-19-pandemic-and-intimate-
partner-violence-against-women-eu).
EIGE, Estimating the cost of gender-based violence in the European Union, [upcoming in
September 2021].
EIGE, Data on Gender-based violence, available at: (https://eige.europa.eu/gender-based-
violence).
Equinet, Tackling Violence against Women and Gender-Based Violence: Equality Bodies’
Contribution¸ 2019, available at: (https://equineteurope.org/2019/tackling-violence-
against-women-and-gender-based-violence-equality-bodies-contribution/).
European Commission, Harassment related to Sex and Sexual Harassment Law in 33
European Countries – Discrimination versus Dignity, European Network of Legal
Experts in the Field of Gender Equality, 2012, available at:
(https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/4541-harassment-related-to-sex-and-sexual-
harassment-law-in-33-european-countries).
European Commission, Eurobarometer 428: Gender Equality, 2015, available at:
(https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2048).
83
European Commission, Eurobarometer 449: Gender-based violence, 2016, available at:
(https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2115).
European Commission, Legal Implications of EU accession to the Istanbul Convention,
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, 2016,
available at: (https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3794-legal-implications-of-eu-
accession-to-the-istanbul-convention).
European Commission, Data collection on trafficking in human beings in the EU, 2018,
available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/default/files/what-we-
do/policies/european-agenda-security/20181204_data-collection-study.pdf).
European Commission, Strengthening Victims’ Rights: from compensation to reparation. For
a new EU Victims’ rights strategy 2020-2025. Report of the Special Adviser, J.
Milquet, to the President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, 2019,
available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/strengthening_victims_rights_-
_from_compensation_to_reparation_rev.pdf).
European Commission, European equality law review, European network of legal experts in
gender equality and non-discrimination, Vol. 2019/2, 2019, available at:
(https://www.migpolgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/EELR-2019-
02_WEB.pdf).
European Commission, Data collection on trafficking in human beings in the EU, 2020,
available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/anti-
trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/study_on_data_collection_on_trafficking_in_hum
an_beings_in_the_eu.pdf).
European Commission, Mutual Learning Programme in gender equality, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/gender-
equality/who-we-work-gender-equality/mutual-learning-programme-gender-
equality_en).
European Expert Network on Culture and Audiovisual, Study for the European Commission:
Gender gaps in the Cultural and Creative Sectors, 2020, available at:
(https://eenca.com/eenca/assets/File/EENCA%20publications/Final%20Report%20-
%20Gender%20in%20CCS%20EAC%20with%20Additional%20sections%20AV%2
0and%20Radio.pdf).
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, Criminalisation
of gender-based violence against women in European States, 2021, [unpublished].
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, Country reports
on gender equality – violence against women and domestic violence, available at:
(https://www.equalitylaw.eu/country).
European Parliament, European Added Value Assessment: Combatting Violence against
Women, 2013, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL-
JOIN_ET(2013)504467).
European Parliament, Gender Equal Access to Goods and Services Directive 2004/113/EC –
European Implementation Assessment, 2017, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/593787/EPRS_STU(20
17)593787_EN.pdf).
European Parliament, Study for the FEMM Committee: Violence against women and the EU
accession to the Istanbul Convention, 2017, available at:
84
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/596815/IPOL_STU(201
7)596815_EN.pdf).
European Parliament, Study for the FEMM Committee: Cyber violence and hate speech online
against women, 2018, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/604979/IPOL_STU(201
8)604979_EN.pdf).
European Parliament, Study for the FEMM Committee: Bullying and sexual harassment at the
workplace, in public spaces, and political life in the EU, 2018, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_STU(2
018)604949).
European Parliament, Study for the LIBE Committee: Criminal procedural laws across the
European Union – A comparative analysis of selected main differences and the impact
they have over the development of EU legislation, 2018, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=IPOL_STU%
282018%29604977).
European Parliament, Study: Equality and the Fight against Racism and Xenophobia. Cost of
Non-Europe Report, 2018, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/615660/EPRS_STU(20
18)615660_EN.pdf).
European Parliament, Study for the FEMM Committee: Tackling violence against women and
domestic violence in Europe – The added value of the Istanbul Convention and
remaining challenges, 2020, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658648/IPOL_STU(202
0)658648_EN.pdf).
European Parliament, Study for the FEMM Committee: Violence against Women –
Psychological violence and coercive control, 2020, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/650336/IPOL_STU(202
0)650336_EN.pdf).
European Parliament, Combating gender-based violence: Cyberviolence, European added
value assessment, 2021, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662621/EPRS_STU(20
21)662621_EN.pdf).
Eurostat, Crime and criminal justice – Overview, available at:
(https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/crime/overview)
FRA, Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. Main results report, 2014, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2014/violence-against-women-eu-wide-survey-
main-results-report).
FRA, Mapping child protection systems in the EU, 2015, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/en/project/2014/mapping-child-protection-systems-eu).
FRA, Handbook on European law relating to access to justice, 2016, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2016/handbook-european-law-relating-access-
justice).
FRA, Child-friendly justice – Perspectives and experiences of children involved in judicial
proceedings as victims, witnesses or parties in nine EU Member States, 2017,
available at: (https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2017/child-friendly-justice-
perspectives-and-experiences-children-involved-judicial).
85
FRA, Being Black in the EU: Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey
– Summary, 2019, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2019-being-black-in-the-eu-
summary_en.pdf).
FRA, Women as victims of partner violence – Justice for victims of violent crime, Part IV,
2019, available at: (https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2019/women-victims-partner-
violence-justice-victims-violent-crime-part-iv).
FRA, Violence against children with disabilities: legislation, policies and programmes in the
EU, 2015, available at: (https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2015/violence-against-
children-disabilities-legislation-policies-and-programmes-eu).
FRA, Children deprived of parental care found in an EU Member State other than their own
– A guide to enhance child protection focusing on victims of trafficking, 2019,
available at: (https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2019-children-
deprived-of-parental-care_en.pdf).
GEC, Analytical study of the results of the 4th
round of monitoring the implementation of
Recommendation Rec(2002)5 on the protection of women against violence in Council
of Europe member States, 2014, available at:
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/genderequality/recommendation-rec-2002-5-and-other-
tools-of-the-council-of-europe-concerning-violence-against-women).
Government of Spain, Mujeres víctimas de violencia de género en el mundo rural, Ministry of
Gender Equality, 2020, available at:
(https://violenciagenero.igualdad.gob.es/violenciaEnCifras/estudios/investigaciones/20
20/pdfs/vg__mundorural.pdf).
GREVIO, Mid-term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline evaluation reports, 2021,
available at: (https://rm.coe.int/horizontal-review-study-2021/1680a26325).
GREVIO, Country-monitoring work – Baseline Reports, available at:
(https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention/country-monitoring-work).
HateAid, Statement: General Recommendation on the Digital Dimension of Women, 2021,
available at: (https://hateaid.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Protection-of-women-
against-digital-violence.pdf).
HRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and
Consequences on violence against women in politics, A/73/301, 6 August 2018,
available at: (https://undocs.org/A/73/301).
HRC, Report of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, Its Causes and
Consequences on violence against women journalists, A/HRC/44/52, 6 May 2020,
available at: (https://undocs.org/en/A/HRC/44/52).
ICJ, Women’s Access to Justice for Gender-Based Violence – A Practitioners’ Guide, 2016,
available at: (https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Universal-Womens-
accesss-to-justice-Publications-Practitioners-Guide-Series-2016-ENG.pdf).
IDZ, #Hass im Netz – der schleichende Angriff auf die Demokratie, 2019, available at:
(https://www.idz-jena.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Bericht_Hass_im_Netz.pdf).
Intervita, Quanto costa il silenzio? Indagine nazionale sui costi economici e sociali della
violenza contro le donne, 2013, available at:
(https://polser.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/quantocostailsilenzio_short_def.pdf).
86
IPU, Sexism, harassment and violence against women in parliaments in Europe, Issue Brief,
2018, available at: (https://www.ipu.org/resources/publications/issue-briefs/2018-
10/sexism-harassment-and-violence-against-women-in-parliaments-in-europe).
National Center for Transgender Equality, Understanding Non-Binary People: How to Be
Respectful and Supportive, 2018, available at:
(https://transequality.org/issues/resources/understanding-non-binary-people-how-to-
be-respectful-and-supportive).
NSW Ombudsman, Domestic violence: improving police practice – A special report to
Parliament under s31 of the Ombudsman Act 1974, 2006, available at:
(https://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/3480/Domestic-violence-
improving-police-practice-Special-Report-to-Parliament-December-2006-.pdf).
NSW Law Reform Commission, Family Violence: Improving Legal Frameworks, 2010,
available at: (https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/family-violence-improving-legal-
frameworks-cp-1/).
OECD, SIGI 2019 Global Report – Transforming Challenges into Opportunities, 2019,
available at: (https://www.oecd.org/development/sigi-2019-global-report-bc56d212-
en.htm).
OHCHR, Gender stereotyping, available at:
(https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/women/wrgs/pages/genderstereotypes.aspx).
Research and Statistics Division Department of Justice Canada, Health Impacts of Violent
Victimization on Women and their Children, 2012, available at:
(https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/rr12_12/rr12_12.pdf ).
UNESCO, The Chilling: Global trends in online violence against women journalists –
Research Discussion Paper, 2021, available at:
(https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/the-chilling.pdf).
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 8 (2006): The Right of the
Child to Protection from Corporal Punishment and Other Cruel or Degrading Forms
of Punishment (Arts. 19; 28, Para. 2; and 37, inter alia), CRC/C/GC/8, 2 March 2007,
available at: (https://www.refworld.org/docid/460bc7772.html).
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 13 (2011): The right of the
child to freedom from all forms of violence, CRC/C/GC/13, 18 April 2011, available
at: (https://www.refworld.org/docid/4e6da4922.html).
UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women & UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child, Joint general recommendation No. 31 on harmful practices,
CEDAWC/GC/31-CRC/C/GC/18, 14 November 2014, available at:
(https://undocs.org/CEDAW/C/GC/31/CRC/C/GC/18).
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, General Comment No. 3 (2016) on
women and girls with disabilities, CRPD/C/GC/3, 25 November 2016, available at:
(https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno
=CRPD/C/GC/3&Lang=en).
UN Division for the Advancement of Women & UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Good
practices in combating and eliminating violence against women – Expert Group
Meeting, 2005, available at: (https://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/vaw-gp-
2005/docs/FINALREPORT.goodpractices.pdf).
UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Handbook on effective prosecution responses to violence
against women and girls, Criminal Justice Handbook Series, 2014, available at:
(https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-
87
reform/Handbook_on_effective_prosecution_responses_to_violence_against_women_
and_girls.pdf).
UN Office on Drugs and Crime, INSPIRE: Seven Strategies for Ending Violence Against
Children, 2016, available at: (https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-
reform/who---inspire_-seven-strategies-for-ending-violence-against-children.pdf).
UN Women, Stereotypes, 2020, available at: (https://www.endvawnow.org/en/articles/2023-
stereotypes.html).
Victim Support Europe, Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe
(VOCIARE), 2019, available at: (https://victimsupport.eu/about-us/our-
projects/vociare/).
Voices of Culture, Gender Equality: Gender Balance in the Cultural and Creative Sectors –
Brainstorming Report Reflecting Group Discussions, Structured Dialogue between the
European Commission and the cultural sector, 2020, available at:
(https://voicesofculture.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/VoC-Brainstorming-Report-
Gender-Balance-in-the-Cultural-and-Creative-Sectors.pdf).
WHO, The economic dimensions of interpersonal violence, 2004, available at:
(https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/42944/9241591609.pdf;jsessionid=0
27DFE72D5CF119FFFFEEF1F687ED3F3?sequence=1).
WHO, Violence prevention – the evidence, 2010, available at:
(http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/77936/9789241500845_eng.pdf).
WHO, Violence against women, 2021, available at: (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-
sheets/detail/violence-against-women).
WHO, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine & South African Medical Research
Council, Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and
health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence, 2013,
available at: (who.int/publications/i/item/9789241564625).
88
ANNEX 2: Stakeholder consultation
The stakeholder consultation strategy
To inform the preparations of the legislative initiative, the Commission consulted extensively
with stakeholders to gather up-to-date information and expertise and to develop effective
measures to counter gender-based violence against women and domestic violence, as
indicated in the stakeholder strategy developed in support of the initiative. Relevant results
from previous consultations have also been taken into account227
. In addition, in 2016, the
Commission also conducted a specialised Eurobarometer survey on gender-based violence
with a sample of over 27,000 respondents form all EU Member States228
. These activities
have contributed to the design and testing of the policy options. Details on the individual
consultations are provided in the following.
Open public consultation on ‘Combating gender-based violence – protecting
victims and punishing offenders’ (8 February 2021 – 10 May 2021)
Objectives of the public consultation
The European Commission conducted an open public consultation to gather the views of the
public on measures to address gender-based violence against women and domestic violence.
The purpose of the consultation was to assess the existing legal framework at EU level insofar
as relevant for matters of gender-based violence and domestic violence as well as to inform
the Commission’s work on further measures for improved, coordinated prevention of and
protection against this kind of violence. This public consultation forms part of the evidence
gathering carried out in support of the impact assessment conducted in preparation for a
legislative initiative to prevent and combat violence against women and domestic violence.
Approach to the public consultation
Open public consultations are not, by nature, statistically representative of the population
(unlike, e.g., public opinion polls). Therefore, their purpose is not to find answers that could
be generalised, but rather to gain in-depth insights to shed new light on a range of issues.
The public consultation was open from 8 February 2021 to 10 May 2021. It included 66
questions across five sections. Two of the questions were exclusively open-ended and 11 were
multiple choice, which permitted the selection of multiple response options. 47 of the closed-
227
See ‘Open public consultation on gender equality in the EU: Current situation and priorities for the future’ (8
March 2019 – 31 May 2019), where 46% of all respondents held that strengthening the rights of victims of
gender-based violence, including on specific support, protection measures and compensation was crucial.
Prevention work, including by tackling gender stereotypes and promoting non-violent conflict resolution was
selected by 40% of all respondents and 67% of employers’ organisations. In addition, developing measures to
tackle online hate speech, abuse and violence against women and girls (36% of all respondents), data collection
and research on root causes, prevalence, consequences or costs (31% of all respondents), and ensuring that
gender-based violence is addressed within relevant EU policies and strategies (education, humanitarian aid,
digital agenda, etc.) (31% of all respondents) were identified as further key actions to be considered by the
Commission in combating gender-based violence.
228
European Commission, Eurobarometer 449: Gender-based violence, 2016, available at:
(https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2115). Also European Commission, Eurobarometer 428: Gender
Equality, 2015, available at: (https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2048), where violence against
women (especially sexual violence), was considered one of the two areas that the EU should address the most
urgently.
89
ended questions also provided the opportunity to include an open text response. The
consultation gathered input from a range of stakeholders, including individual citizens, civil
society organisations, social partners, equality bodies, Member States and national authorities.
The questionnaire was uploaded on the Have Your Say portal of the European Commission.
Overview of the respondents
There were 767 respondents to the open public consultation from across the Member States,
Hungary was the most represented with 371 respondents (48%), followed by Italy with 126
(16%) and Germany with 87 (11%) (see Figure 1). The replies showed no organised campaign
or similar attempt to influence outcomes. The high number of responses in Hungary resulted
from publicity of the consultation in national media. There were much fewer responses from
other EU countries, varying between 37 (Spain, Belgium) and one (Luxembourg); only Latvia
had none. There were four responses from non-EU citizens, one from Albania and three from
citizens who nevertheless indicated residence in EU Member States.
90
Overview of responses
The questionnaire allowed respondents to reply to one, several, or all of the sections. Whilst
the total number of respondents was 767, this was not the total response rate for each
question. As can be seen in Figure 2, which shows the number of responses received for each
question, Question 1 received the highest number of responses (758), and Question 19 the
fewest (287). Of the five sections, Section I received the highest average number of responses
(751), followed by Section III (711). Section IV received the fewest (664) (see Figure 3).
Section I: How to effectively prevent gender-based violence and domestic violence?
In response to the first, and most responded to, question, the overwhelming majority (725
respondents, 96%) believe it is ‘Very important’ that their Member State takes measures to
prevent violence against women (VAW/DV) (Figure 4).
The measures considered as the most frequently taken to prevent VAW/DV in Member States
are awareness-raising among the general public (435 respondents, 59%) and training of
relevant professionals (274 respondents, 37%). No knowledge of measures taken is the third
most selected option (233 respondents, 32%) and is chosen almost exclusively by respondents
from Hungary. The predominant reasons given for measures being ineffective are that the
91
public is not sufficiently aware of this kind of violence or see it as a private matter (579
respondents, 79%) and that there are not enough services and activities offered to empower
survivors and encourage them to break the silence (538 respondents, 73%).
37% (272) of respondents are aware of prevention programmes at national or local levels
for perpetrators of VAW/DV. Among respondents from Hungary, however, this is
substantially lower (55 respondents, 15%) and among respondents from Italy and Germany it
is higher (58% (73) and 73% (55) respectively). Respondents recognize that the media (336
respondents, 46%) and the cultural and creative (270 respondents, 37%) sectors have in
particular made efforts to support prevention of VAW/DV in their Member States.
Regarding training, almost half of all respondents (340 respondents, 48%) do not believe that
professionals are adequately trained to work with victims of VAW or perpetrators. This is
echoed in the responses from Hungary and Italy whereas 43% (33) of respondents from
Germany believe they are. As to whether NGOs provide training, almost half of the
respondents indicated they do not know (346 respondents, 49%), against 38% (264) who
indicated that they do so.
Concerning possible further prevention measures, most respondents (672 respondents,
90%) deem very important that harmful gender stereotypes be challenged to prevent
VAW/DV. Measures that teach non-discrimination, gender equality and non-violent
communication topics in schools are viewed as most needed to better prevent VAW/DV (687
respondents, 94%), followed by further measures to raise awareness about VAW/DV among
the general public (605 respondents, 82%).
Section II: Protection from further violence and access to justice, including compensation
The question in this section with the highest response rate (734) was whether victims of
VAW/DV are provided with information on their rights, the services they can turn to and
the follow up given to their complaints, to which 60% (439) of respondents selected
‘Partially’ (see Figure 5). Moreover, in terms of the timeliness of this information and its
accessibility, respondents predominantly found that information is not provided quickly
enough (292 respondents, 43%), is difficult to find (283 respondents, 42%) and is inconsistent
and spread over different sources (281 respondents, 42%).
92
For questions concerning the conduct of authorities, the majority (543 respondents, 75%) of
respondents do not consider that relevant authorities or services ensure that risk factors are
sufficiently considered at all stages of investigation and court proceedings. Additionally, 56%
(404) of respondents do not believe that law enforcement and judicial authorities in their
Member State ensure appropriate follow-up of VAW/DV reports. Over half of the
respondents (420 respondents, 57%) do not believe that these authorities treat victims, as well
as child witnesses, in a gender-sensitive and child friendly manner. Open text commentary
detailed that the treatment of victims is at the discretion of the officials involved and shows
biases and re-victimization (victims being blamed or not believed). In countries such as
Belgium, Germany, and Italy, however, where special processes or staff training have been
implemented, some described a positive environment. The prevalent view across all
respondents is that sanctions for gender-based and domestic violence offences are not
sufficient (548 respondents, 75%). Many respondents raised issues related to sanctions, such
as low rates of conviction, light or suspended sentences, and a lack of enforcement.
Regarding compensation for victims, almost half of the respondents (354 respondents, 49%)
do not believe that information on how victims can obtain compensation (from the offender
and/or the state) is available in their Member State. Whilst this view was echoed by two of the
most represented countries (Hungary and Italy), 59% (42) of respondents from Germany (the
third most represented country) do deem this information to be available. A minority of
respondents (108 respondents, 15%) believe that victims do receive compensation from the
offender, although 39% (279) do not know. The final question on compensation (question 19)
received the fewest responses across all questions (286). It asked respondents to
hypothetically describe the process of pursuing compensation, should they be entitled to it,
which the overwhelming majority (241 respondents, 84%) described as difficult and long.
The final question of this section asked whether further measures to improve access to
justice in matters of VAW/DV could improve the situation of victims, to which 73% (516)
responded they believe that they could at both national and EU level.
Section III: Supporting victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The first question in this section asked whether support services (either general or specialist)
are available to victims of gender-based and domestic violence in respondents’ Member
States. Across all respondents, 64% (464) do understand these services to be available.
However, for two of the most represented countries, Germany and Italy, this proportion is
substantially higher, at over 82% (see Figure 6).
93
Regarding general support services, three quarters of respondents (526, 75%) selected that
neither they nor those with whom they have a close relation have used them. Those who
replied that they had used these services (11 respondents, 17%), frequently mentioned social
services, followed by employment services, health services, psychological or counselling
services, and anti-violence centres. In response to whether general support services
systemically account for the needs of victims of VAW/DV, most (344 of respondents, 48%)
do not believe they do, against 17% (123) who believe they do, while the remainder do not
know (251 respondents, 35%). Further open text responses focused on the limited scope of
support, with a frequent lack of financial support and provision of counselling to victims.
Similarly, 46% (330) of respondents believe general support services do not take systematic
account of the special needs of child victims/witnesses of domestic violence, against 19%
(139) who believe they do, while others (250 respondents, 35%) do not know.
The following support services questions relate to specialist support services. 39% (283) of
respondents believe that general support services refer victims to appropriate specialist
services in their Member State. The proportion, however, is higher among respondents from
Italy and Germany and accounts for over 60% in both cases. In terms of specialist support
services that are accessible only to women victims of gender-based or domestic violence, 54%
(385) of respondents believe that these are available. However, knowledge of services that are
accessible to male victims is much lower (141 respondents, 20%). For the special needs of
child victims and child witnesses of domestic violence, almost 50% (332) of respondents do
not know whether these specialist services systematically take children’s needs into account,
and supplementary open-text responses suggest this is inadequate.
Three questions in this section address the availability of support services that account for the
needs of different groups of victims. Firstly, the accessibility of support services for persons
with disabilities is unknown to half of the respondents (356 respondents, 51%). Secondly, the
availability of services without discrimination, such as that based on racial or ethnic origin, is
split across respondents 32% (225) believe they are, 35% (247) believe they are not and 33%
(233) do not know). Thirdly, responses as to whether victims receive information on support
services in a timely manner and in a language they understand is also split but with a higher
proportion of people not knowing (292 respondents, 41%).
As to whether further measures should be taken to improve the support to victims of
VAW/DV, the majority (553 respondents, 77%) believe they should, at national and EU level.
Section IV: Specific forms of violence against women
Concerning specific forms of violence against women, as shown in Figure 7, the majority of
respondents understand that the primary gaps in protection against sex-based and sexual
harassment result from the perception that it is not considered a real problem by the general
public (431 respondents, 66%), that sanctions are insufficient (430 respondents, 66%), and
that provisions are ineffectively enforced (406 respondents, 62%).
94
Over half of respondents (355 respondents, 52%) are not aware of anti-harassment policies or
guidelines developed by government or social partners on tackling sex-based harassment at
work. 48% (324) are aware of these policies/guidelines either by both government and social
partners or by one of them (see Figure 8).
60% (391) of respondents are unaware of a workplace policy on sex-based harassment.
Similarly, over three quarters of respondents (515 respondents, 78%) are not aware of training
of employer representatives in their Member State. In further open-text responses, among
respondents aware of training provided by their Member State, most stated that the training
offered is not mandatory, and therefore whether employees have to follow it depends largely
on the commitment of employers. Finally, 59% (394) of respondents do not know which
national authorities or other bodies they can contact in their Member State in cases of sex-
95
based harassment at work. However, for respondents from Italy and Germany, over half (54%
and 62% respectively) do know who to contact.
The second category covered is gender-based cyber violence. 68% (470) of respondents
believe that it has become more common in recent years in their Member State; and the most
common forms of illegal gendered online content are believed to be gender-based hate speech
(566 respondents, 84%), illegal sharing of private photos (492 respondents, 73%), and cyber-
stalking (471 respondents, 70%). In further open-text commentary, respondents mentioned
that the spread of the internet is one of the main problems, as abusers benefit from its
anonymity when engaging in abusive behaviour. In response to whether perpetrators
explicitly indicate that their behaviour is based on a victim’s gender, there is no consensus
(40% (270) said that they do, 23% (154) that they do not and 37% (255) do not know). The
supplementary open-text commentary explains that although gender may not be clearly stated,
the vocabulary and content reveal the gendered nature of the abuse.
In terms of measures that respondents believe online platforms should take to combat illegal
and harmful gendered online content, the primary option selected is maintaining an effective
‘notice and action’ system for users to report content (545 respondents, 81%), followed by the
establishment of policies in this area and informing users of these policies including the
effects of breaches (493 respondents, 73%). In the event that online platforms establish
specific policies on illegal and harmful gendered content, most respondents believe that they
should inform users on how to seek assistance from the platform and explain the available
complaint mechanisms (573 respondents, 88%). If equality bodies in the EU Member States
had powers to address this kind of content, the main power respondents indicated they should
have is the provision of legal advice to victims (543 respondents, 83%).
The third category is harmful practices, and the first question asks whether measures were
taken in Member States to prevent harmful practices targeting women. Across respondents,
40% (268) indicated that they were, and further open-text responses predominantly mentioned
criminal laws of their Member State. As regards protection or support programmes for victims
of these practices, 36% (242) of respondents are not aware of them and 34% (229) do not
know, whilst almost half of respondents (327 respondents, 49%) do not believe that existing
preventive, intervention or support measures are effective. More than half the respondents
(372 respondents, 56%) do not know whether psychological and gynecological care are
available in their Member State for victims of female genital mutilation. For respondents from
Germany, however, the majority are aware of care available (50 respondents, 74%).
On the issue of trafficking in human beings, the final category, 42% (277) of respondents
are aware of prevention measures in their Member State. For respondents from Italy and
Germany, this is more pronounced (56% and 68% respectively). 42% (268) of respondents
believe that other aspects of sexual exploitation of women and girls than trafficking should
be addressed in EU law - with the most occurring theme being prohibition of buying sexual
services.
Section V: other aspects related to violence against women and domestic violence
Responses as to whether data on gender-based violence and domestic violence is being
regularly collected at national level are split (43% (293) selected that it is, 31% (210) do not
know and 26% (176) believe it is not).
96
As to specific aspects of gender-based or domestic violence, 65% (428) of respondents do not
know whether violence targeting women with disabilities are addressed by general
measures. In open text responses, respondents remarked on the general lack of attention to
women with mental and physical disabilities. Similarly, specific aspects of intergenerational
violence, not addressed by general measures, are also unknown (367 respondents, 56%).
On measures to address psychological violence, 55% (371) of respondents are not aware of
specific measures. This is similar for measures to address economic violence, where almost
half (310 respondents, 46%) are not aware of them. 57% (382) of respondents deemed
measures to tackle sexual violence to be ineffective. This is echoed by respondents from
Hungary and Italy, while 42% (28) of respondents from Germany believe that measures in
their country have been effective. Across all respondents, 57% (385) think that there are
specialised support services available for victims of sexual violence.
63% (427) of respondents believe that regional differences in the availability of preventative,
protection, and support services regarding gender-based violence and domestic violence do
exist. Most respondents indicated strong differences between rural and urban areas in the
availability of support services, with rural areas more at risk as most services are city-based.
Almost 70% (453 respondents, 67%) of respondents believe that NGOs encounter issues in
their work on gender-based violence and domestic violence. The final question addresses the
extent to which COVID-19 had impacts on gender-based and domestic violence. The
majority of respondents believe that there has been an impact (567 respondents, 83%), with
almost 70% (470 respondents, 69%) believing that this impact is severe (see Figure 9). In
open text responses, respondents mostly reported that they perceived a considerable increase
in domestic violence in the context of COVID-19.
Finally, 23 written submissions were made to the European Commission in connection with
the open public consultation. These include inputs and recommendations from the United
Nations agencies (1), European agencies (1) social partners (2) and NGOs (19).
Feedback to the Inception Impact Assessment
A total of 63 contributions were submitted. The replies present broadly the whole stakeholder
spectrum: NGOs, individual citizens, international organisations, social partners, academics
97
and research institutions, equality bodies, the private sector, foundations, company and
business organisations and trade unions. Most stakeholders agreed with the need for a
comprehensive, holistic legislative initiative on GBV, NGOs underlining the need for an
intersectional approach.
Targeted consultations and engagement activities
1.4.1. Targeted consultation for the Member States
The European Commission organised a targeted consultation with Member States. The online
survey gathered views and information on the measures taken to prevent and combat violence
against women and domestic violence. Responses were received from all Member States
except for Malta, although response rates varied for each country, with Croatia not responding
to most questions.
Section 1: coordination and data collection
For section one, all Member States that answered have reported some form of a policy
framework to address violence against women and domestic violence, with the most
common challenge being to find consensus among the different actors, and challenges with
inter-agency cooperation, budgetary restraints and lack of political will.
Most (24) reported that they have an official mechanism is in place for coordinating
measures and sharing good practices on tackling violence against women and domestic
violence, and an equal number reported that the coordination of measures and the sharing of
good practices on preventing and combatting violence against women and domestic violence
is ensured among the regional and/or local authorities in their Member State.
Authorities representing 25 Member States responded that data is regularly collected on
violence against women and domestic violence, and although there were significant
variations, the most common answer was that data is collected by the police and published
annually. Most make the data public. Disaggregation of data varies considerably. All had
some level of disaggregation of data, mostly by sex and age. Only some disaggregated by
geographical location and very few by disability. For most member States, the level of
disaggregation depends on the crime. Other disaggregation were also used, such as
relationship to the perpetrator.
Concerning data collection to measure the impact of the Covid-19 crisis on violence
against women and domestic violence, 21 Member States responded that data has been
collected (PL, RO, IE and BG answered in the negative). The most common challenge for
data collection was ensuring harmonised data collection between different institutions along
with challenges collecting the data.
Section 2: prevention of violence against women and domestic violence
25 Member States responded that awareness-raising campaigns on violence against women
and domestic violence have been organised. 26 Member States responded that training to
professionals working with victims of violence against women and domestic violence, or
with perpetrators, is available.
24 Member States responded that this training follows a child-sensitive approach. Only DK
responded in the negative (no response from MT and DE). 22 MS responded that this training
follows a gender-sensitive approach. NL and CZ responded in the negative; no response was
received from MT, DE and SE.
98
Member States listed wide range of challenges in preventing violence against women and
domestic violence. These included embedded negative social attitudes and the need for more
awareness-raising, particularly with men and perpetrators, to change them. Capacity
challenges were also raised around a lack of training, funding and inter-agency cooperation. A
lack of reporting and lack of understanding of prevalence was also noted as making it harder
to identify and support victims.
Section 3: protection and support
All Member States, excluding LV and MT, responded that national protection orders are
used in cases of violence against women and domestic violence. Regarding the consequences
of breaching national protection orders, 21 Member States replied there are criminal
sanctions, 9 Member States that there are civil sanctions, and in 2 there are other
consequences. In only one there are no consequences.
14 Member States have responded that further measures would be useful to make national
protection orders more effective in practice. Six Member States (22%) (NL, SI, FR, CZ, LU
and AT) responded in the negative and no response was provided by seven Member States.
52% of Member States (14) have responded that foreign protection orders have been
recognised and enforced in their Member State. Three authorities responded in the negative
(NL, DE and CZ) and ten did not provide a response.
Regarding challenges in the use of the EU rules on mutual recognition of protection
orders (in civil or in criminal matters) BE, CZ and FI said the problem is a ‘Lack of
awareness about the possibility of mutual recognition of foreign protection orders (by the
relevant authorities or the parties involved)’. BG and RO said ‘Divergence of sanctions in
different Member States for similar types of protection orders’. DK and EE said ‘other
issues’. PL, LV and EE said there are have been very few cases so they could not report on
any issues. EE and FR said there are no known problems. Other MS did not respond.
In response to whether law enforcement authorities are empowered or obliged to inform a
support service of cases of violence against women and domestic violence, 12 Member
States (44%) selected the latter (obliged) and 13 (48%) selected the former (empowered).
Only EL responded that they may not do so. 25 Member States responded that support
services (general or specialised) are available to victims of violence against women and
domestic violence in their Member States. Only BG responded that they are available only in
some parts/regions of the country.
In regard to whether general support services systematically take into account the special
needs of child victims and witnesses of domestic violence based on a child-sensitive
approach, 18 Member States responded that they do. Seven Member States responded that
they do, but not systematically, and two Member States (FR and MT) did not provide a
response. All 26 Member States responded that general support services refer victims to
appropriate specialist services in their Member State.
The below table indicates the available support services referred to. 23 Member States refer
to legal counselling services, 21 to psychological support, 21 to health services, 21 to
helplines for victims, 18 to housing services and 14 to financial support services.
22 Member States responded that there are specialist support services accessible only to
women victims of gender-based and/or domestic violence in their Member State (LV, ES, HU
and PL answered in the negative). 16 Member States responded that there are specialist
support services accessible to male victims of domestic violence while eight responded that
specialist support services are not accessible to male victims in their Member State. IT, PL
99
and MT did not provide a response. 56% (15) Member States responded that specialist
support services do systematically take into account the special needs of child victims and
child witnesses of domestic violence based on a child-sensitive approach. Eight (30%)
responded that they do, but not systematically.
All 23 Member States that provided a response responded in the affirmative, that victims of
VAW/DV are informed of their rights, of the services they can turn to, and the follow-up
given to their complaint. CZ, HR and MT did not provide a response.
16 Member States said the above-mentioned information is easily available. One said that the
information is inconsistent and spread over different sources (PL). Four said the information
is not available in all languages needed. One said the information is difficult to find (LU).
22 Member States responded in the affirmative to the question whether support programmes
for perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence have been set up. Only
HU responded that support programmes for perpetrators have not been set up (four did not
provide a response). 18 Member States responded in the positive to the question whether there
are measures within these perpetrator programmes to ensure the safety of, support for and the
respect of human rights of women victims. PT and LV responded in the negative and seven
did not provide a response.
Just over half of the Member States (14) responded that there are support services for victims
of violence accessible to persons with disabilities. 10 Member States responded that there
are partly (in terms of geographical accessibility and/or in terms of services). 25 Member
States provided a response to this question, and all state that that support services are
available to all women victims of violence without discrimination on grounds such as racial or
ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. HR and MT did not
provide a response. 52% (14) Member States responded that the availability of support
services is not conditional upon the victim’s residence status for migrant women victims of
violence. Five did not provide a response and eight responded that it is conditional.
25 Member States responded that measures have been taken to ensure the regional
availability of preventive, protection and support services regarding violence against women
and domestic violence. BG answered in the negative. 26 Member States responded that NGOs
or other non-governmental actors that provide victim support services receive funding
and / or other support from the government. 24 Member States responded that the national
laws transposing the Victims’ Rights Directive foresee specific measures addressing the needs
of victims of violence against women and domestic violence (three did not provide a
response).
Member State authorities raised a very wide range of challenges in protecting and
supporting victims of violence against women and domestic violence, including challenges
with criminalisation, lack of support services, insufficient training and funding, hesitancy of
victims to report and engage with authorities, lack of inter-agency cooperation, the need to
increase public awareness of the phenomenon,
Section 4: Access to justice, including prosecution
24 Member States have reported that arrangements have been put in place to facilitate
women’s and children’s access to justice. BG and RO stated that some of these arrangements
have been put in place.
All 26 Member States that provided a response responded that measures have been put in
place to protect victims of VAW/DV, and/or their families and witnesses, from intimidation,
100
retaliation and repeat victimisation during investigations and court proceedings. 22 Member
States responded that legal aid is available in cases of violence against women and domestic
violence in the same way as it is for victims of other violence. BG and EL responded that it is
available but is limited. IE responded that it is not available.
25 Member States responded that arrangements have been put in place to ensure the best
interests of child victims and witnesses during criminal investigations and court
proceedings. RO responded that some of these arrangements have been put in place.
One of the major challenges identified by Member States in the prosecution of cases on
violence against women and domestic violence is a lack of evidence, which makes conviction
very challenging (AT, CY, DE, DK, FI, RO, SE, SK, SL). The most common challenges
which women victims of violence against women and domestic violence face in accessing
justice was a lack of reporting which was highlighted by six MS as one of the main
challenges in the prosecution of cases of GBV (BE, BG, CY, DE, IE, RO).
Section 5: Harmful practices against women and girls
44% (12) Member State responded that there is no data collection system in place to record
asylum requested and/or granted on grounds of harmful practices against women while
33% (9) of MS responded that there is a data collection system in place in their Member State.
With regard to whether there are measures in place to ensure that custom, religion, tradition or
so-called honour cannot be regarded as a justification for harmful practices against women,
13 MS responded that this is specified by law. BE and HU responded that this is specified in
government guidelines and seven Member State responded that this is not specified.
In response to whether harmful practices against women and girls perpetrated abroad can
be investigated, prosecuted and adjudicated, 19 Member State responded that this is the case.
Only CZ responded in the negative.
1.4.2. Targeted consultation workshop with non-governmental organisations, 6 May
2021
The European Commission organized an ad hoc meeting of the Victims’ Rights Platform229
and NGOs working in the area of violence against women. Eight individual interviews with
NGOs were additionally conducted.
NGOs identified a range of protection and support gaps across the EU for victims of
violence against women and domestic violence. Victims face significant challenges in
accessing justice. NGOs indicated that significantly more action was needed at national and
EU levels to effectively tackle such violence. They did not articulate challenges with the
current EU legislation, but felt the main challenge is the need for more comprehensive
legislation to tackle the issue of VAW/DV specifically, particularly in Member States that
have not ratified the Istanbul Convention.
NGOs had largely consistent and complementary views in this area and articulated a range of
views, focusing on the challenges to be addressed:
229
https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/criminal-justice/protecting-victims-
rights/victims-rights-platform_en.
101
■ Participants noted that in order to effectively address violence against women and
domestic violence, minimum standards on prevention and protection measures are
needed at EU level, including on work with perpetrators, more awareness of violence
against women and domestic violence and information provision to victims on
accessing support and protection. Addressing harmful gender stereotypes as one of
the main root causes of gender-based violence and the education sector has a pivotal
role in addressing them.
■ Targeted trainings for professionals across sectors were broadly considered essential
to providing effective support to victims, particularly with police and judicial
authorities.
■ They noted the important of covering a wide range of forms of violence, including
cyber violence. Some NGOs stressed that sexual exploitation and trafficking should not
be conflated with sex work.
■ NGOs underlined the importance of inclusive and intersectional approaches to
violence against women and domestic violence that include transgender, lesbian,
intersex people, migrants (including undocumented migrants) and people with
disabilities.
■ Generally, all participants agreed on the need to increase resources for issuing
emergency barring orders in order to ensure more effective police interventions, as
well as highlighted the need for comprehensive long-term and multiagency
coordination and cooperation for the protection of victims.
■ The participants noted the need for more action to address barriers to access to
justice and the low rate of reporting.
■ Most participants stressed the lack of general and specialised support services for
victims and stressed the importance of Member States providing both general and
specialised support services. They identified as a key challenge the lack of funding for
victim support services.
■ Most participants stressed the lack of comparable and comprehensive disaggregated
data to understand the scale of the problem and better identify victims. They also noted
the need to estimate the cost of violence and the relevant benefits.
■ Multiagency coordination was considered essential both at the national level and at
regional / local levels to ensure geographical availability of services and
coordinated, holistic support and protection measures. Participants also highlighted
the need for Member States to establish a coordination mechanism, as well as called for
an EU level coordination mechanism.
1.4.3. Workshop with social partners, 29 June 2021
The European Commission and ICF co-organised a targeted workshop meeting with social
partners on 29 June 2021230
. The meeting focused on two aspects: 1) exchange of views on
the effectiveness and relevance of the EU framework on preventing and combatting violence
230
The invitation was sent to the social partners’ representatives in the Advisory Committee on equal
opportunities for women and men and to sectoral social partners that have expressed interest in the subject in
the context of their Sectoral Social Dialogue Committee meetings. An identical workshop was organised for
employer associations the following day.
102
against women at work, and 2) and on the possible measures for increased prevention of sex-
based work harassment and protection of victims.
Overall, the EU legislative framework was not seen as lacking although there were mentions
that it was not sufficiently implemented. EU legislation was seen as only one factor affecting
the work of social partners with many participants noting the important role of other factors,
including the ILO Convention no.190 and the MeToo movement. One participant said there
needs to be a more proactive approach. The current approach is largely reactive and requires
litigation to claim those rights.
Collective bargaining was highlighted by some participants as the best root to proactive
measures. Collective bargaining was described as having led to negotiation of collective
agreements, policy commitments, workplace support structures and trainings, about zero
tolerance to harassment.
One participant noted that to prevent sexual harassment, a gender equal environment in
the workplace is needed, including equal pay, equal access to decision making, and
an inclusive and just environment.
Risk assessments were discussed as having an important in preventing and combatting VAW.
However it was raised that risk assessments are not gender responsive. It was also noted that
very few risk assessments are carried out and when they are, they do not include psychosocial
risks.
Addressing violence against women and domestic violence and its impacts on work
environments was discussed. Examples of concrete measures, including 10 days’ leave for
victims were mentioned. Some participants stressed that what happens at home has an impact
on the work. This is not about encouraging into employees’ private lives but workplaces must
be inclusive places so issues can be raised. Victims need insurance that they will not lose their
job. It was also noted that violence in the workplace can also lead to domestic violence.
One participant raised that there is evidence of the costs to companies included
around absenteeism and other costs that would make it in companies interest to address it.
One participant raised that home-working and the increase of domestic violence has led to
debate among companies about a duty of care to ensure safe and secure working places.
Concerning access to justice, including collective action, one participant discussed the
important of collective interventions by trade unions as it is a safer and cheaper option.
Another participant noted that collective action can have a role in protecting victims from
exposure, especially in high profile cases. It was noted that in individual cases, access to
justice can be difficult, cumbersome, and lengthy. Another participant noted that the shift
of the burden of proof onto employers is very important in securing access to justice.
It was noted that online harassment is increasing, also in work contexts, and taking new
forms. Certain professions are more at risk, such as female journalists. It was considered
that more action is needed including training and encouragement to report cyber violence,
user friendly tools to report and flag online content, a national media regulatory.
1.4.4. Workshop with employer associations, 30 June 2021
The European Commission organised a targeted workshop meeting with four employer
associations on 30 June 2021 with the same agenda as for the social partner’s workshop
described above.
103
Regarding current EU legislation and policy, social partners noted that the social partners’
framework agreement was the main source guiding their action in this area at EU level.
Although adopted in 2007, it is still producing a range of actions231
.
ILO Convention no. 190 has a significant role for the work of employer associations. A focus
of the discussion was on domestic violence. Participants felt that it is important that
employers are not made responsible or have obligations related to domestic violence as it is
beyond their control. There are also issues of privacy that victims may not want discussed at
work. One participant drew an analogy with health and safety whereby employers are not
responsible for health and safety issues when an employee has left the workplace. Participants
felt that there is a clear separation between the public/work sphere and the private sphere.
Another employer noted that there are challenges implementing existing legislation and
adding domestic violence might make it more complicated and would lead to difficult
negotiations.
Participants were largely resistant to more obligations relating to the effects of violence
against women and domestic violence at work. One noted that that soft measures, such as
EIGE’s Handbook on Sexism, was a better route and more training.
Regarding current activities, one participant said there are projects ongoing on third party
violence, which will include gender dimension, including domestic violence and the impacts
of COVID-19. They are looking at risk assessments, including psychosocial risk, and
developing an agreement on training of HR managers in this regard. Another participant
noted there has been challenges implementing risk assessments because they include sensitive
issues and employers need support and guidance to do it.
One participant noted that understanding of the challenge and illegality sexual harassment is
very well establish and understood but the challenge is practical implementation.
Two participants noted that the issue of tackling sexual harassment varies considerably on the
size of the company. In small companies, it can be hard to maintain confidentiality. Smaller
companies may also not have a comprehensive HR structure or trainings in place.
1.4.5. Targeted consultation workshop with the Member States, 1 July 2021
The objective of the workshop was twofold: (1) to provide Member States with the
preliminary results from the evaluation and the existing criminal law provisions applied to
violence against women and domestic violence, and (2) to gather Member States’ views on
the options considered by the Commission for the legislative initiative.
Dr. Lorena Sosa, Assistant Professor at Utrecht University, presented the main findings of the
upcoming thematic report on ‘Criminalisation of gender-based violence against women in
European States, including ICT-facilitated violence’ of the European network of legal experts
in the field of gender equality, and explained how the Member States are addressing violence
against women and domestic violence from a comparative legal perspective. She elaborated
on the persisting gaps in coverage and protection – especially when assessed against the
benchmarks in the Istanbul Convention – and the need for more action.
Member States were invited to engage in discussion on the different policy options to address
the identified gaps. Italy welcomed the comprehensive approach of the upcoming legislative
231
Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament transmitting the European
framework agreement on harassment and violence at work (COM(2007) 686 final)).
104
proposal and emphasised the importance of taking into account the pending legal opinions on
the Istanbul Convention and on the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention no. 190.
France recalled its commitment to tackle gender based violence and asked about the legal
bases of the directive. Slovakia referred to differing state practices concerning consent in the
field of sexual violence. Portugal underlined the relationship between the criminal nature of
gender-based violence and discrimination, as well as emphasized that the proposal should take
into account the needs of children. Latvia had questions about the relationship between the
legislative proposal and the proposal on hate speech and hate crime.
1.4.6. Targeted consultation workshop with international organisations, 8 July 2021
A targeted consultation workshop was organised by the European Commission to gather
international organisations’ views on possible minimum standards concerning effective
prevention, protection, support and access to justice for victims of all forms of violence
against women and domestic violence in the EU, and gather input to ensure the
complementarity of the upcoming proposal with the international obligations of the Member
States.
Concerning prevention of violence against women and domestic violence, participants
highlighted the need for early intervention and prevention programmes. A range of
measures were necessary to ensure better prevention measures, including integrated service
delivery; psychosocial risk; awareness-raising measures that include harassment, stalking,
online violence, FGM, forced marriage, etc. forms of violence against women and domestic
violence, which are not currently covered. They emphasized the need for large-scale
awareness-raising campaigns that cover these forms of gender-based violence. Similarly, the
need to combat societal prejudices, assumptions and gender stereotypes was also noted.
Prevention initiatives must be inclusive, integrated and gender-sensitive, meaning that all
stakeholders must be directly involved in the drafting, monitoring and evaluation of the
prevention programmes. Some participants noted the importance of engaging men and boys
in prevention measures. To this regard, the participants discussed the importance of
providing teaching material on gender issues – in both formal curricula and informal
education – as well as providing appropriate training for relevant professionals (e.g.
doctors, nurses, midwives, lawyers, judges, etc.). Training should be continuous and be based
on clear guidelines, as well as mandatory. Relevant professionals should be encouraged to
follow in-service trainings throughout their career.
As regards protection and support services, participants identified a lack of gendered
understanding of violence, which can lead to secondary and repeat victimization,
intimidation and retaliation. One-stop-shop approaches to seek assistance were highlighted as
best practice. It was also noted there is a need to dissociate access to support services from
the willingness to report or pursue the criminal process. There is a need to invest more in
services for child witnesses. More generally, protection and support services are negatively
affected by inadequate infrastructure, long waiting periods, insufficient funding or
geographical coverage, and lack of specialised personnel. Some countries are overcoming
access barriers by setting up specialist shelters for women who cannot access regular shelters,
like women with substance abuse or mental disabilities. COVID has negatively impacted the
services provided and the number of shelters in general is insufficient in the EU.
Participants suggested specific support services to assist victims in (re-)entering the labour
market, as economic empowerment is central to realising gender equality. In addition,
victims should be ensured paid leave, dismissal protection and flexible working arrangements
so as to allow them to make use of the available services.
105
In work settings, challenges with access to justice were noted. Clear reporting mechanisms
and anonymous reporting can help. External complaint mechanisms, such as courts with
sufficient knowledge, are necessary. Legal advice should be available for free. Guidance and
information on accessible resources, also in languages different from the main one in the
country. One participant noted that the shift on the burden of proof as in EU anti-
discrimination legislation is beneficial. Concerning access to compensation from the state or
the perpetrator, shortcomings have been identified in particular regarding too short
timeframes to claim compensation, limitations concerning claims for moral damages (only
for certain types of crimes but not all), high court fees or excessively high thresholds for
proof.
Gender-based cyber violence was considered a new field that is not explicitly covered in
current legislation at EU and international levels. One participant said that more regulation of
the media and internet service providers is needed – in balance with the freedom of expression
- and more reporting procedures both online and to the police.
Participants discussed the need to require online platforms to offer reporting procedures
and ensure effective follow-up. Participants emphasized the need to balance the protection of
women and children against cyber violence with the rights to freedom of expression and data
protection. Platforms and internet intermediaries should receive more guidance on these
aspects.
To improve policy coordination, several participants noted the need for improve data
collection, including better disaggregated data and for it to be published. It was noted that
there are not enough population surveys to truly understand prevalence. Participants also
mentioned the need for a unified (statistical) definition of violence against women and
domestic violence to ensure smooth and consistent data collection. This data should be
disaggregated, collected on a regular basis, and made available to the public.
Participants highlighted the need for an intersectional approach, meaning that policies on
gender-based violence and domestic violence should take account of the particular challenges
that certain groups (e.g. minorities, refugees, rural women, members of the LGBTQ+
community, etc.) face in regard to violence against women and domestic violence.
Events and expert group meetings
1.5.1. Meetings of the High-Level Group on Gender Equality, 25-26 January 2021
and 8-9 September 2021
During the meetings, the state of play concerning the preparation of the legislative initiative
on preventing and combatting gender-based violence against women and domestic violence
was presented. In January, the Member States were encouraged to take part in the upcoming
targeted consultation. In September 2021, Member States were further informed of the
progress and thanked for their extensive contributions to the written consultation, and for
participation in the workshop.
1.5.2. Mutual learning seminar on ‘Methodologies and good practices on assessing
the costs of violence against women’, 7-8 July 2021
The European Commission organised a Mutual Learning Seminar on methodologies and good
practices on assessing the costs of violence against women for the EU Member States under
106
its Mutual Learning Programme in Gender Equality.232
There were 16 participating Member
States: Finland (host country), Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Germany, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain and
Sweden.
Participants welcomed the opportunity for exchange and dialogue. While noting substantial
data gaps and limitations in some country contexts they considered that the Finnish
methodology for measuring the costs of such violence, presented by experts from the host
country, offered an important model that could either be replicated or else used as a reference.
Most countries indicated that they had conducted some form of cost analysis: they
referred to empirical studies or GDP-based cost estimates carried out as part of the 2014 EIGE
study, local or regional studies, studies of the costs of a specific service and national studies
using administrative data or surveys. However, some studies were conducted a few years ago
and need to be updated taking into account new methodologies. Participants also
highlighted the fragmented nature of administrative data and the difficulty in linking
different registers such as health care and legal services or the lack of compatibility between
police and justice sectors. Other obstacles faced included poorly developed national
administrative records, or difficulties in accessing information because of devolved
government structures, or because external funding received by NGOs for shelters was hard to
identify. Many participants noted that the visible costs were just the tip of the iceberg. There
are many hidden and indirect costs, and many victims fail to identify as such, and thus, do
not seek help. Victims must often pay privately for various health-related services and
prescriptions, which are not included in cost calculations. Furthermore, many professionals do
not record cases adequately. This demonstrates the difficulty and complexity of estimating the
costs of violence, as there is no one gold standard methodology. The Member State
representatives highlighted the urgent need for better administrative data on costs and use
of services and better survey data on prevalence.
Participants recommended that the EU together with EIGE could play an important role in
developing:
 a common legal definition of what constitutes violence against women and domestic
violence;
 a common methodology or operational framework for assessing costs;
 cross–country collaborative studies with harmonised procedures;
 guidelines on how to monitor and assess the impact of interventions in order to
advocate for greater resource allocation to prevention services;
 further networking opportunities to build upon existing expertise and to facilitate new
ideas on research and policy.
1.5.3. Workshop on online violence against women, 8 September 2020
In September 2020, DG JUST in cooperation with DG CNECT organised an online workshop
with a panel of six academics as well as representatives from the Commission to discuss the
issue of violence against women in the online environment. Academics agreed that Digital
Services Act could be an opportunity to overcome the existing fragmentation, and agree on
common definition/standards. An opinion resonated among the academics that parts of the
Digital Services Act package should be perceived as complementary to tackling the issue
together with supplementing sectoral initiatives. As the problem is structural, the solution
232
Mutual Learning Programme in gender equality, summary report. https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-
fundamental-rights/gender-equality/who-we-work-gender-equality/mutual-learning-programme-gender-equality_en.
107
should be based on complex market approach, so the users can switch to other platform that
provides for different moderation may it be their wish. Some academics further concluded
that an amplification element is important to distinguish harmful content and illegality, and
that the horizontal solutions included in the Digital Services Act should cover all users in
vulnerable situations, including women users, users with minority backgrounds and children.
They also reported that the decision between the self- and co-regulatory approach on one side
and “hard” regulation on the other should not be taken. At the same time, they acknowledged
that here are clear positives and negatives of self- and co-regulatory approach, and its success
depends a lot on the Member States’ as well on platforms’ approach. In this regard, an
agreement was reached that scope for existing authorities to develop their role concerning
privacy and different forms of cyber violence might be created by the new regulation. The
academics also summarised that there is a need to adapt obligations according to the layers of
the internet, as well as to ensure redress and support to individuals when considering illegal
acts according to the existing rules.
108
ANNEX 3: Who is affected and how?
Who is affected?
The main target and beneficiaries of this initiative are victims of violence against women and
domestic violence, i.e. one woman out of 3 according to the FRA 2014 survey, i.e. overall
around 75 millions of women. These acts of violence also affects witnesses, family members
and other close relations, as well as bystanders and perpetrators. The initiative also has
implications for national administrations, including those in charge for the organisation and
effectiveness of the law enforcement, judicial, health and social services involved; employers
and social partners as for the consequences for labour market participation and implementing
and managing anti-harassment procedures; as well as NGOs and practitioners working with
victims, witnesses and perpetrators.
Summary of affected stakeholders
Main problems For whom is this a problem?
Affected stakeholders Forms of violence concerned
High prevalence of violence
against women and domestic
violence across the EU
Individual stakeholders:
 Victims of violence
against women and
domestic
violence(women,
children, men; the
elderly, LGBTIQ)
 Perpetrators of
violence
 Witnesses
 Family members and
other close relations of
victims
Other stakeholders:
 Governments, regional
and local authorities
 National authorities,
private support service
providers and NGOs
 IT platforms
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
Cyber violence against
women and in intimate
partnerships
Sex-based work harassment;
indirect effects from violence
109
 Social partners and
employers, including
companies of all sizes
against women and domestic
violence experienced outside
of work
Ineffective prevention
measures
Individuals at risk of / victims
of violence against women
and domestic violence
General public
Perpetrators and potential
perpetrators
IT platforms
Media
Governments, national,
regional and local authorities
(esp. education providers,
social and health services)
Equality bodies
Social partners and
employers, including
companies
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
Cyber violence against
women and in intimate
partnerships, (platforms can
be used to advocate for/incite
to all forms of violence
against women and domestic
violence, but can also
promote mutual respect,
equality and non-
discrimination)
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
Sex-based work harassment
Ineffective protection
measures
Law enforcement
Support service providers
(social and health service
providers, NGOs)
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
110
Judicial authorities
IT platforms
Social partners and
employers, including
companies
Cyber violence against
women and in intimate
partnerships, (provision of
on-platform protection
measures)
Sex-based work harassment
(provision of company-
internal protection)
Ineffective access to justice Victims
Witnesses
Law enforcement
Judicial authorities
Equality bodies
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
Ineffective support measures Victims
Witnesses, incl. children
Support service providers
(social and health service
providers, NGOs)
Law enforcement
Judicial authorities
Family members and other
close relations of victims
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
Ineffective coordination International actors (UN,
CoE)
EU-level coordination
National authorities
Local and regional authorities
Equality bodies
All forms of violence against
women and domestic
violence
111
Summary of costs and benefits
The tables below present the costs and benefits associated with the preferred Policy Option,
Policy Option 2A ("comprehensive policy option"). Benefits are mainly in the form of direct
costs savings across MS national authorities and individual victims. On the other hand, costs
were mainly identified for national authorities and include one-off and recurring costs.
I. Overview of benefits (total for all provisions) of the preferred option
Description Amount Comments
Direct benefits
Reduction in costs of
violence against
women and domestic
violence
(Lost economic
output)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 8.1 billion in the shorter-
term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 12.2
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reductions in costs would
accrue to individual victims of
violence against women and
domestic violence as a result of a
reduction in lost earnings and
productivity due to lower prevalence
of GBV.
Reduction in costs of
violence against
women and domestic
violence
(Health services)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 2.5 billion in the shorter-
term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 3.8
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reduction in costs would accrue
to national authorities as a result of
a reduction in healthcare costs due to
lower prevalence of violence against
women and domestic violence and
hence, cases that require
services/treatment.
Reduction in costs of
violence against
women and domestic
violence
(Criminal justice
system)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 7.2 billion in the shorter-
term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 13.7
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reductions in costs would
accrue to national authorities as a
result of a reduction in criminal
justice system costs due to lower
prevalence of violence against women
and domestic violence.
Reduction in costs of
violence against
women and domestic
violence
(Civil justice system)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 0.2 billion in the shorter-
term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 0.4
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reductions in costs would
accrue to national authorities as a
result of a reduction in civil justice
system costs due to lower prevalence
of violence against women and
domestic violence.
Reduction in costs of
violence against
women and domestic
violence
(Social welfare)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 2.1 billion in the shorter-
term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 3.1
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reductions in costs would
accrue to national authorities as a
result of a reduction in social welfare
costs due to lower prevalence of
violence against women and domestic
violence
112
Reduction in costs of
Gender-based violence
(Personal costs)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 0.6 billion in the shorter-
term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 1.0
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reductions in costs would
accrue to individual victims of
violence against women and
domestic violence as a result of a
reduction in personal costs due to
lower prevalence of violence against
women and domestic violence.
Reduction in costs of
Gender-based violence
(Physical/emotional
impacts)
Cost reductions are estimated to
be EUR 32.2 billion in the
shorter-term i.e. 5 years after
implementation and EUR 48.4
billion in the longer-term i.e. 10
years after implementation.
These reductions in costs would
accrue to individual victims of
violence against women and
domestic violence as a result of a
reduction in physical and emotional
harms of crime due to lower
prevalence of violence against women
and domestic violence.
Indirect benefits
None quantified
113
II. Overview of direct costs of the preferred option
Measure Recurring One-off
Minimum Maximum
1.1 Awareness-raising, provision of
information and training of professionals
€29,862,000 €34,403,000 €1,816,000
1.2 OVAW - Self-regulatory standards negligible negligible negligible
1.4 Work with perpetrators €134,000 €134,000 0
2.1 Protection orders, emergency barring
orders
€3,696,000 €25,175,000 0
2.2 Violence reporting and transmission
of personal data between services
negligible negligible negligible
2.3 Special measures for the protection
of children in the context of domestic
violence
€718,971,000 €1,942,604,000 0
2.4 Risk assessment and management €46,855,000 €46,855,000 0
3.1 Criminalisation n/a n/a n/a
3.2 Measures against illegal gender-
based content online
€326,459,000 €326,459,000 0
3.3 National coordination €2,027,000 €2,027,000 0
4.1 Specialised support €117,643,000 €117,643,000 0
4.2 Support to victims of OVAW €1,159,566,000 €1,159,566,000 0
4.3 Support to victims of gender-based
work harassment
€627,091,000 € 627,091,000 0
4.4 Shelters €20,486,000 €379,746,000 €12,630,000
4.5 Helplines €461,000 €4,656,000 € 946,000
4.7 Coordination of measures against
gender-based work harassment
n/a n/a n/a
5.1 Monitoring, incl. data collection €20,769,000 €20,769,000 €152,000
5.2 One-stop-shop information access €357,000 €357,000 n/a
(Cost for employers)
1.3 Specific prevention measures against
gender-based work harassment
€1,893,919,000 €1,893,919,000 €605,000
Total costs for preferred policy option €4,968,296,000 €6,581,404,000 €16,149,000
114
Sensitivity Analysis
The table below summaries the variation in the comparison of the scores of the different
policy options when assigning different weights to the three criteria of effectiveness (which
includes proportionality), efficiency and coherence.
Option 1 is always dominated by each suboptions of Option 2. Suboption 2A maintains its
advantage in all the different weighting scenarios.
Sensitivity analysis
Effectiveness: 40%; Efficiency: 40%; Coherence: 20% 1.80 2.60 2.05
Effectiveness: 50%; Efficiency: 30%; Coherence: 20% 1.80 2.58 2.01
Effectiveness: 50%; Efficiency: 40%; Coherence: 10% 1.78 2.60 1.98
Effectiveness: 40%; Efficiency: 50%; Coherence: 10% 1.78 2.63 2.01
Unweighted score 1.83 2.58 2.13
115
ANNEX 4: Analytical methods
For the assessment of the policy options and policy measures, the following main baseline
assumption has been made:
1) No actions are taking place at the moment, where there is no robust evidence of them233
;
2) For the purposes of administrative costing, it is assumed that the costs incurred due to the policy
option are additional to the baseline.
Analytical methods applied to estimate costs and cost reductions (economic benefits)
The overall approach to the estimation of costs and cost reductions (economic benefits) consisted of
the following key steps:
1. Firstly, the cost items associated with each policy measure were assessed, considering the type
of cost (i.e. one-off or recurring), and the already existing measures in the Member States.
2. For each cost item, estimates for the value of the cost were developed. Further details on how
each type of cost item was estimated are set out below. Overall, estimates and assumptions were
based on a combination of factors, including publicly available data (see each measure for details on
sources) and the study team members’ experience of conducting similar quantification exercises.
3. The administrative and compliance costs for each cost item and policy measure were then
aggregated across Member States. This enabled aggregate costs across all relevant Member States to
account for differences in costs across Member States (e.g. salaries of relevant professionals,
prevalence rates, reporting rates etc.). In addition, to estimate aggregate costs for the implementation
of each policy measure across Member States, where relevant and possible, the specific costs per
Member State were estimated, considering evidence on whether policy measures were currently
being implemented or partially implemented.
4. For cost reductions (economic benefits), estimations were based on figures on the overall cost of
violence against women and domestic violence234
(i.e. the overall potential for cost reduction of
violence against women and domestic violence associated with all policy measures under each
policy option). This is because there is a lack of evidence and available data on the potential for cost
reduction thought to be associated with each policy measure. On the basis of a review of studies on
the economic impact of policy measures on combatting and preventing violence against women and
domestic violence, economic benefits of the policy options were considered to be generated due to a
decrease in the prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence. Moreover, due to lack
of evidence quantifying the causal link between prevalence and the full set of measures under each
policy option, two hypothetical scenarios were assumed.
233
Evidence for current actions was available for the following measures: 1.4 Work with perpetrators; 2.1 Protection orders;
emergency barring orders; 2.3 Special measures for the protection of children in the context of domestic violence; 2.4 Risk
assessment and management; 3.4 Victim compensation; 3.6 National coordination; 4.2 Specialised support; 4.5 Shelters; 4.6
Helplines.
234
EIGE, The costs of gender-based violence in the European Union (2021).
116
Estimation of compliance costs
1.2.1. Estimation of costs of prevention
a. Awareness-raising, provision of information and training of professionals
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of:
1) general and targeted awareness raising campaign
2) online training on violence against women and domestic violence violence against women and
domestic violence to professionals dealing with victims or perpetrators & professionals working
with victims of violence against women and domestic violence
3) equipment of law enforcement and judicial authorities with specialized resources/training to
prosecute OVAW
For awareness raising, the following calculations are used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑡𝑤𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑙𝑦235 × (𝑏𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔236
+ 𝑏𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑡𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠 𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑖𝑔𝑛237)
For training on violence against women and domestic violence, the following approach is used, for
each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑡𝑤𝑜 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟238
× (𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑠239 × %𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑240
× 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟241 + 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑠242 × %𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑243
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑟′
𝑠 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟244 + 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑎𝑤𝑦𝑒𝑟𝑠245 × %𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑246
× 𝑙𝑎𝑤𝑦𝑒𝑟𝑠′
𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟247 + 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑠248 × %𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑249
× 𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒′
𝑠 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟250) + 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑤𝑜 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠251
235
Assumes every country needs to implement at least 2 awareness raising campaigns in a year
236
Examples from Belgium, Estonia, Italy and Poland used to provide estimates for the minimum and maximum budget
needed for one campaign
237
Grevio reports EE (2021) Targeted Campaign: Campaign to encourage victims to reach out for help with the title “Hero
of our time”. Budget: 10 000 euros.
238
Attending a 2-hour course in a year.
239
Eurostat data (2016) - https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/crim_just_job/default/table?lang=en; No data for
IE: average across all countries used (57528)
240
Assuming 15% attend training on dealing with victims or perpetrators and an additional 5% attend training on GBV/DV
victims specifically.
241
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13] (Public administration and defence salary > 10 employees or more). No data for AT, BE, EL,
PT: average across all countries used (€16.4)
242
CEPEJ studies no.26 - 2018 (2016 data).
243
See footnote 8.
244
CEPEJ studies no.26- 2018 (2016 data):
245
CEPEJ studies no.26 - 2018 (2016 data)
246
See footnote 8.
247
assume same as prosecutors’ salary
248
CEPEJ studies no.26 - 2018 (2016 data)
249
See footnote 8.
250
CEPEJ studies no.26 - 2018 (2016 data). No data for CZ: average across all countries used (€35.2)
117
For training on OVAW, the following approach is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑡𝑤𝑜 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟252 × (
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙253
×
𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟254 + 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑255 ×
𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑢𝑡𝑜𝑟′
𝑠 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟256 + 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑257 ×
𝑗𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒′
𝑠 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟258) + 𝑓𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛259
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64260
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒261
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚262
Assumptions used:
- the assessment of the baseline finds that all Member States have some form of awareness-
raising in place. Therefore, we assume an additional 2 general campaigns and 2 additional
targeted campaigns are needed per year needed to ensure regular campaigns
- selected officials attend a 2-hour training sessions
- the assessment of the baseline did not find information hours of trainings provided or the
presence of tailored training on violence against women and domestic violenceor
OVAW, therefore assume all Member States incur additional costs
- the cost for the provision of information to victims of violence against women and
domestic violencewill be fulfilled through awareness-raising campaigns and training of
professionals
251
Assuming one 2-hour training is needed for all relevant professionals and one 2-hour tailored training is needed for
professionals working with GBV/DV victims. Estimated cost of developing an online training session obtained from:
European Commission (2019) Skills for Industry Strategy: Promoting Online Training Opportunities for the Workforce in
Europe based on findings from https://raccoongang.com/blog/how-much-does-it-cost-create-online-course/
252
attending a 2-hour course in a year
253
1350 cases is used - Internet Watch Foundation (2020), 299,619 reports assessed by 330 employees. We assume that 2/3
(220 employees) work on the reports, as the IF also carries out other secondary functions. Available at:
https://annualreport2020.iwf.org.uk/trends
254
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13] (Public administration and defence salary > 10 employees or more)
255
CEPEJ studies no.26 - 2018 (2016 data). Assuming 15% attend.
256
CEPEJ studies no.26- 2018 (2016 data): Annual salary to hourly wage is converted using the following: ($50000 per
year / 52 weeks) / 40 hours per week = $24.04 per hour. No data for CZ: average across all countries used (35.21
257
see number of prosecutors required above.
258
see prosecutor’s salary above
259
Estimate of the cost of developing an online training session obtained from: European Commission (2019) Skills for
Industry Strategy: Promoting Online Training Opportunities for the Workforce in Europe based on findings from
https://raccoongang.com/blog/how-much-does-it-cost-create-online-course/
260
Eurostat Population on 1st
January 2020, [demo_pjanbroad]
261
38% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
262
25% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
118
b. Gender-based cyber violence - self-regulatory standards
The total investment required is assumed to be negligible as large online platforms provide codes of
conduct that are stricter in nature in identifying illegal content online to be removed than national
law263
.
c. Specific prevention measures against gender-based work harassment
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost to train managers on sexual harassment in the
workplace. This cost falls mostly on employers.
The following calculation is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑟𝑠 (𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑀𝐸)
× ( ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑟𝑠264 × 2 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑡𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟)
× (𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑀𝐸𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑠265)
+ 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑒𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛266
Assumptions used:
- all managers attend a 2-hour training session
- one manager per 10 employees
- costs of awareness-raising and information provision on sexual harassment in the workplace at
governmental, social partners’ and company levels would already be covered by 1.1b and 1.1c
- the cost of development of policies on anti-harassment and risk assessments at governmental,
social partners’ and/or employer level is already included under existing EU health and safety
legislation
- there is no comparable training for managers in the baseline and therefore all Member States
incur full costs
d. Work with perpetrators
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost providing a series of sessions (online or face-to-
face) to all perpetrators (2B), only to repeated offenders (2A) or voluntary (assumed 5% of
perpetrators).
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
263
See: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/652718/IPOL_STU(2020)652718_EN.pdf
264
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_14]
265
Eurostat, Structural Business Statistics (2018) [SBS_SC_SCA_R2]
266
Estimate of the cost of developing a training session obtained from: European Commission (2019) Skills for Industry
Strategy: Promoting Online Training Opportunities for the Workforce in Europe based on findings from
https://raccoongang.com/blog/how-much-does-it-cost-create-online-course/
119
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑝𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑠267
× ( ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑒𝑟268
× 6 𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟)
It is important to note that costs were not calculated for five Member States (BE, CY, EL, IE, IT) with
missing data on total number of convicted persons and therefore, costs might be higher than estimated.
Assumptions used:
- 6 one-on-one sessions of 1 hour of health and social worker support provided per perpetrator
with no set-up costs
- the compensation of social and health workers equals the European average for Member States
with missing data
- no Member State currently provides sufficient perpetrator intervention and treatment
programme, but the costs would be lower for countries that have a programme in place. The
total cost is discounted by 50% for Member States that have a perpetrator programme in place in
the baseline269
- for Member States (LT, MT) with no information on baseline, it is assumed that no programmes
are in place and therefore full costs would be incurred.
1.2.2. Estimation of costs of protection
a. Protection orders, emergency barring orders
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of adopting minimum standards in relation to the
issuance and conditions of national emergency barring orders and ensuring effective enforcement of the
order.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = (𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙/𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 × 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒270)
× (𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑃𝑂 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑗𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟271) × 1.1
267
Number of convicted persons for sexual assault or rape from: Joint Eurostat and UNODC data; Eurostat’s online code
crim_hom_soff
268
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13]
269
Based on the study's mapping of baseline situation
270
Application rate is estimated from UK crime statistics Appendix tables on number of victims of domestic abuse divided
by number of domestic violence protection orders. Available at:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=%2fpeoplepopulationandcommunity%2fcrimeandjustice%2fdatasets%2fdomesticabuseine
nglandandwalesappendixtables%2fyearendingmarch2018/da2018appendixtablesfinalv8.xlsx
271
Unit cost of a protection order to the police and justice sector estimated to be €1,185 and €213 in UK prices, adjusted for
each Member State's price level using PPP GDP/capita. Estimates based on Evaluation of the Pilot of Domestic Violence
Protection Orders in England (2013):
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/260897/horr76.pdf
120
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64272
× 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛273
× 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒274
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
= (𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64275
× 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛276)
− 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
Note that costs were not estimated for two Member States (IT, MT) with missing data on prevalence
and therefore the total costs might be higher than estimated.
Assumptions used:
- due to lack of comparable data on the number of women victims of violence against women and
domestic violence by Member State, a minimum and maximum estimate of women victims of
violence against women and domestic violence is used based on FRA 2014 survey results
- for the minimum cost estimate, only physical violence of a sexual nature against women is
considered and for the maximum cost estimate, all types of physical violence against women are
considered
- application rate is constant across Member States
- relative unit costs of a protection order is constant across Member States and there are no set-up
costs
- no Member State issues a sufficient number of protection orders on violence against
women and domestic violence but costs would be lower for Member States that already
have the possibility to apply for protection orders. Therefore, the total cost is discounted
by 50% for Member States where emergency protection orders are available in the
baseline, and by 25% for Member States where they are partially available in the
baseline277
- each Member State incurs an additional 10% of total costs to increase efficiency and ensure
timely issuance and more effective enforcement.
b. Violence reporting and transmission of personal data between services
The total investment required is assumed to be negligible as costs to encourage reporting of violence
against women and domestic violence would be covered in training of relevant professionals and
awareness-raising campaigns.
272
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
273
Based on FRA 2020 survey results: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
274
Based on FRA 2020 survey results: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
275
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
276
Based on FRA 2020 survey results: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
277
Based on study's mapping of baseline situation
121
c. Special measures for the protection of children in the context of domestic violence
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of providing support services to child witnesses of
domestic violence and maintaining contact with the child in a surveyed safe place outside the alleged
perpetrator’s home.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑠 × 29 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
× ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑠278
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑 𝑤𝑖𝑡𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑠
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 15 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠279 × 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑 𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡280
× 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜 𝑜𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑑 𝑎𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒281
Assumptions used:
- based on 2-hours of health and social worker support per child/ week for 3 months, and an
additional hour per month for three months to maintain contact. The total is 29 hours per case282
- rate of co-occurrence of child abuse and domestic violence is constant across Member States
- no set-up costs
- no Member State provides sufficient levels of support to child witnesses, but costs would be
lower for Member States that have support services in place to account for the special needs of
child witnesses of domestic violence. Therefore, the cost of support for Member States is
discounted by 50% for Member States where such services are available in the baseline, and by
25% for Member States where such services are partially available283
. For Member States (FR,
HU, LI, MT) with no information available on the baseline, partially availability is assumed.
- no Member State provides services for maintaining contact with child witnesses and therefore
all Member States incur full costs to provide this service.
d. Risk assessment and management
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost for law enforcement authorities to conduct
individual risk assessments and risk management in a timely manner in cooperation with support
services.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
278
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13]
279
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
280
Country profiles, European Status report on preventing child maltreatment (2018):
https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0017/381140/wh12-ecm-rep-eng.pdf Note: The prevalence rates vary
considerably by country and may reflect reporting rates rather than actual rates. Therefore, a potential range of child
maltreatment prevalence is used instead with Min value of 10.4% and Max value of 28.1%
281
Most reliable estimate of child abuse and domestic violence co-occurrence is 40%, as estimated by Walby (2004) and
used in EIGE (2021).
282
2 hours per week x 4.345 weeks per month x 3 months) + (1 session a month x 3 months) = 29 hours per case
283
Based on study's mapping of baseline situation
122
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒
× ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑦 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟284 × (𝑜𝑛𝑒 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑒𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 + 25%
× (𝑡𝑤𝑜 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡
+ ℎ𝑎𝑙𝑓 𝑎𝑛 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑠))
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64285
× 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛286
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒287
Note that costs where not estimated for two Member States (IT, MT) with missing data on prevalence
and therefore the total costs might be higher than estimated.
Assumptions used:
- due to lack of comparable data on the number of women victims of violence against women and
domestic violence by Member State, the estimate of victims eligible for risk assessment is based
on the broader category of all women victims of physical violence
- screening requires one hour, in-depth assessment requires two-hours and cooperation with
victim support services required half an hour
- 25% of women victims qualify as high risk i.e. for in-depth assessment and referral to victim
support services
- no set-up costs
- no Member State provides sufficient levels of individual risk assessment, but the cost is lower
for Member States that carry out such assessments. Therefore, the total cost for Member States
is discounted by 50% for Member States that carry out individual risk assessments in the
baseline, and by 25% for Member States that partially carry out such assessments in the
baseline288
.
1.2.3. Estimation of costs of access to justice
a. Criminalisation
The total investment required is assumed to be negligible as there are likely to be low administrative
costs to change national and EU legislation and several Member States already have laws in place
criminalising various forms of violence against women and domestic violence.
b. Measures against gender-based cyber violence
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost for Member States to allow online/other low-
threshold reporting of incidents of OVAW to national law enforcement or other authorities.
284
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13] (Public administration and defence salary > 10 employees or more)
285
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
286
Based on FRA 2020 survey results: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
287
Ibid.
288
Based on study's mapping of baseline situation
123
The following calculation is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 =
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙289
× 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟290
× 2080 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟.
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑎 𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑙𝑑
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64291
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒292
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚293
Assumptions used:
- constant reporting and prevalence of OVAW across Member States
- low threshold would translate into reporting of OVAW to police instead of platforms
- no set-up costs
- cost of training covered by [1.1 Training OVAW]
- cost of investigation covered by [3.5 Public prosecution]
- the assessment of the baseline did not find information on comparable measures in place,
therefore it is assumed that all Member States incur full costs
c. Victim compensation
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of providing access to compensation for victims of
online serious gender based harassment. It is assumed that bodily injury and impairment of health and
meaningful compensation to violence against women and domestic violence victims are covered by the
baseline scenario, as current EU law already requires States to provide such compensation for violent
intentional crimes.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
289
1350 cases is used - Internet Watch Foudnation (2020), 299,619 reports assessed in a year. Available at:
https://annualreport2020.iwf.org.uk/trends
290
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13] (Public administration and defence salary > 10 employees or more)
291
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
292
38% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
293
25% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
124
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = (𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
+ 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡)
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛294 × 50%295
× 𝑎𝑚𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑤𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑑296)
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64297
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑑 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒298
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚299
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑟 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡
= (𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64300
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤ℎ𝑜 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡301
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠302)
Note that costs were not estimated for two Member States (IT, MT) with missing data on prevalence
and therefore the total costs might be higher than estimated.
Assumptions used:
- the number of women experiencing harassment or discrimination is used as an estimate of the
number of victims serious gender based harassment.
- no set-up costs
- limited to costs for the state. Obligation of the future directive would put on States to pay
compensation in those situations where the victim is not able to recover such compensation
from the perpetrator or other sources. It is assumed the state pays in 50% of the cases.
- negligible costs are incurred to inform victims of violence against women and domestic
violence about the possibility to request compensation from the perpetrator and to provide a
decision in a reasonable time.
294
Based on FRA 2020 survey results on percentage of respondents that reported contacting legal service/lawyers after the
incidence of violence: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
295
Assumed in half the cases costs are not covered by the perpetrator but the state
296
Most suitable compensation is chosen from table on compensation costs provided.
When that is not available, we use 2.5 times the minimum monthly wage.
No amount found for AT, DK and SE, therefore the average cost for the Netherlands was used
297
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
298
Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
299
Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
300
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
301
Eurobarometer - In the past 12 months have you personally felt discriminated against or harassed on the basis of one or
more of the following grounds? (Gender) (Percentage of respondents who mentioned each ground of discrimination)
302
FRA (2019) - Women reporting the incident of harassment. Available at: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs
125
d. Public prosecution
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of investigation and prosecution ex officio of the
new EU-crimes (on online violence).
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = ( 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑂𝑉𝐴𝑊 − 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑂𝑉𝐴𝑊 𝑠𝑒𝑒𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠𝑒 )
× 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛303 × 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑝𝑢𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑒𝑑 𝑒𝑥 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑜304
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑂𝑉𝐴𝑊 𝑠𝑒𝑒𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠𝑒
= 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑂𝑉𝐴𝑊
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑒𝑘 𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠𝑒305
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑂𝑉𝐴𝑊
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64306
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒307
Assumptions used:
- due to lack of data available on the proportion of cases that are pursued ex officio, it is assumed
that 20% of remaining of OVAW cases (i.e. cases not pursued by individual victims) are
pursued ex officio for all Member States
- no set-up costs
- the assessment of the baseline did not find information on comparable measures in place,
therefore it is assumed that all Member States incur full costs.
e. National coordination
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of ensuring legal standing to equality bodies to
assist and represent violence against women and domestic violence, incl. OVAW, victims in line with
COM Rec on equality.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = (𝑎𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝐹𝑇𝐸𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑 × 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓 𝑖𝑛 𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑏𝑜𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑠308)
303
The UK costs of crime report estimates the average prosecution cost of "sexual offences" to be £30 in 2015/2016:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/954485/the-economic-
and-social-costs-of-crime-horr99.pdf
- adjusted for each country’s price level using PPP GDP/capita
- UK- EUR conversion rate of 1 GBP = 1.35503 EUR in Month 1 of 2016
304
Assumed 20% due to lack of available information.
305
5% - A resent EPRS study assumed that 5% of victims of both cyber-harassment and cyber-stalking seek legal recourse
p.210. Available at :
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662621/EPRS_STU(2021)662621_EN.pdf
306
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
307
38% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
126
Assumptions used:
- 2 additional FTEs required per Member State to assist and represent victims of violence against
women and domestic violence including OVAW
- no set-up costs
- For countries with no data, assume average salary across 23 countries with data
- no costs for Member States where equality bodies already have a legal standing to receive GBV
complaints or claims or sexual harassment and harassment based on sex
- for Member States where either equality bodies cannot receive GBV complaints or cannot
receive claims of harassment, additional FTE's are needed. For Member State with no
information on the baseline (SI), it is assumed that equality bodies have no legal standing and
hence, full costs are incurred.
1.2.4. Estimated costs of victim support
a. General support – Special leave
The total investment required is negligible as general support services to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence are covered in the baseline from a cost perspective. Additional costs are
covered by 4.2 Specialist support, 4.3 Support to victims of OVAW, 4.4 Support to victims of gender-
based harassment at work and 4.5 Access to shelters. Moreover, the cost if issuing guidelines is
assumed to be minimal.
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of the obligation for MS to provide three days of
special leave compensated at the level of sick leave for all victims of violence against women and
domestic violence. The cost falls on companies. The following approach is used, for each Member
State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒
× 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑑𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑑 16 𝑡𝑜 64309 × 𝑡ℎ𝑟𝑒𝑒 𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑣𝑒
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64310
× 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑝ℎ𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑛311
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑐𝑒312
Note that costs where not estimated for two Member States (IT, MT) with missing data on prevalence
and therefore the total costs might be higher than estimated.
Assumptions used:
308
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_17] (Public administration and defence; compulsory social security; education; human health and
social work activities; arts, entertainment and recreation; other service activities > 10 employees or more)
309
Eurostat mean income by age and sex - EU-SILC and ECHP surveys. online data code: ILC_DI03
310
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
311
Based on FRA 2020 survey results: https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
312
Ibid.
127
- due to lack of comparable data on the number of women victims of violence against women and
domestic violence by Member State, the estimate of victims eligible is based on the broader
category of all women victims of physical violence
- Three-day leave is implemented in all MSs
- Level of sick leave compensation set at 100% of pay
- negligible cost of issuing guidelines
- no set-up costs.
b. Specialised support
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of ensuring availability of specialist women's
support services to all women victims of violence and their children and groups at a heightened risk of
violence (such as migrant women, victims from minority communities, women with disabilities,
women working in the sex industry and women prisoners).
The following calculation is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = (𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑔𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒313
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑣𝑜𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑒𝑥𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒314)
× 1.1
Note that costs where not estimated for three Member States (RO, SI, SE) with missing data on the
proportion of missing services and therefore the total costs might be higher than estimated.
Assumptions used:
- due to lack of data available on Member State expenditure on specialist support services for
women victims of violence against women and domestic violence and their children, the annual
UK expenditure adjusted by relative population size of UK and each EU Member State is used
- no set-up costs
- the expenditure needed is a function of the percentage of missing expenditure on survivors of
sexualised violence
- all Member States need an additional 10% of total expenditure to ensure availability of services
to groups at heightened risk.
c. Support to victims of gender-based cyber violence
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of providing on- and offline support for victims of
gender-based cyber violence against women.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
313
EIGE (2021) - annual UK government expenditure on specialist support services for women victims of GBV: EUR
19,653,064. MS expenditure is then adjusted by relative population size of UK and each EU MS.
314
Specialised services for sexualized violence in EU Member States (2018) - WAVE annual report
128
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑠𝑖𝑥 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟315
× (𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑
× ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑒𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟316)
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑒𝑑
= 𝑝𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 15 𝑡𝑜 64317
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒318
× 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠𝑢𝑐ℎ 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑛𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑚319
Assumptions used:
- no set-up costs
- each reported case of OVAW is dealt with 6 one-hour sessions
- on-line support is already covered under the helplines [4.6]
- the assessment of the baseline did not find information on comparable measures in place,
therefore it is assumed that all Member States incur full costs
d. Support to victims of gender-based work harassment
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost to all employers including SMEs of providing
support to victims of gender-based work harassment through one-to-one sessions (online or face-to-
face).
The following calculation is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑀𝐸
× 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑠 𝑓𝑜𝑟 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓320
× 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑀𝐸𝑠321
315
assuming each case is dealt with 6 one-hour sessions for the whole year.
316
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13] (Human health and social work activities salary; compulsory social security > 10 employees or
more)
317
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
318
38% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
319
25% - Economist Intelligence Unit (2020) -Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Available at:
https://onlineviolencewomen.eiu.com/ .
320
Eurostat, [earn_ses18_13] (Human health and social work activities salary; compulsory social security > 10 employees or
more)
321
Eurostat, Structural Business Statistics (2018) [SBS_SC_SCA_R2]
129
ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑓𝑓 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑀𝐸
= 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑒 𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑆𝑀𝐸322
× 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡323
× 𝑜𝑓 𝑓𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑒 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑒𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑑 ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑡 12 𝑚𝑜𝑛𝑡ℎ𝑠324 × 2
− ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
Assumptions used:
- no set-up costs
- for countries with 0% prevalence reported i.e. BG & RO, assume prevalence rate of EU-27
average
- each reported case of gender-based work harassment is dealt with two-hour sessions
- the assessment of the baseline did not find information on comparable measures in place,
therefore it is assumed that all Member States incur full costs.
e. Shelters
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of providing an additional 10% of refuge spaces
needed options 1 and 2A) and all spaces needed i.e. one refuge space per 10,000 population (2B) for
women victims of violence against women and domestic violence and their children.
The following calculation is used, for each Member States:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = (𝐴𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 × (0.1325) × 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑢𝑔𝑒 𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟326)
+ (
𝐴𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟327
× 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑎 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟328)
322
Eurostat, Structural Business Statistics (2018). [SBS_SC_SCA_R2].
Data for Austria, Italy and Portugal are estimated based on EU average share of employment in large enterprises to
population aged 15-74. i.e.: Employees in large enterprises in Austria = Austrian population 15-74*EU share of the
population employed in large enterprises (~14%).
323
Eurostat, [lfsq_egan2].
324
Eurofound (2015). “Over the last 12 months, during the course of your work have you been subjected to harassment?”
(% of respondents, 15+ workers, total is for EU-28. Available at: https://eige.europa.eu/gender-
statistics/dgs/indicator/genvio_sex_harass_sur__ewcs_harassment
325
Assume 10% of additional beds are provided under 2A.
326
Cost estimation received from WAVE on the average cost of a shelter bedspace for a woman (with or without child) for
four MS (AT, MT, SI, SE). Note: due to considerable differences across Member States, minimum and maximum estimates
were used.
327
Assuming an average 125-person capacity/shelter based on estimated capacity from WAVE annual report (2018) data on
number of accessible shelters and number of spaces available.
328
Based on a project example where Cyprus’ first purpose-built shelter to accommodate women and children received
€742,920 in grants. See: https://eeagrants.org/sites/default/files/resources/Gender-based%2Bviolence_Updated092014.pdf
130
𝐴𝑑𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑏𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑
= (
𝑃𝑜𝑝𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑛 1𝑠𝑡 𝐽𝑎𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑦 2020329
10,000
− 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠330)
Assumptions used:
- due to lack of available data, it is assumed that the expenditure needed to establish a shelter is
the same across all Member States
- the encouragement of shelter provision (option 1 and 2A) would lead to 10% of additional beds
provided and obligation to provide one refuge space for 10,000 population (2B) would lead to
all additional beds provided
- the requirement for 1 space per 10,000 population would be sufficient to provide safe
accommodation to all women victims of violence against women and domestic violence and
their children that need it
- for Member States (CY, EE, LV, LU, MT, SI) that already exceed or meet the requirement for 1
space per 10,000 population in the baseline, no costs are incurred.
f. Helplines
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of setting-up and operating state-wide 24/7 helpline
free of charge for victims of violence against women and domestic violence.
The following calculation is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = (𝑏𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑠ℎ 𝑎 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒331 +
𝑏𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒𝑡 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑎 ℎ𝑒𝑙𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟332)
Assumptions used:
- due to lack of available data, it is assumed that the budget needed to establish a helpline is the
same across all Member States
- for Member States (AT, BG, CY, DK, EE, FI, DE, EL, IE, IT, LT, RO, SK, ES, SE) that have
24/7 toll free helpline in place for victims of violence against women and domestic violence333
,
no additional costs are incurred to set-up and operate the national helpline
- negligible cost of setting-up a harmonised EU helplines and no costs to run a harmonised EU
helpline.
329
Eurostat [DEMO_PJAN]
330
WAVE annual report 2018, Table 7.
331
Estimated based on GREVIO report for Poland (2018) where the state expenditure for the establishment of a 24-hour toll
free hotline for victims of GBV.DV was €78,822.
332
Cost estimation received from WAVE on how much it costs per year to operate a women's helpline which runs 24/7 for
free for three MS (AT, EL, MT,). Note: due to considerable differences across Member States, minimum and maximum
estimates were used.
333
Based on information available from WAVE annual report (2018) on national women's helplines in EU MS meeting the
standard of the Istanbul Convention.
131
g. Coordination of measures against gender-based work harassment
The total investment required to discuss measures against gender-based harassment with social partners
is assumed to be minimal.
1.2.5. Estimated costs of coordination
a. Monitoring, incl. data collection
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of participating in a survey coordinated at the EU-
level on violence against women and domestic violence and of conducting administrative data
collections at regular intervals meeting ICCS standards.
The following calculation is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑛 𝐸𝑈
− violence against women and domestic violence 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
+ 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
+ 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎 𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚334
+ 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑑𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑎335
𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑛 𝐸𝑈
− violence against women and domestic violence 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑦 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
= 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑒𝑤𝑒𝑒336 × 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑣𝑒𝑦337
𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
= ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑒338 × 360339
Assumptions used:
- the assessment of the baseline did not find information national administrative data collection
based on ICCS standards, therefore it is assumed that all Member States would incur this cost.
Moreover, the costs to participate in an EU-level survey on violence against women and
domestic violence represents a new cost to all Member States and therefore, all Member States
would incur costs every two-years.
- assumed cost of €100 cost per interviewee includes all costs that would need to be incurred by
Member States
334
Based on the estimated hourly cost of a database developer (see: https://www.approvedindex.co.uk/database-
developers/database-prices) converted to EUR based on 2021 mid-year conversation rates, assuming 120 hours are required
to change the data collection system.
335
Cost of updating and maintaining EIGE's Gender Statistics Database is used as a proxy of yearly maintenance cost.
336
Assumed €100 cost per interviewee
337
Based on information obtained on ESTAT on estimated sample size for countries currently implementing the EU-GBV
survey
338
Mean hourly earnings by sex, age and economic activity [EARN_SES18_13] of public administration and defence;
compulsory social security; education; human health and social work activities; arts, entertainment and recreation; other
service activities. EU-27 average used for countries with missing data (AT, BE, EL, PT)
339
Assuming 120 hours are required per admin data collection, assuming three such collections in a year (police, judiciary,
support services)
132
- for countries with no data on sample size it is assumed that, an average across all countries is
assumed
- due to lack of available data on number of hours required to change a data collection system and
to complete questionnaires on administrative data, it is assumed that they require 120 hours
each and that three administrative data collections would be required in a year.
b. Multi-agency service provision
The estimation of this measure is based on the cost of the obligation for MS to provide multi-agency
and multi-disciplinary one-stop access to relevant protection and support services in the same premises.
The following approach is used, for each Member State:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 = 𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑒𝑠 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑑 × 𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑎𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑙𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑠340
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑒𝑠 = 4 𝑏𝑦 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑎𝑢𝑙𝑡.
To match population differences, this is increased by 1 employee for every 2 million females aged 15
to 64341
(when the female population is above 10 million)
Assumptions used:
- Minimum of four staff members needed for information centre
- employees compensated at the level of “health and social workers”
- Assuming 52 times 40-hour weeks every year
- no set-up costs
Estimation of cost reductions (economic benefits)
The overall costs of violence against women and domestic violence estimated to be €290 billion by
EIGE were used for the costs in the status quo. The estimated reduction in costs was calculated for each
of the cost categories measured by EIGE, which includes342
:
- Lost economic output to individual victims measured in lost earnings due to time taken off work
and lost productivity
- Health services costs to national authorities as victims of gender-based violence make use of
health services for treatment of physical and mental harms
- Criminal justice system costs to national authorities due to involvement in investigations and
prosecutions of gender-based violence
- Civil justice system costs to national authorities to provide legal aid to victims of gender-based
violence to separate from a violent partner
340
Eurostat Mean hourly earnings for human health and social work activities > 10 employees or more - Eurostat (online
code EARN_SES18_13). For countries with no data average of countries with available data (10.2) was used
341
Eurostat, Population on 1st
January 2020 [demo_pjanbroad]
342
Estimation of the costs of gender-based violence in the UK case study and extrapolation to EU Member States
(forthcoming EIGE paper, 2021).
133
- Social welfare costs to national authorities to provide housing aid and child protection to
victims of gender-based violence
- Personal costs to individual victims of moving homes due to divorce related to gender-based
violence and to self-fund legal proceedings for separation from a violent partner
- Physical and emotional impacts to individual victims due to negative impacts of the crime on
quality of life
The calculation of cost reductions were made using the formula below:
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝒓𝒆𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏
= 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑎𝑔𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑡 𝑤𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑑𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑏𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑦
× % 𝑟𝑒𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒
The following assumptions were made for the calculation:
- Two scenarios, short and long term, for each of the (sub-) options, were considered for the
percentage reduction in prevalence: 15% and 20% reduction (option 1); 20% reduction and 30%
reduction (2a) and 22% reduction and 32% reduction (2b). The scenario's build on the European
Parliament's assessment of the added value of Gender-based violence as a new area of crime
listed in Article 83(1) TFEU343
. The assessment assumed that the prevalence of violence against
women and domestic violence will decrease by 10% in the short-term (about five years) and
20% – 30% in the long-term (about 10 years) after an EU–wide legislation is introduced.
- Given that policy option 2b includes additional measures for support to victims of violence
against women and domestic violence and for prevention, the reduction in prevalence was
assumed to be greater than that estimated by the European Parliament's assessment. This is
consistent with e.g. an assessment of the US National Crime Victimization Survey (NVCS) that
found that the use of victim services was associated with a 40 percent reduction in the risk of
repeat victimisation344
.
- The reduction in costs is proportionate to the decrease in prevalence of gender-based violence
under each scenario.
- For the criminal and civil justice system, there are counteracting economic impacts of an
increase in costs due to increased reporting of gender-based or domestic violence and a decrease
in costs due to the reduction in prevalence. The assumed change is therefore a lower proportion
compared to the other cost categories.
To estimate the percentage reduction for the criminal justice system and civil justice system,
calculations were made using the formula below which is used by the European Parliament's
assessment345
:
% 𝒓𝒆𝒅𝒖𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒊𝒏 𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆
= (1 + %𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒) × (1 + % 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝑟𝑒𝑝𝑜𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔) − 1
The following sources and assumption were used for the above calculation:
343
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662640/EPRS_STU(2021)662640_EN.pdf
344
Ibid.
345
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662640/EPRS_STU(2021)662640_EN.pdf based on
approach by N. Lomba, C. Navarra, M. Fernandes, Combating Gender-based Violence: Cyber Violence, briefing, EPRS, European Parliament,
2021.
134
- The measures under this policy option (e.g. criminalisation, awareness-raising, information
provision to victims of violence against women and domestic violence and encouragement of
reporting of violence against women and domestic violence by witnesses and professionals) is
likely to lead to an increase in reporting of violence against women and domestic violence
violence against women and domestic violencecases. This change in reporting rates would
likely lead to higher costs for the criminal and civil justice system.
- The change in reporting rates is assumed to be 10% for option 2a. This assumption is based on a
European Parliament study346
which estimates that an EU Directive on gender-based
cyberviolence could increase reporting rates by 5% to 10%. Given that this policy option
includes measures beyond EU-level criminalisation, the higher bound of 10% is used.
- Given that reporting rates might increase further due to additional support measures in 2b, the
reporting rate is assumed to be 12.5% for option 2b.
- The increase in reporting rates is assumed to be the same in the two scenarios for option 2a and
2b.
346
N. Lomba, C. Navarra, M. Fernandes, Combating Gender-based Violence: Cyber Violence, briefing, EPRS, European Parliament, 2021.
135
ANNEX 5: Assessment of measures
Problem area: prevention of violence against women and domestic violence
1.1.1. Assessment of measure 1.1.b Awareness raising, provision of information and
training of professionals
Measure 1.1.b will include:
■ Right to information: Obligation of MS to provide information to victims of
violence against women and domestic violence (IC art. 19).
■ Awareness raising: Obligation of MS to conduct regular awareness-raising and
provide information to the general public (Art. 13 IC, 14 IC)
■ Awareness raising (online VAW): N/A
■ Training: Obligation of MS to provide training on violence against women and
domestic violenceto relevant professionals dealing with victims or perpetrators
(IC 15):
– voluntary to participants;
– at intervals determined by the MS
■ Training (online VAW): N/A
Assessment criterion Assessment
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
The measure will have some impact in relation to achieving this policy objective. First, it will put in place,
across the EU, in a comprehensive manner, a set of prevention measures aimed at raising awareness of the
general public and specific target groups.
Currently, all 27 EU Member States operate awareness raising campaigns, mostly directly towards victims
of DV/VAW to guide them towards dedicated helplines and information provision. However, their quality,
coverage and frequency differ to a great extent. It would therefore be important for this measure to set some
minimum standards as to the substance, type and scape of campaigns. Based on available evidence, larger,
well-targeted campaigns using appropriate communication tools seem to have most impact. For example, in
the last few years, due to a strong EU emphasis on the awareness raising part concerning prevention of
VAW, many MS joined the EU campaign of ‘Orange the World’ carried out on 25 November – the
international day of violence against women; the UN campaigns of 16 Days of Activist against VAW and
White Ribbon Campaign and by organising and participating in visible, public events on 25th November
where the situation of VAW is presented, discussed, political statements formulated and some new actions
or plans announced.
The main impacts anticipated from awareness raising measures will be related to behavioural changes
amongst victims, their immediate social environment, specific target groups, perpetrators and wider society.
However, as they are aimed at the general public and not targeted, they may not engage with those who are
harder to reach and potentially at heightened risk of violence. Such campaigns are also non-existent in the
Member States.
The measure also includes an obligation to produce training to professionals dealing with victims and
perpetrators. This would improve the nature and quality of support provided to victims. Training of police
has also, for example, has been shown to result in stronger prosecution.347
Although training is available in
all Member States, it is does not include all relevant professionals.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective
347
Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) Funding A Nationwide Assessment of Effects on Rape and Assault:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1077801208329146
136
Assessment criterion Assessment
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The right to information will support women in obtaining better access to justice, as they will gain a better
understanding of the legal process and relevant organisations to support them.
The training of professionals will, to a similar extent, ensure that relevant practitioners are able to better
detect and respond to acts of violence. They will also be better able to cooperate with other relevant
agencies. This is expected to improve overall access to justice for victims.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The right to information will improve access to support services for women, as they will be better informed
about services and organisations available.
The training of professionals may also, to some extent, contribute to this objective as professionals, as part
of their increased knowledge of cooperation structures, may also be able to refer victims to relevant support
services.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Social impacts If implemented, this measure is expected to have a limited extent of social impacts on the following
groups.
Victims of violence against women or domestic violence
Awareness raising measures can be expected to lead to behavioural changes in terms of victims more willing
to report such violence to the authorities, understand their rights to be free from violence, and seek help. The
training of professionals and right to information will improve their access to justice and to support services.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The training of professionals may lead to an improvement in the detection and handling of particular groups
of victims.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
Behavioural changes impacts from awareness raising measures can be expected in terms of perpetrators
recognising their acts of violence, coming forward, and asking for help. For this, however, campaigns would
need to be tailored to men.
Wider society
Positive impacts from awareness raising measures can be expected in terms of better understanding of such
violence and changing social norms, raising the issue to the public attention, and increasing the public
awareness of its extent and scale across society. Ultimately, they can help the wider public to take such
violence more seriously and considerately and approaching it as an all-society problem. Transformative
changes in social attitudes and acceptance take however relatively long time to spread into society.
In the more immediate environment of the victims (friends, relatives, neighbours), awareness raising
measures can encourage the willingness to support victims in reporting and taking other actions, directly
intervene, and help to address such violence. This should encourage the target groups to take action,
intervene and help the victims by contacting the authorities and getting help.
Awareness raising measures aimed at children and young people can help to decrease the likelihood of such
violence at a later life stage and increase the likelihood of reporting such violence when witnessed in their
environment.
National authorities
Overall, political acceptance of the measure is likely to be high, considering that most already have similar
ones in place.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)
- Integration of persons with disabilities (Article 26)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
137
Assessment criterion Assessment
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Administrative and compliance costs The costs of the measures are expected to be born by the EC, Member State authorities and support of other
organisations (if running awareness-raising campaigns). More specifically:
The EC is expected to incur costs for the development of the Directive, and for providing additional
guidance and organising consultation during transposition. It will also incur costs for monitoring and
reporting on the implementation of the Directive.
Possibly, the EC may also co-fund awareness raising campaigns, but the costs of these are presented below
and relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for running the awareness-raising campaigns and developing and
organising training to relevant professionals that are shown below.
One-off development
cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost (Millions of
euros)
Awareness-
raising
0.5 1.7 – 4.0 1.7 – 4.0
Training 0.6 18.4 19.0
Costs for awareness-raising are based on minimum and maximum estimates for conducting one awareness-
raising for the general public on violence against women and domestic violence. Costings assume that
Member States would conduct an additional two such campaigns in a year compared to the baseline.
Therefore, all Member States are assumed to incur the same costs for awareness-raising. While it is likely
that a group of Member States that currently meet the IC standards would incur lower or close to zero costs
and hence the total EU cost might be lower, information is not available to the number of campaigns
conducted in these Member States in the baseline.
Training costs are based on the cost of developing a 2-hour online training session and the cost of attending
a 2-hour training session for police officers, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges. The cost of attending a
training session is based on number of police officers, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges (assuming 15% of
the total number in each group attend the training session) and their hourly national wages. Costings assume
that no Member States conduct training for relevant professionals dealing with victims or perpetrators in the
baseline. Although details are not available on hours of training provided, Member States already provide
training to relevant professionals on victims' rights in the baseline which means total EU costs might be
lower. However, since existing trainings to do necessarily target violence against women and domestic
violence victims, it is assumed that all Member States would incur additional costs.
The cost for the provision of information to victims of violence against women and domestic violence will
be fulfilled through awareness-raising campaigns and training of professionals and therefore, costs are
assumed to be zero.
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation and setting regular and mandatory awareness-raising, training and the right to information in a single
legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant
measures and improve their quality in many Member States, in particular in those which have not ratified the IC and those in which current
measures are found to be lacking or insufficient in scale or scope. These measures are crucial are tackling embedded negative gender stereotypes
and norms that are at the heart of violence against women. The training is not however mandatory which may mean gaps in the provision of
training remain. It will bring benefits to victims and wider society, and may also help potential and actual perpetrators to change their behaviour.
The total investment required amount to Million Euros 20.7 – 22.9.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
1.1.2. Assessment of measure 1.1.c Awareness raising, provision of information and
training of professionals
■ Right to information:
– Obligation of MS to provide information to victims of violence against women and
domestic violence (IC art. 19).
138
■ Awareness raising:
– Obligation of MS to conduct regular awareness-raising and provide information to the
general public (Art. 13 IC, 14 IC)
– Targeted awareness-raising and provision of information for groups at a heightened
risk of violence against women and domestic violence
■ Awareness raising (online VAW):
■ Information provision on OVAW to the general public and relevant professionals (incl.
media literacy).
■ Training:
– Obligation of MS to provide mandatory and regular training on violence against
women and domestic violence to relevant professionals dealing with victims or
perpetrators (IC 15):
○ voluntary to participants;
○ at intervals determined by the MS
■ Training (online VAW):
– Equipment of law enforcement and judicial authorities with specialized
resources/training to prosecute OVAW.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
The measure will have some impact in relation to achieving this policy objective. First, as with
measure 1.1.b, it will put in place, across the EU, in a comprehensive manner, a set of prevention
measures aimed at raising awareness of the general public.
Currently, all 27 EU Member States operate awareness raising campaigns, mostly directly
towards victims of violence against women and domestic violenceto guide them towards
dedicated helplines and information provision. However, their quality, coverage and frequency
differ to a great extent. It would therefore be important for this measure to set some minimum
standards as to the substance, type and scape of campaigns. Based on available evidence, larger,
well-targeted campaigns using appropriate communication tools seem to have most impact. For
example, in the last few years, due to a strong EU emphasis on the awareness raising part
concerning prevention of VAW, many MS joined the EU campaign of ‘Orange the World’ carried
out on 25 November – the international day of violence against women; the UN campaigns of 16
Days of Activist against VAW and White Ribbon Campaign and by organising and participating
in visible, public events on 25th November where the situation of VAW is presented, discussed,
political statements formulated and some new actions or plans announced.
The main impacts anticipated from awareness raising measures will be related to behavioural
changes amongst victims, their immediate social environment, specific target groups, perpetrators
and wider society. The measure will also implement targeted awareness-raising and provision of
information for groups at a heightened risk of violence against women and domestic violence,
which will engage with those who are harder to reach and potentially at heightened risk of
violence. Such campaigns are also non-existent in the Member States.
Finally, the measure will add provisions on online violence against women. Information will be
provided to the general public and relevant professionals specifically on this topic, including on
media literacy. This will help prevent this form of violence, and will educate victims and the
wider public about their rights related to online violence. Further, including this type of targeted
information provision in a legal instrument about gender-based violence and violence against
women will send the message that this form of gendered violence is unacceptable and must be
addressed. The measure will also equip law enforcement and judicial authorities with specialized
resources and training to prosecute online violence against women, which will increase
investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of such perpetrators.
The training of professionals is also expected to positively impact on this objective, as it will
help professionals on how to prevent secondary victimisation. This measure will implement
mandatory and regular training, which will enhance prevention through ensuring consistency in
professional conduct. Training professionals in a mandatory and regular way will also send the
139
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
message that it is crucial to appropriately and adequately help victims of gender-based violence
and violence against women. While in place in all Member States, it is not mandatory in all
Member States (see Mapping in Annex) and the new Directive will add important value in terms
of setting out the minimum standards for such training, based on the IC.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 1.1.b, the right to information will support women in obtaining better access to
justice, as they will gain a better understanding of the legal process and relevant organisations to
support them.
The regular and mandatory training of professionals will, to a similar extent, ensure that
relevant practitioners are able to better detect and respond to acts of violence. They will also be
better able to cooperate with other relevant agencies. This is expected to improve overall access to
justice for victims.
The measure will also equip law enforcement and judicial authorities with specialized resources
and training to prosecute online violence against women, which will increase investigation,
prosecution and sanctioning of such perpetrators.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 1.1.b, the right to information will improve access to support services for
women, as they will be better informed about services and organisations available.
The regular and mandatory training of professionals may also, to some extent, contribute to this
objective as professionals, as part of their increased knowledge of cooperation structures, may
also be able to refer victims to relevant support services.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts If implemented, this measure is expected to have a limited extent of social impacts on the
following groups.
Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Awareness raising measures can be expected to lead to behavioural changes in terms of victims
more willing to report such violence to the authorities, understand their rights to be free from
violence, and seek help, including specifically related to online violence against women. The
training of professionals and right to information will improve their access to justice and to
support services.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The regular and mandatory training of professionals may lead to an improvement in the detection
and handling of particular groups of victims. Awareness-raising and provision of information will
also be targeted for groups at a heightened risk of gender-based violence and domestic violence,
which will ensure particular groups of victims (including those at risk of intersectional
discrimination) will receive information about their rights which is specific and sensitive to their
needs.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
Behavioural changes impacts from awareness raising measures can be expected in terms of
perpetrators recognising their acts of violence, coming forward, and asking for help. For this,
however, campaigns would need to be tailored to men.
The measure will equip law enforcement and judicial authorities with specialized resources and
training to prosecute online violence against women, which will increase investigation,
prosecution and sanctioning of such perpetrators.
140
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Wider society
Positive impacts from awareness raising measures can be expected in terms of better
understanding of such violence and changing social norms, raising the issue to the public
attention, and increasing the public awareness of its extent and scale across society. The
information provision in this measure will also include specific information about online violence
against women, and ultimately, they can help the wider public to take such violence more
seriously and considerately and approaching it as an all-society problem.
In the more immediate environment of the victims (friends, relatives, neighbours), awareness
raising measures can encourage the willingness to support victims in reporting and taking other
actions, directly intervene, and help to address such violence. This should encourage the target
groups to take action, intervene and help the victims by contacting the authorities and getting
help.
Awareness raising measures aimed at children and young people can help to decrease the
likelihood of such violence at a later life stage and increase the likelihood of reporting such
violence when witnessed in their environment.
National authorities
Overall, political acceptance of the measure is likely to be high, considering that most already
have similar ones in place.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)
- Integration of persons with disabilities (Article 26)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs This option requires that Member States conducted targeted awareness-raising campaigns
providing information to groups at heightened risk of violence against women and domestic
violence and provide regular and mandatory training to professionals working with violence
against women and domestic violence. Therefore, in addition to the costs estimated under 1.1b,
public authorities will incur costs for running more targeted awareness-raising campaigns and
developing and organising tailored trainings for relevant professionals.
One-off development
cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost (Millions of
euros)
Awareness-
raising
- 2.2 – 4.4 2.2 – 4.4
Training 1.2 24.5 25.7
Costs for awareness raising are based on the unit cost of a campaign that targets groups at
heightened risk of violence against women and domestic violence. Costings assume that Member
States would conduct two such campaigns in a year in addition to two campaigns in a for the
general public on violence against women and domestic violence year compared to the baseline
Training costs are based on the cost of developing an additional 2-hour online training session
tailored to violence against women and domestic violence victims and the cost of attending a 2-
hour training session for police officers, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges that work with victims
of violence against women and domestic violence. The cost of attending a training session is
based on number of police officers, lawyers, prosecutors, and judges (assuming an additional 5%
of the total number in each group attend the training session) and their hourly national wages.
Costings assume that no Member States conduct regular training for professionals working with
victims of violence against women and domestic violence in the baseline.
The approach to right to information is the same as the second policy option and therefore no
additional costs are incurred.
Overall assessment
141
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation and setting regular and mandatory awareness-raising, training and the right to information in a single
legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant
measures and improve their quality in many Member States, in particular in those which have not ratified the IC and those in which current
measures are found to be lacking or insufficient in scale or scope. This measure improves upon measure 1.1.b as it adds targeted awareness-
raising and provision of information for groups at a heightened risk, information provision on OVAW to the general public and relevant
professionals (including media literacy), equipment of law enforcement and judicial authorities with specialized resources/training to prosecute
online violence against women, and makes the training of professionals regular and mandatory.
The measure will contribute to meeting three policy objectives by bringing positive changes in terms of a greater awareness, better understanding,
etc. It will bring benefits to victims and wider society, and may also help perpetrators to change their behaviour and seek help. In comparison to
measure 1.1.b, the measure will additionally include targeted awareness-raising and provision of information for groups at a heightened risk,
improving vulnerable groups’ awareness about their rights.
The total investment required amount to 31.7 – 36.2 Million Euros.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
1.1.3. Assessment of measure 1.2.b gender-based cyber violence against women - self-
regulatory standards
■ Self-regulatory standards: Encouragement of MS to encourage IT platforms and the
media to establish self-regulatory standards to address violence against women and
domestic violence and the root causes of such violence (Art. 17 IC).
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
This measure will encourage Member States to incentivise the private sector, the information and
communication technology sector, and the media to implement self-regulatory standards. These
standards will prevent online violence against women and domestic violence and will enhance
respect for the dignity of such victims, an area which has been severely lacking in regulation and
monitoring. Guidelines and standards brought in by the sector will limit the sharing of violent or
abusive content, therefore reducing the capacity of perpetrators to conduct online abuse.
Victims of gender-based online violence against women have benefitted somewhat from the
general EU provisions applicable to all victims, for example Art. 21(2) of the Victims Rights
Directives requires Member States to encourage the media to take self-regulatory measures to
protect the privacy of victims. However, a strength of this measure will be to specifically address
online violence against women which will more effectively and comprehensively contribute to
effective protection and support.
Currently, no countries, except Romania, have a specific definition of online violence in law.
Eleven states (BE, FR, IE, IT, MT, NL, PL, PT, ES, SE) have criminalised or are about to
criminalise non-consensual dissemination of intimate/private/sexual images specifically. A clear
definition and/or criminalisation would facilitate the establishment of self-regulatory standards, as
the latter could be based on principles in the law. However, for Member States without a
definition or criminalisation, the standards will not have such a basis. Industry’s own self-
regulatory standards brought in by this measure should nevertheless reduce the availability of
online violence, including non-consensual dissemination of intimate/private/sexual images.
The self-regulatory standards could include measures recommended by GREVIO, including
offering easily accessible effective complaint mechanisms for users to report harmful content,
incentivising commercial online activities that incorporate a human rights perspective at all stages
of their activity, and making legal information and information about requesting the removal of
non-consensual content, including images or videos, available on their platforms. Another
standard could be to ensure that spy software or stalkerware cannot do harm.
However, the measure is self-regulatory and therefore will have less impact and harmonisation
than a binding measure. Further, the effects of this measure will be dependent on the content of
the guidelines and measures the industry chooses to bring in. GREIVO baseline evaluation reports
for some Member States noted that existing self-regulatory instruments did not address the
representation of women in a stereotyped and sexualised manner and/or address the reporting on
violence against women and the harm caused by violence to child witnesses.
142
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
The measure will help protect victims of gender-based violence against women and domestic
violence from further violence if the repeated violence is occurring online, as the industry’s self-
regulatory standards may prohibit certain materials and images being used.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts If implemented, this measure is expected to have a limited extent of social impacts on the
following groups.
Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Self-regulatory standards can enhance the dignity and safety of the victims of online violence
against women and domestic violence as the sector will limit the opportunity for perpetrators to
share violent or abusive content.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on particular groups will depend on the content of the standards and guidelines; the
standards could for example include specific rules related to content of children.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is expected to impact perpetrators as sharing violent or abusive content would
violate platforms’ guidelines or standards, and therefore perpetrators would be expected to be less
likely to share such content. The measure may also have an impact on the freedom of expression
rights of perpetrators if their content is (unjustly) removed for violating self-regulatory standards.
Wider society
The measure would improve the experience of all users of online platforms, as all users will be
less likely to encounter violent or abusive content.
It will also clearly impact the private and ICT sector as they will be creating and implementing
the self-regulatory standards.
National authorities
This will likely find political acceptance as it will not require Member States to enact binding or
obligatory measures.
Fundamental rights The measure is expected to enhance in particular the following fundamental rights.
Victims of online violence against women
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Respect for private and family life (Article 7)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Protection of personal data (Article 8)
- Freedom of expression and information (Article 11)
Child victims /witnesses
143
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs N/A
Overall assessment
Overall, encouraging Member States to encourage the online sector to establish self-regulatory standards to address violence against women and
domestic violence and the root causes of such violence is expected to prevent online violence against women and domestic violence to some extent
in many Member States, in particular in those which have not ratified the IC and those in which current measures are found to be lacking or
insufficient in scale or scope. As the measures will be self-regulatory, they may not be as strong or effective as binding rules.
The total investment required is negligible as large online platforms provide codes of conduct that are stricter in nature in identifying illegal content
online to be removed than national law.
This measure is likely find political acceptance as it will not require Member States to enact binding or obligatory measures.
1.1.4. Assessment of measure 1.2.c gender-based cyber violence against women - self-
regulatory standards
■ Self-regulatory standards: Obligation for MS to oblige very large platforms to
implement Codes of Conduct to mitigate risk of OVAW.
■ Measures directed at intermediary service providers: Measures obliging to:
– Act on or inform law enforcement upon request in cases of OVAW (see Art. 8, 9
DSA)
– Process data for the voluntary detection, reporting or removal of criminalized ICT-
facilitated gender-based violence as defined, in particular on the basis of a central
repository of hashes.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
This measure will oblige Member States to require very large online platforms to implement
Codes of Conduct. For smaller stakeholders in the private sector, the information and
communication technology sector, and the media, Member States will be encouraged to
incentivise self-regulatory standards, as in measure 1.2.b.
Both the Codes (for large platforms) and the self-regulatory standards (for smaller stakeholders)
will mitigate risk and prevent online violence against women and domestic violence and will
enhance respect for the dignity of such victims, an area which has been severely lacking in
regulation and monitoring. Codes of Conduct (for large platforms) and self-regulatory standards
(for smaller stakeholders) brought in by the sector will limit the sharing of violent or abusive
content, therefore reducing the capacity of perpetrators to conduct online abuse. The Codes of
Conduct and self-regulatory standards could include measures recommended by GREVIO,
including offering easily accessible effective complaint mechanisms for users to report harmful
content, incentivising commercial online activities that incorporate a human rights perspective at
all stages of their activity, and making legal information and information about requesting the
removal of non-consensual content, including images or videos, available on their platforms.
Another preventative action which could be in the Codes and standards is to ensure that spy
software or stalkerware cannot do harm.
The measure will also oblige the large platforms to act on or inform law enforcement upon
request in cases of online violence against women, and to process data for the voluntary
detection, reporting or removal of criminalized ICT-facilitated gender-based violence as defined,
in particular on the basis of a central repository of hashes.
As with measure 1.2.b., a clear definition and/or criminalisation in a Member State will facilitate
the establishment of Codes of Conduct and self-regulatory standards in the Member States which
have them (only RO has a specific definition of online violence in law; the following have
criminalised or are about to criminalize non-consensual dissemination of intimate/private/sexual
144
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
images: BE, FR, IE, IT, MT, NL, PL, PT, ES, SE), as the standards could be based on principles
in the law. However, for Member States without a definition or criminalisation, the Codes will not
have such a basis. Nevertheless, the Codes of Conduct and standards brought in by this measure
will reduce the availability of online violence, and the involvement of the online platforms in
detecting and processing data related to online violence against women will reduce ICT-
facilitated gender-based violence.
Victims of gender-based online violence against women have benefitted somewhat from the
general EU provisions applicable to all victims, for example Art. 21(2) of the Victims Rights
Directives requires Member States to encourage the media to take self-regulatory measures to
protect the privacy of victims. However, a strength of this measure (as with measure 1.2.b) will be
to specifically address online violence against women which will more effectively and
comprehensively contribute to effective protection and support.
Compared to measure 1.2.b, this measure will be more effective as large platforms will be
obliged to implement Codes of Conduct, rather than encouraged to implement self-regulatory
standards. This will be more effective as they will be mandatory, and there will be more scope for
controlling the content of the Codes. However, proportionality will be ensured as smaller
platforms and providers will simply be encouraged to implement self-regulatory standards.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
The measure will help protect victims of gender-based violence against women and domestic
violence from further violence if the repeated violence is occurring online, as the Codes of
Conduct (for large platforms) and self-regulatory standards (for smaller stakeholders) will
prohibit certain materials and images being used.
The obligation for platforms to report and process data relating to online violence against women
on their platforms will facilitate the removal of content and potential prosecution of perpetrators,
therefore protecting victims from potential further online violence.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The obligation for platforms to report and process data relating to online violence against women
on their platforms will facilitate the work of law enforcement, enabling faster and more effective
removal of content and prosecution of perpetrators.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts If implemented, this measure is expected to have a limited extent of social impacts on the
following groups.
Victims of violence against women and domestic violenceGBVviolence against women and
domestic violence
Codes of Conduct (for large platforms) and self-regulatory standards (for smaller stakeholders)
can be expected to enhance the safety and dignity of the victims of online violence against women
and domestic violence, as the sector will limit the opportunity for perpetrators to share violent or
abusive content. The participation of large platforms in informing law enforcement and
processing data related to online violence against women will also facilitate justice for victims
through punitive measures.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on particular groups will depend on the content of the Codes of Conduct and
standards; they could for example include specific rules related to content of children.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violenceGBVviolence against women
and domestic violence
145
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
The measure is expected to impact perpetrators as sharing violent or abusive content would
violate platforms’ Codes of Conduct (for large platforms) and self-regulatory standards (for
smaller stakeholders), and therefore perpetrators would be expected to be less likely to share such
content. When platforms act or inform law enforcement in cases of online violence against
women, this will facilitate investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of perpetrators. The measure
may also have an impact on the freedom of expression and data protection rights of perpetrators if
their content is (unjustly) removed for violating self-regulatory standards or Codes of Conduct,
and if personal information is shared with law enforcement.
Wider society
The measure would improve the experience of all users of online platforms, as all users will be
less likely to encounter violent or abusive content.
It will also clearly impact the private and ICT sector as they will need to implement the Codes of
Conduct and self-regulatory standards, and monitor and act on cases of online violence against
women.
National authorities
Political acceptance of this measure may be somewhat lower, as it would require Member States
to monitor and enforce implementation, and law enforcement to act upon reporting. As mentioned
earlier, Member States which do not have a definition in law, or a working definition in practice,
will have to introduce one and criminalise this type of offence. On the other hand, several
Member States may consider the measure a welcome EU action, providing the opportunity for a
more harmonised approach, given the high cross-border dimension of online abuse.
Fundamental rights The measure is expected to enhance in particular the following fundamental rights.
Victims of online violence against women and domestic violence
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Respect for private and family life (Article 7)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Protection of personal data (Article 8)
- Freedom of expression and information (Article 11)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
The measure may have a somewhat negative impact on:
Perpetrators of online violence against women and domestic violence
- Freedom of expression and information (Article 11)
- Protection of personal data (Article 8)
Especially if the latter are unjustly identified and investigated.
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs N/A
Overall assessment
Overall, obliging large platforms to implement Codes of Conduct (for large platforms) and self-regulatory standards (for smaller stakeholders)
related to online violence against women is expected to prevent online violence against women to some extent in many Member States, in
particular in those which have not ratified the IC and those in which current measures are found to be lacking or insufficient in scale or scope.
Requiring large platforms to act on, inform law enforcement, and process data when acts of violence against women are conducted on their
platforms will facilitate the removal of such violent material and assist law enforcement to act swiftly in such cases. This will contribute to
increased safety for women and enhanced prosecution of perpetrators, which may have a deterrent effect.
The total investment required is negligible as large online platforms provide codes of conduct that are stricter in nature in identifying illegal content
online to be removed than national law.
Political acceptance of this measure may be somewhat lower, as it would require Member States to monitor and enforce implementation, and law
enforcement to act upon reporting.
146
147
1.1.5. Assessment of measure 1.3.c.I - specific prevention measures against gender-
based work harassment
■ Obligation on MS and employers to provide information and raise awareness
■ Obligation on all employers to provide training of managers, develop anti-
harassment policies and risk assessments
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
The EELN report highlights shortcomings in the implementation of the EU directives in terms of
effectiveness, including insufficient prevention measures.348
In the majority of baseline evaluation
reports, (including those on AT, DK, IT, and SE), GREVIO called on the authorities to ensure
that the private sector/employers take an active part in the prevention of violence against women,
for example, by engaging them actively in policy development processes or by encouraging them
to develop self regulatory standards, or, more generally, to take an active part in preventing and
combating violence against women in all its forms. More specifically, in some Member States
these actions do not appear to be implemented or its implementation is difficult to assess.
This measure would improve these shortcomings by implementing awareness-raising and
information provision on gender-based work harassment; mandatory training of managers, and
mandatory policies and risk assessments on gender-based harassment at work. These actions are
crucial for preventing violence against women and gender-based violence and harassment in the
workplace, and further building awareness in this way can limit gender based behaviours which,
while not reaching the threshold of severity that would allow them to be qualified as violence
under the Istanbul Convention, are often the precursors of violence and/or promote its
emergence or minimise it, as a manifestation of the structural inequalities that persist between
women and men in the world of employment.
See the row below on addressing the harassment of women at work for a more specific
assessment related to workplace harassment.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
In its baseline evaluation reports, GREVIO highlights some current examples of good practice
related to harassment at work, including in Portugal, France, and Malta, as described in measure
348
EELN report p.82
148
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
effectively addressed 1.3.b. Further, social partners have engaged in a wide range of measures and successfully
provided assistance, particularly through collective bargaining.349
However, as described in
measure 1.3.b, there are many described shortcomings with the current state of affairs in Europe.
Social partners cited ILO Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No.190) as guiding their
work in this area because they provide far more comprehensive and specific provisions,350
and
this measure is based on ILO-190.
The measure will implement awareness-raising and information provision on gender-based work
harassment; training of managers; and mandatory policies and risk assessments on gender-based
harassment at work. This will ensure that when work-based harassment occurs, a victim’s
colleagues and managers, as well as the government and social partners, will be informed and
prepared to help support the victim and address the harassment swiftly and effectively.
Currently, sexual harassment is defined in gender-neutral terms across Directive 2006/54/EC,
2004/113/EC and 2010/41/EU, and the EELN report highlights fragmentation of the provisions
across different legal instruments as shortcomings in the implementation of the EU directives.351
Bringing in a comprehensive and specific legal framework on violence against women and
domestic violence will emphasize the experience of women at work, sending a powerful message
of zero tolerance towards gender based violence in the work environment, and will harmonise
fragmented provisions. The measure will also clearly reference harassment on the basis of gender
rather than sex. Having a strong legal framework is also essential to enabling unions to negotiate
concrete sectoral and workplace measures.
Further, there has been a ‘slow transition’ from an understanding of sexual harassment at work
from a health and safety approach that views it as an issue of ‘dignity’, to an approach that
recognises sexual harassment as due to discrimination and rooted in gender equality and thus a
form of gender based violence.352
The ETUC found that, as violence and harassment have become
a part of mainstream safety and health and wellbeing at work policies, they are not gender-
sensitive and ‘not seen as a structural gender equality issue’.353
GREVIO has also identified the
provision of training to relevant stakeholders including a component on the recognition of
gendered dynamics, and the impact and consequences of violence on victims as a necessary
pathway to ensure service provision based on a gendered understanding. The awareness-raising,
information provision, and mandatory training brought in by this measure would accelerate
this shift in understanding as employers, employees, and officials gain understanding.
The mandatory policies and risk assessments on gender-based harassment at work will ensure
structures are in place to punish perpetrators and address situations of violence and harassment
effectively and quickly.
Finally, there will be benefits to bringing in a comprehensive and specific legal framework on
violence against women and domestic violence through this measure. It will emphasize the
experience of women at work, sending a powerful message of zero tolerance towards gender-
based violence in the work environment, and will harmonise fragmented provisions. Another key
impact will be a focus on gender rather than sex when referring to discrimination, which will
more appropriately address the underlying causes of gender discrimination and structural
obstacles that women face due to socially constructed roles, behaviours, expressions and identities
rather than biological attributes.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
349
ETUC (2017) ‘Safe at home, safe at work: trade union strategy to prevent, manage and eliminate work-place
harassment and violence against’. https://www.etuc.org/sites/default/files/document/files/en_-_brochure_-
_safe_at_home_1.pdf
350
DG Just meeting with employer associations, 30 June 2021; DG Just/ICF meeting with social partners 29
June 2021.
351
EELN report p.82
352
Petroglou, P., (2019) Sexual Harassment and harassment related to sex at work: time for a new directive
building on the EU gender equality acquis’, European Equality Law Review, Issue 2.
353
Ibid
149
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Awareness-raising, information provision, and mandatory training will ensure all relevant actors
are primed and prepared to recognise and prevent violence and harassment in the workplace, to
reduce the number of victims and ensure justice when violence and harassment occurs.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on particular groups will depend on the content of the training and awareness raising;
for example they could cover employees at risk of intersectional discrimination in the workplace,
including potential victims of both gender-based and race-based harassment.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
The measure is expected to impact perpetrators as harassment would violate the mandatory
policies, and therefore perpetrators would be expected to be less likely to engage in harassment
and violence. When other actors are trained and prepared to recognise instances of violence and
harassment, this will facilitate investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of perpetrators.
Wider society
There will be an impact on government (as awareness-raising, information provision, and
mandatory policies are brought in), social partners (awareness-raising, information provision, and
mandatory policies), companies (awareness-raising, information provision, and mandatory
policies), managers (mandatory training), and staff (voluntary training).
Importantly, this will be mandatory only for large employers, as SMEs will only need to offer
training on a voluntary basis and are encouraged to develop anti-harassment policies and risk
assessments.
National authorities
The measure could encounter some resistance by some Member States, due to the sensibilities
around the gender versus sex debate also in relation to the IC
Fundamental rights The measure is expected to enhance in particular the following fundamental rights.
Victims of violence against women or domestic violence:
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs are expected to be borne by employers and Member State authorities. More
specifically:
Public authorities may develop their own training on violence against women or domestic
violence in the workplace that can be used across Member States.
This policy option requires mandatory training of all managers in all companies on violence
against women or domestic violence in the workplace. Employers will incur costs for developing
and organising trainings for all managers on violence against women or domestic violence.
One-off development
cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost (Millions of
euros)
Training 0.6 1893.9 1894.5
Training costs are based on the cost of developing a 2-hour online training session on violence
against women or domestic violence in the workplace and the cost of attending a 2-hour training
session for managers. The cost of attending a training session is based on an estimate of the
number of managers per employer, assuming an average of one manager per 10 employees, and
their hourly national wages. Costings assume that no Member States conduct such trainings in the
baseline.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure would represent a large improvement over the current baseline situation (and therefore over measure 1.3.b). The introduction
150
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
of awareness-raising and information provision; mandatory of managers on violence against women and domestic violence; and mandatory policies
and risk assessments on gender-based harassment at work will ensure awareness and preparedness of relevant stakeholders to prevent and deal with
gender-based violence and harassment when it occurs. It will also formalise and harmonise provisions at the EU level, sending a powerful message
of zero tolerance towards gender-based violence in the work environment, harmonising fragmented provisions.
The measure will bring benefits to victims and wider society, and will impact perpetrators by facilitating investigation, prosecution and sanctioning
of perpetrators. Depending on the content of the implemented provisions, the measure may be able to reach more vulnerable groups as well.
The total investment required amount to 1,894.5 Million Euros.
The measure could encounter some resistance by some Member States, due to the sensibilities around the gender versus sex debate also in relation
to the IC
151
1.1.6. Assessment of measure 1.4.b - work with perpetrators
■ Perpetrator intervention and treatment programmes:
– Obligation of MS to have perpetrator intervention and treatment programmes
in place for those sentenced for perpetrating violence against women and
domestic violence (IC Art. 16); mandatory participation for re-offenders or
mandatory participation for all offenders.
– Leaving flexibility to MS as to programme availability, format (online or in
person) etc.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
The measure will oblige Member States to have perpetrator intervention and treatment
programmes in place for those sentenced for perpetrating gender-based violence and violence
against women, whilst leaving flexibility to Member States regarding programme availability and
format (online or in person). By engaging and working with perpetrators, this will reduce the
chances that a previous perpetrator will engage in violence against women or domestic violence
in the future.
At present, the EU provisions do not regulate treatment of perpetrators as such. The European
Network for Work with Perpetrators (WWP EN) said that most countries do not have structured
programmes in place for perpetrators, although there are more in prison.354
Although all but one
country (HU) reported having set up support programmes for perpetrators of VAW/DV,
attribution cannot be made to the directives.355
Similarly, WWP EN said that the directives had
limited relevance to their work. The measure will bring in mandatory perpetrator intervention
and treatment programmes at the EU level, expanding the present provision of such programmes.
WWP EN stated that at present, the Istanbul Convention is the main driver of change across the
EU;356
the measure corresponds to Art 16 of the Istanbul Convention and will therefore expand
provisions already existing in Member States which have ratified and implemented the Istanbul
Convention to other Member States.
GREVIO has called on the authorities to increase the number of available programmes for
perpetrators of domestic violence in its baseline evaluation reports on several countries. In the
Member States with programmes in place, description of the existing measures show that most
target domestic violence and not all are compulsory. At present, there are mandatory programmes
for perpetrators in seven Member States (BE, CZ, ES, LV, PL, PT, FR for those in prison, and
HR as part of probation service), and programmes are voluntary in ten Member States (DK, EE,
FI, IE, IT, LU, NL, RO, SE, SI). Making the programme compulsory for those sentenced for
perpetrating gender-based violence and violence against women will therefore have the largest
impact on prevention in these ten Member States. In its baseline evaluation reports for some
countries (including AT, DK, FI, IT, MT, NL, PT), GREVIO also called on the authorities to
increase the levels of attendance of perpetrator programmes for domestic violence. The
introduction of mandatory programmes would clearly have an impact on increasing attendance
and accordingly more effectively preventing future violence.
Further, gender is included and considered in the present programmes in most Member States
(AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, DK, EE, FR, IE, IT, LU, NL, RO, SE, SI), although it is not included in
three (CZ, LV, PT) therefore the inclusion of these mandatory programmes in a gender-focused
instrument will bring the most impact in these countries.
The effectiveness of the programmes will depend somewhat on their content. The programmes
would be expected to have a larger preventative effect if they are designed to encourage
perpetrators to take responsibility for their actions, examine their attitudes and beliefs towards
women and incorporate a gendered understanding of violence against women, as recommended
by GREVIO. GREVIO also recommends that authorities ensure that the programmes incorporate
354
Interview with European Network for Work with Perpetrators (WWP EN), 2 July 2021.
355
Targeted Consultation q. 29. No response: PL, HR, LT
356
Interview with European Network for Work with Perpetrators (WWP EN), 2 July 2021.
152
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
a uniform gendered approach and deconstruction of sexist stereotypes. The programmes could
also take an approach such as that taken in Andorra, whereby a programme is aimed at boys who
reproduce violent patterns of behaviour to which they were exposed or of which they were direct
victims.
Further, details of the programmes such as their availability and format (online or in person) in
this measure would be left as flexible to the Member States. If programmes have limited
availability this will clearly limit participation and therefore effectiveness in preventing violence
and abuse. If programmes are online, this would increase accessibility but may be less impactful
than in person. The policy measure should, where possible, include some minimum standards for
the programmes, in relation to reach, duration, elements to be covered, etc.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
The measure will ensure that sentenced perpetrators undergo programmes to reduce the likelihood
they re-victimise the same victims, for the same reasons described above.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
GREVIO has expressed concerns that in Austria and Portugal, perpetrator programmes were
ordered to replace prosecution, conviction or sentencing. Therefore, these programmes will be
most effective if authorities ensure that the interplay between perpetrator programmes and
criminal proceedings does not work against the principle of victims’ access to fair and just legal
processes.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women or domestic
violence
Introducing mandatory perpetrator programmes will protect victims and potential victims of
gender-based violence and violence against women as they will reduce the likelihood that
previous perpetrators will offend again.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact of the perpetrator programmes will depend on the content of the programmes; they
could include for example learnings on intersectionality and child victims as well.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women or
domestic violence
The programmes will clearly impact perpetrators most directly, as they will be the attendees at the
programmes and will therefore be less likely to engage in violence against women or domestic
violence again. The presence of certain measures in the programmes, such as encouraging
perpetrators to take responsibility for their actions, examine their attitudes and beliefs towards
women and incorporating a gendered understanding of violence against women, will increase the
effectiveness of the programmes. However, the measure will only address those sentenced for
perpetrating gender-based violence and domestic violence, and will not consider those in the
population who are at risk of offending.
Wider society
The existence and publicization of the programmes could raise awareness among the general
population about the severity of gender based violence and violence against women, as well as the
importance of reducing re-occurrence of violence.
153
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
National authorities
All but one country (HU) reported having set up support programmes for perpetrators of
VAW/DV. However, the compulsoriness and inclusion of gender varies across Member States.
Programmes are mandatory for perpetrators in seven Member States (BE, CZ, ES, LV, PL, PT,
FR for those in prison, and HR as part of probation service), and voluntary in ten Member States
(DK, EE, FI, IE, IT, LU, NL, RO, SE, SI). Gender is included and considered in the present
programmes in most Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, DE, DK, EE, FR, IE, IT, LU, NL, RO,
SE, SI), and not included in three (CZ, LV, PT). Therefore, the scale of impact will be largest in
those with voluntary rather than mandatory programmes, and those which do not include gender
as a consideration.
Fundamental rights The measure is expected to enhance in particular the following fundamental rights.
Victims of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women or domestic
violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women or domestic
violence:
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs of the measures are expected to be borne by the EC, Member State authorities and
support of other organisations (if running intervention and treatment programmes). More
specifically:
Possibly, the EC may co-fund intervention and treatment programmes, but the costs presented
relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for running treatment and intervention programmes for
perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women or domestic
violence that are shown below.
Max Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Perpetrator intervention and treatment
(running cost per annum)
0.7
Costs are based on the estimated costs of providing 6 sessions of 1 hour health and social worker
support per perpetrator of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women
or domestic violence. The total costs are based on the total number of convicted persons under
sexual offences (including sexual assault and rape) and the hourly national wages of health and
social workers. The costs assume that no Member State currently provides sufficient perpetrator
intervention and treatment programmes. Therefore, countries that have a programme in place in
the baseline need reach provide support to 50% more perpetrators and countries that do not have a
programme in place need to provide support to all perpetrators. For countries with no data on
baseline, it is assumed no programmes in place. Furthermore, costs are not estimated for five MS
(BE, CY, EL, IE, IT) due to lack of data on number of convictions and hence, total costs might be
higher.
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing perpetrator intervention and treatment programmes for those sentenced for perpetrating violence against women or domestic
violenceviolence against women and domestic violence in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and
domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in many Member States, in
particular in those which have not ratified the IC and those in which current measures are found to be lacking or insufficient in scale or scope.
The measure will contribute to meeting three policy objectives by bringing positive changes by reducing the likelihood that perpetrators will re-
offend. It will bring benefits to victims and wider society, and will also help perpetrators to change their behaviour. However, a limitation of the
measure is its focus on those sentenced for perpetrating gender-based violence and domestic violence, and it does not consider those in the
population who are at risk of offending.
154
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
The total maximum investment required amount to 0.7 Million Euros.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up. Notably, this measure leaves flexibility to MS as to programme availability and format, which on one hand will
improve political acceptance, yet on the other hand may limit the effectiveness if programmes are not widely available in all Member States.
violence against women and domestic violenceviolence against women and domestic
violenceviolence against women and domestic violenceviolence against women and domestic violenceviolence
against women and domestic violenceviolence against women and domestic violence
Problem area: protection from violence against women and domestic violence
1.2.1. Assessment of measure 2.1.a - protection orders, emergency barring orders
 Obligation for MS of protection orders (emergency barring orders, restraining or
protection orders at national level of violence against women or domestic
violenceviolence against women or domestic violence in all cases.
 Art. 4(1)(c) VRD: information on available protection measures upon first contact
with the authorities.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Protection order and emergency protection/barring orders are a crucial method to ensure victims
of violence against women or domestic violence are effectively protected from further violence.
The availability in law of protection orders is high and therefore the measure is unlikely to
have a significant impact. Mid and long-term protection orders are available in all Member
States. Emergency protection orders, according to the 'Austrian model', are available in 18 states
(AT, BE, BC, CZ, DE, DK, FI, HR, HU, IE, IT, LV, LU, NL, PO, RO, SI, SK). In all other
Member States (CY, LT, EL, FR, EE, PT, ES), the laws suggest that protection orders could be
applicable in emergency situations, yet there are many difficulties in accessing protection in
practice.
The obligation to have protection orders available 'in all cases' could have more impact in France
and Portugal as protection orders are only available for victims of domestic violence, rather than
all types of violence.
Information about protection orders is important as victims may not be aware of the possibility
of this measure, which can negatively impact uptake which is overall low. As the measure is the
same as the baseline, little impact is expected. Detailed mapping is not available about if
information is available for victims about available protection measures upon first contract with
authorities (rather than later in the process). However, it is noted that information is not always
available in suitable languages which may create particular challenges for migrant women and in
cross-border cases.
The measure however does not address some of the core challenges in accessing emergency
protection orders such as lengthy proceedings which delay access at a critical time (for example in
Malta, Spain and Sweden). Similarly, enforcement can be lacking, particularly because of
insufficient sanctions for breaching protection orders. A lack of minimum standards and
conditions also hinders mutual recognition of protection orders in cross-border cases.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Protection orders will help victims feel protected against the perpetrator which may make them
more willing to press charges, especially as fear of reprisal attack and further violence may be
higher if such a step is taken. This measure may therefore increase victims’ access to justice.
Ensuring the effective availability of No impact on this objective
155
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts If implemented, this measure is expected to have a limited extent of social impacts on the
following groups.
Victims of violence against women or domestic violence
Protection orders can provide a high level of physical protection for victims of violence against
women or domestic violence from further violence. However as there is already a high legal
availability of protection and emergency barring orders, this measure will have limited impact.
Information about protection orders is important for ensuring uptake but the measure is the same
as the baseline
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The availability of protection orders to victims of all types of violence could have particular
impact for victims of VAW that are not domestic violence related e.g. FGM, forced marriage and
stalking.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
The measure will impose legal restrictions on perpetrators. The focus of the measure is on the
protection of the victim, rather than behavioural/attitudinal change of the perpetrator.
Wider society
The focus of the measure is on the victim so any impact on wider society will be indirect.
National authorities
There may be impact on national authorities in France and Portugal as this measure would likely
require legal changes to make protection orders available for all victims of GBV, as well as
potentially an increase in issuance of protection orders.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women or domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs for providing decisions and enforcing protection orders for
cases of violence against women or domestic violence that are shown below.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Availability of protection orders
(running cost per annum)
3.3 – 22.8
Protection order costs are based on the estimated unit costs of a protection order to the police and
justice sector per application. The total costs are calculated by multiplying the unit costs with
minimum and maximum estimates of the total number of applications filed. The total number of
156
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
applications are estimated using an estimation of application rates and an estimated number of
women victims of violence against women or domestic violence. Due to lack of comparable data
on the number of women victims of violence against women or domestic violence by Member
State, a minimum and maximum estimate of women victims of violence against women or
domestic violence is based on FRA 2020357
survey results on percentage of women respondents
that reported experiencing a physical incident of sexual nature and percentage of women
respondents that reported experiencing any type of physical violence, respectively. The costs
assume that no Member State has issued a sufficient number of protection orders for women
victims of violence against women or domestic violence in the baseline. It is assumed that
countries that have availability of emergency protection orders in the baseline need to issue 50%
more PO's and countries that have partial availability need to issue 75% more PO's. Furthermore,
costs are not calculated for two MS (IT, MT) due to lack of data to estimate the number of women
victims of violence against women or domestic violence and therefore, costs might be higher.
The costs for provision of information are the same as the baseline and therefore, costs are
assumed to be zero.
Overall assessment
The impact of this measure will be low as availability of protection orders and emergency baring orders is already high across Member States. The
main impact will be ensuring protection orders are available for all forms of violence, not just domestic violence, in Portugal and France. This
could improve protection for victims of FGM, forced, marriage and stalking. Recognition of protection orders across Member States is likely to
remain low as there are not minimum standards in place. Similarly, although information about protection orders is very important for ensuring
uptake, the measures is the same as the baseline so limited change is expected.
The total investment required amount to 3.3 – 22.8 Million Euros.
The measure will probably find political acceptance as little change is required.
1.2.2. Assessment of measure 2.1.b - protection orders, emergency barring orders
Obligation for Member States to increase the efficiency of national emergency barring orders
in violence against women and domestic violence cases, in particular by:
- adopting minimum standards in relation to the issuance and conditions of national
emergency barring orders;
- requiring them to be issued within 24 hours
- ensuring effective enforcement of the order.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Protection order and emergency protection/barring orders are a crucial method to ensure victims
of GBVAW/DV are effectively protected from further violence. Mid and long-term protection
orders are available in all Member States. Emergency protection orders, according to the
'Austrian model', are available in 18 states (AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, DK, FI, HR, HU, IE, IT, LV,
LU, NL, PO, RO, SI, SK). In all other Member States (CY, LT, EL, CY, FR, EE, PT, ES), the
laws suggest that protection orders could be applicable in emergency situations, yet there are
357
https://fra.europa.eu/en/data-and-maps/2021/frs?mdq1=theme&mdq2=982
157
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
many difficulties in accessing protection in practice.
The obligation to have protection orders available 'in all cases' could have more impact in France
and Portugal as protection orders are only available for victims of domestic violence, rather than
all types of violence.
Information about protection orders is important as victims may not be aware of the possibility
this measure, which can impact uptake. As the measure is the same as the baseline, little impact is
expected. Detailed mapping is not available about if information is available for victims about
available protection measures upon first contract with authorities (rather than later in the process).
However, it is noted that information is not always available in suitable languages which may
create particular challenges for migrant women and cross-border cases.
The measure addresses some of the core challenges in accessing emergency protection orders.
Lengthy proceedings (for example in Malta, Spain and Sweden) leave victims without protection
at a time when they are often most needed. Requiring that they are issued within 24 hours will
significantly contribute to achieve effective physical protection for victims.
Similarly, ensuring effective enforcement will improve the effectiveness of protection orders.
Measures across Member States currently varies. Best practice is demonstrated in Spain, for
example, where the system for ensuring compliance with protection orders entails monitoring of
perpetrators through GPS tracking, as well as systematic analysis of violations of protective
orders that is also factored into ongoing risk assessments. Enforcement will also require effective
sanctions for breaching protection orders, which currently vary significant across member states.
Minimum standards and conditions are important for addressing the currently low recognition
and enforcement of foreign protection orders which Member State authorities attributed to a
divergence of sanctions in different Member States for similar types of protection orders (NL,
BG) and divergence among the protection measures in the EU Member States (NL, RO).
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Efficient protection orders will help victims feel protected against the perpetrator which may
make them more willing to press charges, especially as fear of reprisal attack and further violence
may be higher if such a step is taken. This measure may therefore increase victims’ access to
justice.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts If implemented, this measure is expected to have a limited extent of social impacts on the
following groups.
Victims of violence against women or domestic violence
Protection orders can provide a high level of physical protection for victims of violence against
women or domestic violence from further violence. Increasing the effectiveness and timeliness of
the issuance of emergency protection orders will significantly increase physical protection for
victims at a time when they are most needed. Similarly, the measure stands to improve the
effectiveness of protection through ensuring they protection orders are enforced.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The availability of protection orders to victims of all types of violence could have particular
impact for victims of VAW that are not domestic violence e.g. FGM, forced marriage and
stalking.
Similarly, challenges with mutual recognition across Member States will be better addressed
through minimum standards and conditions which will particularly benefit victims in cross-border
158
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
situations.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
The measures will impose legal restrictions on perpetrators. The focus of the measure is on the
protection of the victim, rather than behavioural/attitudinal change of the perpetrator to prevent
future incidents.
Wider society
The focus of the measure is on the victim so the impacts on wider society will only be indirect.
National authorities
Measures will likely involve procedural and legal changes to ensure the efficiency of protection
orders, as well as possibly training with police to enforce changes.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women or domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs In addition to the costs incurred under 2.1b, public authorities will incur additional costs to
increase the efficiency of national protection orders in violence against women or domestic
violence to ensure timely issuance and more effective enforcement.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Availability of protection orders
(running cost per annum)
3.7 – 25.2
It is assumed that costs under 2.1b would need to increase by 10% under this option.
The costs for provision of information are the same as the baseline and therefore, costs are
assumed to be zero.
Overall assessment
The impact of this measure will be high, especially compared to the baseline and policy option 'Istanbul light'. It addresses core issues around the
speed with which emergency baring orders, ensuring physical protection is available when it is often most needed, the measure ensures minimum
standards which will help address the low recognition of foreign protection orders across Member States, and better enforcement of them as
sanctions for breaching them are currently viewed as insufficient and inconsistency in sanctions further hinder recognition of foreign protection
orders. It also ensures protection orders are available for all forms of violence, not just domestic violence, in Portugal and France. This could
improve protection for victims of FGM, forced, marriage and stalking in those countries.
The total investment required amount to 3.7 – 25.2 Million Euros
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because of the significant changes that will be required in some Member States.
159
1.2.3. Assessment of measure 2.2.b - violence reporting and transmission of personal
data between services
The policy measures entail an obligation on Member States to encourage reporting
of violence against women or domestic violenceviolence against women and
domestic violence by witnesses and professionals.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
Reporting can increase the number of perpetrators who are brought to justice and tackle impunity
which can act as a deterrent to perpetrators and thus help prevent further violence against women
or domestic violence.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Reporting a crime can bring victims into contact with professionals who can provide information
about protection available to victims which may reduce further incidents of violence.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Reporting of crimes is crucial in ensuring effective access to justice. Rates of underreporting are,
naturally, difficult to obtain but they are widely viewed as low. A survey conducted by FRA in
2021 shows that most incidents of violence and harassment are not reported to the authorities;
only 30% of incidents involving physical violence, and 11% of those involving harassment were
reported.358
Rates of reporting of physical violence vary between countries, from 40% to 9%. It is
important to note that these statistics are not specific to gender-based violence. Given the
increased stigma and lack of awareness of GBV, it is likely that statistics related to such crimes
may be even lower. Moreover, in cases of domestic violence, the close proximity of the
perpetrator may further hinder reporting.
An obligation on Member States to encourage witnesses and professionals would likely help to
increase reporting. Training of professionals is also important but is not included in this measure
which could reduce effective access to justice: the very low number of reports of cases of
violence made by professionals indicates that this may be related to the need to improve training
of professionals in the identification of victims of violence and of the links between intimate
partner violence and violence against children.
Impact may also be limited because some professionals may be hesitant to report incidents of
violence against women or domestic violence if they think it breaches confidentiality rules in
domestic law. EU legislation provides specific measures to remove obstacles related to
confidentiality regarding reporting of child sexual exploitation in Article 16 of CSAMD but not
violence against women or domestic violence more generally. As this obligation is in place under
the Istanbul Convention, this measure could have more impact on countries who have not ratified
it (BG, CZ, LV, LT, SK), although comprehensive mapping on implementation is not available.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Reporting a crime can bring victims into contact with professionals who can provide information
about support available to victims which may increase access to support. Unlike Istanbul Plus,
this measure does not include an obligation on witnesses and professionals to report which could
raise issues around the provision of victim centred and gender-sensitive support services.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
Reporting obligations would apply to witnesses and professionals in work environments so it
could increase reporting of gender based harassment at work and thus help ensure it is effectively
addressed.
358
FRA (2021) ‘Crime, safety and victims’ rights: Fundamental rights survey’.
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2021-crime-safety-victims-rights_en.pdf
160
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impacts expected.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women or domestic violence
The measure will increase the right of victims of violence against women or domestic violence,
including in the workplace, to access to justice, which is a fundamental right. The measures may
also increase access to support and protection through contact with relevant professionals and
authorities.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The measure might have particular impact on victims of violence against women or domestic
violencewho currently least likely to report a crime. Such groups are often the most marginalised
and may face intersectional discrimination, such as women living with a disability.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
An increase in reporting would help ensure perpetrators are brought to justice.
Wider society
The measure would have an impact on wider society as member of the public and professionals
would be encouraged to report incidents of VAW/DV.
National authorities
The measure may impact national authorities because of potentially increased reporting rates that
would need to be responded to and investigated.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women or domestic violence:
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Zero – costs to encourage reporting of violence against women or domestic violence would be
covered in training of relevant professionals and awareness-raising campaigns
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure could increase reporting by members of the public and professionals. Creating on obligation specific to GBV could help focus
efforts and increase the currently low rates of reporting of this type of crime. However, the measure does not address some of the barriers to
reporting that mean some individuals do not understand their obligations, such as a lack of training or barriers (perceived or real) about
confidentiality rules.
The total investment required amount to zero.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
161
1.2.4. Assessment of measure 2.2.c - violence reporting and transmission of personal
data between services
 The policy measures entail an obligation on MS to ensure that confidentiality rules
do not prevent the reporting of violence against women or domestic violence by
witnesses and professionals to the competent services.
 Obligation on MS to ensure that staff likely to receive complaints are trained to
facilitate the reporting.
 Obligation on MS to permit the transmission of personal data between law
enforcement authorities and support services in accordance with GDPR.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
Reporting can increase the number of perpetrators who are brought to justice and tackle impunity
which can act as a deterrent to perpetrators and thus help prevent further GBVAW/DV. This
measure takes away a further obstacle to reporting – confidentiality rules - and adds training of
relevant staff, thus having an even more positive effect on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Reporting a crime can bring victims into contact with professionals who can provide information
about protection and support available to victims, which in turn may reduce further incidents of
violence.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Reporting of crimes is crucial in ensuring effective access to justice. Rates of underreporting are,
naturally, difficult to obtain but they are widely viewed as low. A survey conducted by FRA in
2021 shows that most incidents of violence and harassment are not reported to the authorities;
only 30% of incidents involving physical violence, and 11% of those involving harassment were
reported.359
Rates of reporting of physical violence vary between countries, from 40% to 9%. It is
important to note that these statistics are not specific to gender-based violence. Given the
increased stigma and lack of awareness of violence against women or domestic violence, it is
likely that statistics related to such crimes may be even lower. Moreover, in cases of domestic
violence, the close proximity of the perpetrator may further hinder reporting.
An obligation on Member States to encourage witnesses and professionals would likely
help to increase reporting, although it would depend on the mechanisms to encourage
reporting. Measures would need to target the general public through awareness-raising
campaigns to increase knowledge of support and protection available, information about
the rights of victims. Training of professionals is also important as a very low number of
reports of cases of violence made by professionals indicates that this may be related to
the need to improve training of professionals in the identification of victims of violence
and of the links between intimate partner violence and violence against children.
Ensuring confidentiality rules do not preventing third-party reporting, including training on this,
as well as the permission to transfer personal data, will help remove barriers to reporting. This is
important as it is often the most vulnerable who are unable to report a crime and access justice,
such as children or victims living with a cognitive disability. Mapping is not available of whether
Member States have measures in place to ensure ensure that confidentiality rules do not prevent
the reporting of violence against women or domestic violence by witnesses and professionals to
the competent services, if training is available and if there are obstacle to the transfer of personal
data.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
The inclusion of actions to ensure that confidentiality rules do not prevent the reporting of
violence against women or domestic violence by witnesses and professionals and an obligation to
permit the transmission of personal data between law enforcement authorities and support
services in accordance with GDPR could negatively impact the support available for victims for
359
FRA (2021) ‘Crime, safety and victims’ rights: Fundamental rights survey’.
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2021-crime-safety-victims-rights_en.pdf
162
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
and domestic violence certain victims (discussed below) however many more victims are likely to be able to access
justice and receive support because of increased reporting. Similarly, the transfer of data could
facilitate greater multi-agency cooperation and provision of more coordinated and comprehensive
support services.
Blanket reporting obligations may raise issues around the provision of victim-centred and gender-
sensitive support services, as has been noted in Italy, Malta, the Netherlands and Spain. Maltese
authorities have specified that, other than in situations in which there are reasonable grounds to
believe that a serious act of violence covered by the scope of the convention has been committed
and further serious acts are to be expected, the obligation to report should be contingent upon the
prior consent of the victim, unless the victim is a child or is unable to protect her/himself due to a
disability.
Making support contingent on reporting may restrict access to support from irregularly-staying
migrant victims who may fear any contact with law enforcement officials because of a fear of
deportation.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
Reporting obligations would apply to witnesses and professionals in work environments so it
could increase reporting of gender based harassment at work and thus help ensure incidents are
effectively addressed.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impacts expected.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women or domestic violence
The measure will increase victims of violence against women or domestic violence, including in
the workplace, access to justice, which is a fundamental right, through encouraging witnesses and
professionals to report instances and removing obstacles related to confidentiality. Similarly,
removing obstacle to the transmission of data could facilitate greater multi-agency cooperation
and provision of more coordinated and comprehensive support services.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The measure might have particularly positive impact on victims of violence against women or
domestic violence who are currently least likely to report a crime. Such groups are often the most
marginalised or victimised / fearful of their perpetrator. Irregularly staying women victims
however may be particularly negatively disadvantages by this measure as compulsory reporting
may deter victims from seeking support for fear of contract with law enforcement authorities and
ultimately deportation.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
An increase in reporting would help ensure perpetrators are brought to justice.
Wider society
The measure would have an impact on wider society as member of the public would be
encouraged to report incidents of VAW/DV that they witness.
National authorities
The measure may impact national authorities because of potentially increased reporting rates that
would need to be responded to and investigated.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women or domestic violence:
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Victims of online GBV
- Protection of personal data (Article 8)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
163
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Administrative and compliance costs Zero – costs to encourage reporting of violence against women or domestic violence would be
covered in training of professionals likely to work with victims of violence against women or
domestic violence and awareness-raising campaigns
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure could increase reporting by members of the public and professionals. Creating on obligation specific to GBV could help focus
efforts and increase the currently low rates of reporting of this type of crime. The measure will increase victims of violence against women or
domestic violence, including in the workplace, access to justice, which is a fundamental right, through encouraging witnesses and professionals to
report instances and removing obstacles related to confidentiality. Similarly, removing obstacle to the transmission of data could facilitate greater
multi-agency cooperation and provision of more coordinated and comprehensive support services. This will have particularly benefits to vulnerable
victims, although irregularly staying migrants may have restricted access to services if there are blanket reporting obligations.
The total investment required amount to zero.
The likelihood of political acceptance is difficult to assess as mapping is not available of current measures in place and thus the changes required
but as reporting crimes is foundational to a functioning judicial system and a fundamental right, it may be likely to find political acceptance.
164
1.2.5. Assessment of measure 2.3.b - special measures for the protection of children in
the context of domestic violence
 The policy measures involves an obligation to ensure that due account is taken of
the rights and needs of child victims and witnesses in the provision of protection
and support services, including an obligation to provide age-appropriate
psychosocial counselling.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impacts expected.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impacts expected.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
If child victims and witnesses are protected and supported, they might be more willing to
act as witnesses in judicial proceedings and press charges. Children’s effective
participation in judicial proceedings is vital for improving the operation of justice, and
European and international human rights instruments recognise the importance of their
participation.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Availability of age-appropriate psychosocial counselling is an important measure to help address
the long-term harm potentially inflicted on children who witness domestic violence. The
obligation to provide these services could have a significant impact as specific services for the
children are not currently systematically available across Member States. In 13 Member States
specialist support services systematically take into account the special needs of child victims and
child witnesses of domestic violence based on a child-sensitive approach (DE, IE, NL, AT, PL,
LV, BG, LU, DK, ES, BE, HR, IT) and eight said they do but not systematically (EE, CZ, FI, PT,
EL, SK, RO, CY).
The provision of services also face a range of more specific access barriers that this measure
could address: in Austria and Finland, for example, services are provided in shelters only; in the
Netherlands, Portugal, and Sweden, shelters support children accompanying their mothers, but
such services are not specialised and tailored to address their specific needs; in Belgium,
provision of services for children relies on the initiative of individual shelters, with no structural
support from the state. Access to counselling services outside of shelters is even more limited.
The promptness and sustainability of services can however be affected by insufficient funding
(Austria, Finland, France, and Spain). The impact of this measure could therefore be limited if the
services made available lack the funding needed to provide quality services.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impacts expected.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impacts expected.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure has limited impact of victims of violence against women and domestic violence as
the focus is on children who are witnesses (not direct victims).
165
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The measures has a significant impact on child witnesses as it addresses gaps in the provision of
services that are specific to children to ensure they have services that are tailored to their needs
and psychosocial counselling that could reduce long-term harm.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
No impact.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
The measure would impact authorities as they would be obliged to increase availability of support
services.
Fundamental rights Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs of the measure are expected to be borne by the EC, Member State authorities and
support of other organisations (if providing support services to children). More specifically:
Possibly, the EC may co-fund support services for children who witness domestic violence, but
the costs of these are presented below and relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for protection and provision of support to child witnesses
including age-appropriate psychosocial counselling as shown below.
Minimum Total EU
cost (Millions of euros)
Maximum Total EU
cost (Millions of
euros)
Protection and support of children
(running cost per annum)
599 1,618
Costs for protection and support to child witnesses are based on minimum and maximum
estimates for the prevalence of child maltreatment (which includes abuse and neglect) combined
with an estimate of the concurrence of child abuse and domestic violence to obtain an estimate of
the number of child witnesses of domestic violence. Total cost calculations are based on the cost
of 2-hours of health and social worker support per child witness for a period of 3-months and the
hourly national wage of health and social workers. The costs assume that Member States do not
provide sufficient protection and support to child witnesses in the baseline. Therefore, it is
assumed that countries that have a programme in place need provide support to 50% more child
witnesses and countries that have a partial programme in place need to provide support to 75%
more child witnesses. For countries with no data on baseline, it is assumed that partial
programmes are in place.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure addresses significant gaps in services provisions. Availability of age-appropriate psychosocial counselling is an important
measure to help address the long-term harm potentially inflicted on children who witness domestic violence and could increase their willingness to
act as witnesses in judicial proceedings. Currently, some Member States do not systematically ensure the special needs of child victims and child
witnesses are taken into account or only available in shelters and overall provision is low.
The total investment required amount to 599 – 1,618 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because significant funds will be needed to ensure that due account is taken of the rights and
needs of child witnesses in the provision of protection and support services and to provide age-appropriate psychosocial counselling.
1.2.6. Assessment of measure 2.3.c –special measures for the protection of children in
the context of domestic violence
 Obligation on Member States to ensure that, in custody and access rights matters
in situations of domestic violence, competent authorities can ensure maintaining
166
contact with the child in a surveyed safe place outside the alleged perpetrator’s
home.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
The measure includes an obligation on Member State authorities to ensure maintaining contact
with the child in a surveyed safe place outside the alleged perpetrator’s home. Supervised
visitations are way for parents of a child to maintain contact but in an environment that is safe for
the child and ensures the location of the child is not identifiable by the perpetrator. It is therefore
important to effectively protect children from further violence. This measure would improve
protection as some Member States lack the necessary resources/infrastructure to ensure safe
supervised visitation. In France such meeting spaces are more equipped to deal with conflictual
relationships than cases involving violence; in Malta a lack of adequate infrastructure meant that
victims had to wait in the same waiting area as the perpetrator. There are also shortcoming in in
regards to sufficient trained personnel for supervised visitation in Austria, Malta, and Spain.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
If child witnesses are protected and supported, they might be more willing to act as witnesses in
judicial proceedings and press charges. Children’s effective participation in judicial proceedings
is vital for improving the operation of justice, and European and international human rights
instruments recognise the importance of their participation.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Availability of age-appropriate psychosocial counselling is an important measure to help address
the long-term harm potentially inflicted on children who witness or are victim of domestic
violence. The obligation to provide these services could have a significant impact as specific
services for the children are not currently systematically available across Member States. In 13
Member States specialist support services systematically take into account the special needs of
child victims and child witnesses of domestic violence based on a child-sensitive approach (DE,
IE, NL, AT, PL, LV, BG, LU, DK, ES, BE, HR, IT) and eight said they do but not systematically
(EE, CZ, FI, PT, EL, SK, RO, CY).
Provision of services also face a range of more specific access barriers that this measure could
address: in Austria and Finland services are provided in shelters only; in the Netherlands,
Portugal, and Sweden, shelters support children accompanying their mothers, but such services
are not specialised and tailored to address their specific needs; in Belgium, provision of services
for children relies on the initiative of individual shelters, with no structural support from the state.
Access to counselling services outside of shelters is even more limited.
The promptness and sustainability of services can however be affected by insufficient funding
(Austria, Finland, France, and Spain). The impact of this measure could therefore be limited if the
services made available lack the funding needed to provide quality services.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impacts expected.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impacts expected.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women or domestic violence
The measure has limited impact of victims of violence against women or domestic violence as the
focus is on children who are witnesses (not direct victims).
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The measures has a significant impact on child witnesses as it address gaps in the provision of
services that are specific to children and in the provision of safe spaces for maintaining parent
167
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
contact with children.
Perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence
The measure would enable perpetrators to main contact with their child, as applicable, but in an
environment where further violence cannot be inflicted both during the visitation and prevents the
identification of the location of the child.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
The measure would impact authorities as they would be obliged to increase availability of support
services and safe spaces for visitations.
Fundamental rights - Respect for private and family life (Article 7)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs This policy option would incur additional costs from under 2.3b to ensure authorities maintain
contact with the child in a surveyed safe place.
Minimum Total EU
cost (Millions of euros)
Maximum Total EU
cost (Millions of
euros)
Protection and support of children
(running cost per annum)
719 1,942.6
Costs for additional protection and support to child witnesses are based on minimum and
maximum estimates for the prevalence of child maltreatment (which includes abuse and neglect)
combined with an estimate of the concurrence of child abuse and domestic violence to obtain an
estimate of the number of child witnesses of domestic violence. Total cost calculations are based
on cost of 1 hour of health and social worker support (to maintain contact) per child witness for a
period of 3-months and the hourly national wage of health and social workers in addition to costs
estimated under 2.3b. No information is available on the availability of existing measures to
maintain safe contact with children in the baseline and therefore, it is assumed that all Member
States incur the additional cost.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure addresses significant gaps in services provisions. Availability of age-appropriate psychosocial counselling is an important
measure to help address the long-term harm potentially inflicted on children who witness domestic violence and could increase their willingness to
act as witnesses in judicial proceedings. Currently, some Member States do not systematically ensure the special needs of child victims and child
witnesses are taken into account or only available in shelters and overall provision is low. Providing a surveyed safe place outside the alleged
perpetrator’s home could provide important protection for children from further violence. This measure would improve protection as some Member
States lack the necessary resources/infrastructure to ensure safe supervised visitation such as France, Malta, Austria and Spain.
The total investment required amount to 120.1 – 324.4 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because significant funds will be needed to ensure that due account is taken of the rights and
needs of child witnesses in the provision of protection and support services and to provide age-appropriate psychosocial counselling, and a suitable
surveyed safe place for visitations.
1.2.7. Assessment of measure 2.4.b - risk assessment and management
 Obligation on MS to ensure an assessment of the lethality risk, the seriousness of
the situation and the risk of repeated violence, is carried out by relevant
authorities. The assessment to duly take into account if perpetrators have access
to firearms.
168
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Member States are currently encouraged, but not obligated, as they would be under this policy
measure, to conduct an individual/risk assessment of victims to identify specific protection needs.
Currently, implementation of individual assessments is weak across Member States, hence this
measure could increase use of individual assessments and thus individuals' protection from further
violence.
Individual assessment are absent in eight Member States (CZ, BE, EE, LU, MT, RO, SI and SK).
In three Member States, protection needs are assessed only for some types of crimes, such as
domestic violence or human trafficking (BE, SI, SK). There are also concerned, even if individual
assessments are in place in law, they are conducted regularly and/or adequately. In Finland and
France concerns have been raised about whether proper efforts have been made to assess the
perpetrator’s access to firearms when carrying out risk assessments.
Existing provisions also do not include an assessment about if the perpetrator has access to
firearms, which, if included, could help prevent extreme harm, intimidation and potentially
femicide. Information is not available about how widely this is currently carried out. However, in
Finland and France concerns have been raised about whether proper efforts have been made to
assess the perpetrator’s access to firearms when carrying out risk assessments.
Although victims of gender based violence are specifically indicated as requiring ‘particular
attention’ in the Victims Rights Directive, the inclusion of an individual assessment in the context
of a single EU instrument tailored to GBV could ensure it is always carried out in a gender-
sensitive manner and tailored to the needs of victims of GBV.
The measure does not include obligations for the enforcement authorities to conduct individual
risk assessments and risk management in a timely manner, potentially delaying access to
protection.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impacts expected, although individual risk assessment may be done in cooperation with
support services and facilitate access to support available.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence / Particular groups of victims
(child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional discrimination)
The measure will provide increase protection for victims through an individual assessment,
especially those who are most vulnerable or at risk of future violence.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
Individual assessment may lead to measures taken against the perpetrator, such as a protection
order or removal of firearm.
169
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Wider society
No impacts expected.
National authorities
The measure will require some Member State authorities to implement individual assessments
and a few Member State authorities to improve the comprehensiveness of the assessment to
include all types of violence and a full assessment of perpetrators’ access to firearms.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs of the measure are expected to be borne by public authorities to ensure assessment of
lethality risk and seriousness of the situation and risk of repeated violence.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Risk assessment (running cost per annum) 43.3
Costs are based on the estimated number of women victims of physical violence that reported the
crime to the police multiplied by the unit costs of screening for risk (i.e. completing a risk
assessment form) and for conducting an in-depth assessment which are based on the national
wages for police officers. Costings assume that police officers need to spend 1-hour on screening
for risk and 2-hours for an in-depth assessment (assuming 25% of women victims qualify as high
risk i.e. for in-depth assessment). It is further assumed that no Member States provides sufficient
individual assessment in the baseline. For countries that that have assessment in place in the
baseline, it is assumed that 50% more victims would need to be assessed, for countries that have a
partial assessment in the baseline, 75% more victims would need to be assessed and for countries
that have no assessment in place in the baseline, all victims would need to be assessed. Further,
costs were not estimated for two countries (IT, MT) that lacked data for the estimation of number
of women victims of physical violence and hence, costs might be higher.
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure will provide increase protection for victims through an individual assessment, especially those who are most vulnerable or at
risk of future violence. The measures will ensure individual assessments are in place in all Member States (they are currently missing eight) and
increase the language from encouraged to ‘obligated’. It would also help improve the quality of assessment, for example that to assess the
perpetrator’s access to firearms when carrying out risk assessments.
The measure does not include obligations for the enforcement authorities to conduct individual risk assessments and risk management in a timely
manner, potentially delaying access to protection.
The total investment required amount to 43.3 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance as not all Member States carry out individual assessments and thus require legal changes.
The measure would also obligate relevant professionals to carry out the assessment for GBV victims specifically which could significantly increase
professional workloads.
1.2.8. Assessment of measure 2.4.c - risk assessment and management
 Obligation for law enforcement authorities to conduct individual risk assessments
and risk management in a timely manner in cooperation with support services.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for No impact on this objective
170
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Member States are currently encouraged, but not obligated, as they would be under this policy
measure, to conduct an individual/risk assessment of victims to identify specific protection needs.
Currently, implementation of individual assessments is weak across Member States so this
measure could increase use of individual assessment and thus individuals' protection from further
violence.
Individual assessment are absent in eight countries (CZ, BE, EE, LU, MT, RO, SI and SK). In
three countries, protection needs are assessed only for some types of crimes, such as domestic
violence or human trafficking (BE, SI, SK). There are also concerned, even if individual
assessments are in place in law, they are conducted regularly and/or adequately.
Existing provisions also do not include an assessment about if the perpetrator has access to
firearms, which, if included, could help prevent extreme harm, intimidation and potentially
femicide. Information is not available about how widely this is currently carried out. However, in
Finland and France concerns have been raised about whether proper efforts have been made to
assess the perpetrator’s access to firearms when carrying out risk assessments.
The measure further ensures effective protection by obligating law enforcement authorities to
conduct individual risk assessment in a timely matter. This is important as individual assessments
can identify victims in need of an emergency protection order and other protection measures
needed in a quick timeframe that provide crucial physical protection for victims from further
violence.
Although victims of gender based violence are specifically indicated as requiring ‘particular
attention’ in the Victims Rights Directive, the inclusion of an individual assessment in the context
of a single EU instrument tailored to GBV could ensure it is always carried out in a gender-
sensitive manner and tailored to the needs of victims of GBV.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The measure could lead to increased access to support for victims as there is an obligation that the
individual risk assessment is done in cooperation with support services and thus ensure they
access the support they need during the judicial process and a coordinated approach to the
victim’s safety. No mapping is available about whether risk assessments are done in cooperation
with support services.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence / Particular groups of victims
(child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional discrimination)
The measure will provide increase protection and support for victims through an individual
assessment, especially those who are most vulnerable or at risk of future violence.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
Individual assessment may lead to measures taken against the perpetrator, such as protection
orders or removal of firearm.
Wider society
No impacts expected.
171
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
National authorities
The measure will require some Member State authorities to implement individual assessments
and a few Member State authorities to improve the comprehensiveness of the assessment to
include all types of violence and a full assessment of perpetrators’ access to firearms.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs This policy measure would incur additional costs from 2.4b to ensure that individual risk
assessments are completed in cooperation with support services.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Risk assessment (running cost per annum) 46.9
Total cost calculations are on the cost of 30 minutes of police time needed to corporate with
support services in addition to costs from 2.4b. Similar to measure 2.4b, it is assumed that no
Member States provides sufficient individual assessment and hence, cooperation with support
services in the baseline. For countries that that have assessment in place in the baseline, it is
assumed that 50% more victims would need to be assessed with cooperation with support
services, for countries that have a partial assessment in the baseline, 75% more victims would
need to be assessed with cooperation with support services and for countries that have no
assessment in place in the baseline, all victims would need to be assessed with cooperation with
support services. Further, costs were not estimated for two countries (IT, MT) that lacked data for
the estimation of number of women victims of physical violence and hence, costs might be
higher.
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure will provide increase protection for victims through an individual assessment, especially those who are most vulnerable or at
risk of future violence. The measures will ensure individual assessments are in place in all Member States (they are currently missing in eight),
tailored to GBV victims, and ensure professionals are not just encouraged but ‘obligated’. It would also help improve the quality of assessment, for
example that to assess the perpetrator’s access to firearms. This measure also ensures these assessments are carried out in a timely manner which is
crucial as this can be critical for accessing time-sensitive protection measures such as emergency barring orders.
The total investment required amount to 46.9 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance as not all Member States carry out individual assessments and thus require legal changes.
The measure would also obligate relevant professionals to carry out the assessment for GBV victims specifically which could significantly increase
professional workloads
Problem area: access to justice in cases of violence against women or domestic
violence
1.3.1. Assessment of measure 3.1b – additional criminalisation
EU-level criminalisations of certain forms of violence against women or domestic
violence.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
No direct impact on this objective, although criminalisation of a type of violence may mean
it is included in prevention activities. The impact is however low as most states have
already criminalised these types of violence (see row 3).
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
Criminalisation will increase the availability of protection measures for the specific type of
violence. The degree to which the measure will ensure victims are effectively protected
from (further violence) is overall low because most states have already criminalised these
172
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
protected from (further) violence types of violence (see row 3).
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Overall, the majority Member States criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical
violence, sexual violence, forced marriage, FGM, forced abortion and forced sterilization.
This means the impact of this measure across all policy objectives is low. The only form of
violence where this is significant variation among Member States is psychological violence
so the greatest impact would be achieved in this regard. Member States tend to vary,
instead, in how these forms of violence are criminalised and the exact definition. Of note,
most are criminalised in a gender-neutral manner, except for FGM, and forced marriage is
not widely considered a form of GBV.
Psychological violence is addressed in divergent ways in Member States: in 13 Member
States it is a specific element of a crime in domestic violence definitions (Belgium,
Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Spain, Slovakia), in others it through other offences such as insults, threats or
coercion, and others as an aggravating factor.
Stalking is specifically criminalised in 24 countries (AT, BE, BG, HR, CZ, EE, FI, FR,
DE, EL, HU, IE, IT, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SI, SV, ES, SW). Lithuania and
Cyprus have other criminal law provisions that are related but not specific to stalking. Only
Denmark has no criminal provisions applicable to stalking and has opted for non-criminal
sanctions. Aggregated factors for stalking and penalties vary across Member States. Of
note, all definitions of stalking are gender-neutral.
Physical violence is typically criminalised under a range of provisions so is difficult to
map by itself. However, in 16 countries, offences of domestic violence allow for the
crimination of physical violence (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, HU, LT, MT, PL, PT, RO, SI,
ES, SE).
Sexual violence: Rape is criminalised in all countries although the definitions used to
criminalise rape vary across Member States, some focusing on the lack of consent, as
recommended by human rights norms, and some relying on the element of force or threats.
Nine states have adopted purely consent-based definitions of rape (Belgium, Croatia,
Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Sweden). Definitions of sexual
violence and rape are consistently gender neutral. Twenty-two states criminalise other
forms of sexual violence, in addition to rape (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus,
Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden). The
differentiation between rape and other sexual offences is not consistent between states.
Forced marriage is criminalised in some form in all Member States. 16 have a specific
provision on forced marriage (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, France,
Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and
Spain). Almost all countries have incorporated the definition of the Istanbul Convention.
The crime of forced marriage is described in a gender-neutral way and is not considered as
a form of violence against women.
Regarding FGM, all Member States have offences dealing with bodily injury, mutilation,
and crimes against health that are applicable to the practice of FGM and may be a basis for
criminal prosecution. 18 Member States have a specific criminal law on FGM. At least half
of the specific offences refer explicitly to women and girls.
All of the reviewed parties have criminalised forced abortion. Conversely, forced
sterilisation has been introduced as a specific criminal offence only in France, Malta,
Portugal and Spain. In Belgium and Italy, forced sterilisation can be prosecuted under other
offences such as aggravated personal injury, grievous bodily harm or assault.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
Criminalization would increase the availability of support for victims of these specific
forms of violence, although, as criminalisation is already high, the impact on this policy
objective will be low (see row 3).
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
Criminalization would help ensure gender-based harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed, although, as criminalisation is already high, the impact on this policy
objective will be low (see row 3).
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
No impact on this objective.
173
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
violence against women and domestic
violence
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women or domestic violence/ Particular groups of victims
(child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional discrimination)
Criminalisation of criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical violence, sexual
violence, forced marriage, FGM, forced abortion and forced sterilization would have
limited impact on victims of violence against women or domestic violence as these types of
violence are already criminalised in nearly all Member States. The main benefit would be
for victims of psychological violence as this is most inconsistently criminalised.
Criminalisation could lead to more support and protection, as well as access to justice, but
again the impact would be low as there are strong existing measures in place.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The impact on perpetrators would be limited except for perpetrators of psychological
violence whose actions would be criminalised.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
A few national authorities would need to make legal amendments to criminalise all forms
of violence, with potentially a knock-on effect to ensure protection and support is also
available to previously unrecognised victims.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial
(Article 47)
-
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs N/A
Overall assessment
Overall, the majority Member States criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical violence, sexual violence, forced marriage, FGM,
forced abortion and forced sterilization. This means the impact of this measure across all policy objectives is low. The only form of violence
where this is significant variation among Member States is psychological violence so the greatest impact would be achieved in this regard.
Member States tend to vary, instead, in how these forms of violence are criminalised and the exact definition. Of note, most are criminalised in a
gender-neutral manner, except for FGM, and forced marriage is not widely considered a form of GBV.
The total investment required is negligible there are likely to be low administrative costs to change legislation and several MS already have laws
in place criminalising various forms of violence against women and domestic violence.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have the legal measures in place.
1.3.2. Assessment of measure 3.1.c.I – additional criminalisations
EU-level criminalisations of certain forms of violence against women and domestic
violence.
Additional EU-level criminalisations of certain forms of ICT-facilitated online
violence
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence (in line
No direct impact on this objective, although criminalisation of a type of violence may mean
it is included in prevention activities. The impact is however low as most states have
already criminalised these types of violence (see row 3).
174
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence are
effectively protected from (further)
violence
Criminalisation will increase the availability of protection measures for the specific type of
violence. The degree to which the measure will ensure victims are effectively protected
from (further violence) is overall low because most states have already criminalised these
types of violence (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Overall, the majority Member States criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical
violence, sexual violence, forced marriage, FGM, forced abortion and forced sterilization.
This means the impact of this measure across all policy objectives is low, although its
potential impact on access to justice is highest. The only form of violence where this is
significant variation among Member States is psychological violence so the greatest impact
would be achieved in this regard. Member States tend to vary, instead, in how these forms
of violence are criminalised and the exact definition. Of note, most are criminalised in a
gender-neutral manner, except for FGM, and forced marriage is not widely considered a
form of GBV.
Of note, most are criminalised in a gender-neutral manner, with the exception of FGM, and
forced marriage is not widely considered a form of GBV. The framing of these forms of
violence as types of violence against women or domestic violence, through being part of an
EU legislative instrument on GBV, under Article 83(1) TFEU could lead to a
reinterpretation of the meaning of these forms of violence and recognition of them as forms
of gender discrimination.
Psychological violence is addressed in divergent ways in Member States: in 13 Member
States it is a specific element of a crime in domestic violence definitions (Belgium,
Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Spain, Slovakia), in others it through other offences such as insults, threats or
coercion, and others as an aggravating factor.
Stalking is specifically criminalised in 24 countries (AT, BE, BG, HR, CZ, EE, FI, FR,
DE, EL, HU, IE, IT, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SI, SV, ES, SW). Current legal
provisions on online stalking are uncertain because it is unclear if it is included under
existing stalking provisions. Some countries have language that could include online
stalking such as stalking ‘by any means’ (Slovenia, Ireland, Malta, Slovakia, Estonia,
Hungary, Bulgaria). In Italy and France the online dimension of stalking is an aggravating
circumstance.360
Physical violence is typically criminalised under a range of provisions so is difficult to
map by itself. However, in 16 countries, offences of domestic violence allow for the
crimination of physical violence (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, HU, LT, MT, PL, PT, RO, SI,
ES, SE).
Sexual violence: Rape is criminalised in all countries although the definitions used to
criminalise rape vary across Member States, some focusing on the lack of consent, as
recommended by human rights norms, and some relying on the element of force or threats.
Nine states have adopted purely consent-based definitions of rape (Belgium, Croatia,
Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Sweden). Definitions of sexual
violence and rape are consistently gender neutral. Twenty-two states criminalise other
forms of sexual violence, in addition to rape (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus,
Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden). The
differentiation between rape and other sexual offences is not consistent between states.
Forced marriage is criminalised in some form in all Member States. 16 have a specific
provision on forced marriage (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, France,
Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and
360
EELN report.
175
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Spain). Almost all countries have incorporated the definition of the Istanbul Convention.
The crime of forced marriage is described in a gender-neutral way and is not considered as
a form of violence against women.
Regarding FGM, all Member States have offences dealing with bodily injury, mutilation,
and crimes against health that are applicable to the practice of FGM and may be a basis for
criminal prosecution. 18 Member States have a specific criminal law on FGM. At least half
of the specific offences refer explicitly to women and girls.
All of the reviewed parties have criminalised forced abortion. Conversely, forced
sterilisation has been introduced as a specific criminal offence only in France, Malta,
Portugal and Spain. In Belgium and Italy, forced sterilisation can be prosecuted under other
offences such as aggravated personal injury, grievous bodily harm or assault.
Ten Member States (Belgium, France, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden) have specifically criminalised the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images. Only France,
Lithuania, Malta and Spain consider whether the offence has been committed on the
grounds of the victim's gender as an aggravating factor. Criminalisation and inclusion of it
as a form GBV may have more impact, compared to other criminalisations proposed in this
measure, due to low rates of criminalisation and lack of gender-sensitivity.
Current legal provisions on online stalking are uncertain because it is unclear if is included
under existing stalking provisions. Some countries have language that could include online
stalking such as stalking ‘by any means’ (Slovenia, Ireland, Malta, Slovakia, Estonia,
Hungary, Bulgaria). In Italy and France the online dimension of stalking is an aggravating
circumstance.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
Criminalization would increase the availability of support for victims of these specific
forms of violence, although, as criminalisation is already high, the impact on this policy
objective will be low (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
Criminalization would help ensure gender-based harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed, although, as criminalisation is already high, the impact on this policy
objective will be low (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence / Particular groups of
victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional discrimination)
1.3.3. Criminalisation of most forms of violence would have
limited impact on victims of violence against women and
domestic violence as they are criminalised in nearly all Member
States. The main benefit would be for victims of psychological
violence, online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual
images as this is most inconsistently criminalised.
Criminalisation would lead to more support and protection, as
well as access to justice for these victims.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The impact on perpetrators would be limited except for perpetrators of psychological
176
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
violence, online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images whose
actions would be criminalised.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
A few national authorities would need to make legal amendments to criminalise all forms
of violence, with potentially a knock-on effect to ensure protection and support is also
available to previously unrecognised victims.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
-
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs N/A
Overall assessment
Overall, the majority Member States criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical violence, sexual violence, forced marriage, FGM,
forced abortion and forced sterilization. This means the impact of this measure across all policy objectives is low. The only form of violence
where this is significant variation among Member States is psychological violence so the greatest impact would be achieved in this regard. Of
note, most are criminalised in a gender-neutral manner, except for FGM, and forced marriage is not widely considered a form of GBV. The
framing of these forms of violence as types of GBV, through being part of an EU legislative instrument on GBV, under Article 83(1) TFEU
could lead to a reinterpretation of the meaning of these forms of violence as GBV. This could lead to much increased and stronger prosecution
as these acts of violence are investigated and prosecuted in ways that recognise the specificity of GBV crimes.
The total investment required is negligible there are likely to be low administrative costs to change legislation and several MS already have
laws in place criminalising various forms of violence against women and domestic violence.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have the legal measures in place.
1.3.4. Assessment of measure 3.1.c.II – additional criminalisations
 EU-level criminalisations of certain forms of violence against women and
domestic violence.
 Additional EU-level criminalisations of certain forms of ICT-facilitated online
violence
 Introduction of violence against women and domestic violence as a Eurocrime.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence (in line
with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
No direct impact on this objective, although criminalisation of all types of violence may
mean it is included in prevention activities. The impact is however low as most states have
already criminalised these types of violence (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence are
Criminalisation will increase the availability of protection measures for the specific type of
violence. The degree to which the measure will ensure victims are effectively protected
from (further violence) is overall low because most states have already criminalised these
177
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
effectively protected from (further)
violence
types of violence (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Overall, the majority Member States criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical
violence, sexual violence, forced marriage, FGM, forced abortion and forced sterilization.
This means the impact of this measure across all policy objectives is low, although its
potential impact on access to justice is highest. The only form of violence where this is
significant variation among Member States is psychological violence so the greatest impact
would be achieved in this regard. Member States tend to vary, instead, in how these forms
of violence are criminalised and the exact definition. Of note, most are criminalised in a
gender-neutral manner, except for FGM, and forced marriage is not widely considered a
form of GBV.
Of note, most are criminalised in a gender-neutral manner, with the exception of FGM, and
forced marriage is not widely considered a form of GBV. The framing of these forms of
violence as types of GBV, through being part of an EU legislative instrument on GBV,
under Article 83(1) TFEU could lead to a reinterpretation of the meaning of these
forms of violence and recognition of them as forms of gender discrimination.
Psychological violence is addressed in divergent ways in Member States: in 13 Member
States it is a specific element of a crime in domestic violence definitions (Belgium,
Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Greece, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Spain, Slovakia), in others it through other offences such as insults, threats or
coercion, and others as an aggravating factor.
Stalking is specifically criminalised in 24 countries (AT, BE, BG, HR, CZ, EE, FI,
FR, DE, EL, HU, IE, IT, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SI, SV, ES, SW). Current
legal provisions on online stalking are uncertain because it is unclear if it
is included under existing stalking provisions. Some countries have
language that could include online stalking such as stalking ‘by any
means’ (Slovenia, Ireland, Malta, Slovakia, Estonia, Hungary, Bulgaria).
In Italy and France the online dimension of stalking is an aggravating
circumstance.361
Physical violence is typically criminalised under a range of provisions so is
difficult to map by itself. However, in 16 countries, offences of domestic violence
allow for the crimination of physical violence (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, HU, LT,
MT, PL, PT, RO, SI, ES, SE).
Sexual violence: Rape is criminalised in all countries although the definitions
used to criminalise rape vary across Member States, some focusing on the lack of
consent, as recommended by human rights norms, and some relying on the
element of force or threats. Nine states have adopted purely consent-based
definitions of rape (Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Ireland,
Luxembourg, Malta, Sweden). Definitions of sexual violence and rape are
consistently gender neutral. Twenty-two states criminalise other forms of sexual
violence, in addition to rape (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden). The
differentiation between rape and other sexual offences is not consistent between
states.
Forced marriage is criminalised in some form in all Member States. 16 have a
specific provision on forced marriage (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus,
France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia,
Spain and Spain). Almost all countries have incorporated the definition of the
Istanbul Convention. The crime of forced marriage is described in a gender-neutral
way and is not considered as a form of violence against women.
361
EELN report.
178
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Regarding FGM, all Member States have offences dealing with bodily injury,
mutilation, and crimes against health that are applicable to the practice of FGM
and may be a basis for criminal prosecution. 18 Member States have a specific
criminal law on FGM. At least half of the specific offences refer explicitly to women
and girls.
All of the reviewed parties have criminalised forced abortion. Conversely, forced
sterilisation has been introduced as a specific criminal offence only in France,
Malta, Portugal and Spain. In Belgium and Italy, forced sterilisation can be
prosecuted under other offences such as aggravated personal injury, grievous
bodily harm or assault.
Ten Member States (Belgium, France, Ireland, Italy, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden) have specifically criminalised the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images. Only France,
Lithuania, Malta and Spain consider whether the offence has been committed on the
grounds of the victim's gender as an aggravating factor. Criminalisation and inclusion of it
as a form GBV may have more impact, compared to other criminalisations proposed in this
measure, due to low rates of criminalisation and lack of gender-sensitivity.
Current legal provisions on online stalking are uncertain because it is unclear if is included
under existing stalking provisions. Some countries have language that could include online
stalking such as stalking ‘by any means’ (Slovenia, Ireland, Malta, Slovakia, Estonia,
Hungary, Bulgaria). In Italy and France the online dimension of stalking is an aggravating
circumstance.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
Criminalization would increase the availability of support for victims of these specific
forms of violence, although, as criminalisation is already high, the impact on this policy
objective will be low (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
Criminalization would help ensure gender-based harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed, although, as criminalisation is already high, the impact on this policy
objective will be low (see row 3).
Criminalisation of online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images could have more
impact as criminalisation is lower across Member States (see row 3).
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence / Particular groups of
victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional discrimination)
Criminalisation of most forms of violence would have limited impact on victims of
violence against women and domestic violence as they are criminalised in nearly all
Member States. The main benefit would be for victims of psychological violence, online
stalking and the non-consensual dissemination/publication/disclosure of
intimate/private/sexual images as this is most inconsistently criminalised. Criminalisation
would lead to more support and protection, as well as access to justice for these victims.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The impact on perpetrators would be limited except for perpetrators of psychological
violence, online stalking and the non-consensual
dissemination/publication/disclosure of intimate/private/sexual images whose
actions would be criminalised.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
A few national authorities would need to make legal amendments to criminalise all forms
of violence, with potentially a knock-on effect to ensure protection and support is also
available to previously unrecognised victims.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
179
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
-
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs N/A
Overall assessment
Overall, the majority Member States criminalise psychological violence, stalking, physical violence, sexual violence, forced marriage, FGM,
forced abortion and forced sterilization. This means the impact of this measure across all policy objectives is low. The only form of violence
where this is significant variation among Member States is psychological violence so the greatest impact would be achieved in this regard. Of
note, most are criminalised in a gender-neutral manner, except for FGM, and forced marriage is not widely considered a form of GBV. The
framing of these forms of violence as types of GBV, through being part of an EU legislative instrument on GBV, under Article 83(1) TFEU
could lead to a reinterpretation of the meaning of these forms of violence as GBV. This could lead to much increased and stronger prosecution
as these acts of violence are investigated and prosecuted in ways that recognise the specificity of GBV crimes.
The total investment required is negligible there are likely to be low administrative costs to change legislation and several MS already have
laws in place criminalising various forms of violence against women and domestic violence.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have the legal measures in place.
1.3.5. Assessment of measure 3.2.b - measures against gender-based cyber violence
against women
Same as the baseline.
1.3.6. Assessment of measure 3.2.c - measures against gender-based cyber violence
against women
Encourage/oblige member states to allow online/other low-threshold reporting of incidents of
online violence against women to national law enforcement or other authorities.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
In an increase in reporting, if it leads to prosecution and ultimately ending impunity, could
act as deterrence to potential perpetrators and thus prevent further incidents.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence are
effectively protected from (further)
violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Overall, as reporting of online violence against women is low, even compared to other
forms of VAW, low-threshold reporting options – that make is easier for victims to report
crimes – would likely help overcome barriers rooted in the perception that the process is
difficult. This would help ensure effective access to justice for victims.
The extent of the impact would however depend on how reports are responded to and
prosecuted. The measure’s impact may be limited if prosecutors are not clear how the law
applies to online crimes and if investigation is not tailored to the specificities on online
crime and frequently cross-border nature.
180
Reporting of measures across forms of online violence is low, often as an extension of the
same challenges offline. These challenges include the tendency for victims to believe their
experiences will not be taken seriously by law enforcement. The fact that law enforcement
often does not have the tools or training to properly handle such cases can worsen these
problems. Fear of stigma, shame and victim-blaming, embedded in wider societal norms,
further deter women from reporting. An additional factor is the absence of a legal
definition covering gender-based online violence in all EU Member States. This leads to
incidents not being possible to investigate and prosecute. A number of cases in which
victims do report to social media platforms or law enforcement, only a small percentage
are pursued, sometimes perceived to be because authorities do not understand the severity
of harm caused by online violence. Low reporting rates can be also due in part to a lack of
awareness among victims that their experiences qualify as violence and is a crime.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that gender based harassment
of women at work is effectively
addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence / Particular groups of
victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional discrimination)
The measure would have an impact on victims of online violence against women. It would
reduce barriers to reporting and improve access to justice for victims. There would be a
significant impact as current reporting is very low.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure would ensure more perpetrators are brought to justice. This would address a
high level of impunity for perpetrators operating online, as it often enables individuals to
act with perceived anonymity.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
The measure would likely increase reporting and thus increased number of cases to be
handled by authorities.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs of the measure are expected to be borne by public authorities to assess reports of
illegal gender-based content online.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Measures against illegal gender-based
content online (running cost per annum)
326.5
Costs are based on the estimated number of women victims of online violence that report
the incident to an online platform and the number of police officers required to assess the
reports. Total costs are calculated by multiplying the number of police officers required to
assess reports of illegal gender-based content online and the hourly national wage of police
officers. No information is available on Member States that allow online/other low
threshold reporting of incidents of OVAW in the baseline and therefore it assumed that all
Member States would incur costs to assess reports.
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure could have a significant impact on the online sphere which is increasingly embedded in all women’s personal and
181
professional lives. Currently, levels of reporting are low and perpetrators often act knowing they can do so with anonymity and impunity.
Reporting is very low because some victims do not know the violence inflicted is a crime and, like crimes committed offline, fear victim-
blaming and stigma if they report the crime to authorities. The measure’s impact may however be limited if prosecutors are not clear how the
law applies to online crimes and if investigation is not tailored to the specificities on online crime, for example its frequent cross-border
element.
The total investment required amount to 326.5 Million Euros.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have
to significantly scale them up.
1.3.7. Assessment of measure 3.4.b - victim compensation
 Obligation for judges and prosecutors to inform victims of violence against
women and domestic violence about the possibility to request compensation from
the perpetrator and the steps needed.
 Obligation for MS to ensure access to state compensation to those who have
sustained serious bodily injury or impairment of health when the damage is not
covered by other sources.
 Obligation for MS to provide victims of violence against women and domestic
violence with a right to a compensation decision in a reasonable time.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence are
effectively protected from (further)
violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Information: Member States use various way to provide information to victims about
compensation. The most common way is for victims to be informed by the police (orally
and by leaflets), or they are informed via information online. An online application form
for compensation is now available in 17 Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EL,
ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, NL, PT, SE, SK). However, it is widely noted by stakeholders
that victims often do not obtain information about how to claim compensation and, if
they do, it is from victims support organisations. Information provided by judges and
prosecutors would help ensure women access the information.
Access: Victims of crime can claim compensation from the perpetrator in all states.
State-funded compensation is not widely available in the EU. In 21 states, in line with
Council Directive 2004/80/EC, (BE, BG, HR, CZ, DE, EE, FI, EL, IE, IT, LV, LT, LU,
MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK, SE) state compensation is in most cases provided only to
victims of violent crimes. In 11 Member States (BE, CZ, DE, HU, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT
RO, ES) it is also available if victims have sustained serious bodily injury or impairment
of health. In the majority of states, state-funded compensation is available subsidiarily,
thus only when the victim cannot procure payment from the perpetrator, either because
they have not been identified, cannot afford the compensation, or compensation was
denied in the criminal or civil proceedings.
Time: The time taken to receive compensation is widely seen as ‘long and difficult’.
Victims often receive their compensation several years after the crime was committed. In
some Member States, there are no concrete deadlines to be compensated and, when there
are deadlines, they are not always respected. Only a few cases are closed and
compensated in a state compensation scheme within the first 12 months and 50% after 24
months. The measure may be limited in impact without clear definitions of ‘timely’ or
deadlines.
Ensuring the effective availability of The measure may provide complementary to support services who often provide
182
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
information to victims about access to information.
Ensuring that gender based harassment
of women at work is effectively
addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could have a significant impact on victims as many do not currently obtain
compensation. Compensation is part of their right to access effective remedy, recognition
of the harm they have suffered and may help victims obtain the economic resources they
need to move forward. Obligating judges and prosecutors to inform victims about their
rights would help victims to access compensation, ensure it is available for serious
bodily injury or impairment of health (which is only available in 11 Member States) and
in a more timely manner.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
No impact on particular groups.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
More perpetrators may be expected to pay compensation to their victims, including
because state compensation is only available subsidiarily if a perpetrator is unable to pay.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
National authorities may have to handle more compensation cases, instil measures to
handle them more quickly, and pay compensation.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs of the measures are expected to be borne Member State authorities or
individual perpetrators (if compensation is paid by the perpetrator). Public authorities or
individual perpetrators will incur costs due to the provision of compensation to women
victims that have sustained serous bodily injury or impairment.
The costs provided below are for public authorities, assuming compensation is provided
by the state.
Minimum Total EU
cost (Millions of
euros)
Maximum Total EU
cost (Millions of
euros)
Compensation to women
victims (costs per annum)
Baseline Baseline
Costs for compensation to women victims are based on minimum and maximum
estimates for the average amount of state compensation awarded to women victims
physical violence (which is broader than violence against women and domestic violence
victims) that apply for compensation. The estimated number of women victims of
physical violence is used as an estimate of the number of victims of bodily injury or
impairment of health due to lack of data on the latter. The total costs are calculated by
multiplying the total number of women victims of physical violence with the proportion
of women victims that apply for state compensation with the estimates for average state
compensation awarded. It is assumed that no Member States provides access to
compensation to all women victims. Countries that have state compensation for violent
crimes in the baseline would need to pay 50% more victims and countries that do not
have state compensation for violent crimes would need to pay all victims. For countries
with no information available on the baseline, it is assumed that no compensation is
available for violence crime and therefore, all victims would need to be paid. Further,
costs are not estimated for 2 MS (IT, MT) with missing information on the number of
women victims of physical violence and therefore, costs might be higher.
Little to zero costs are incurred to inform victims of violence against women and
domestic violence about the possibility to request compensation from the perpetrator and
183
to reach a decision in a reasonable time.
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure could have a significant impact on victims and their access to justice and effective remedy. Victims have a right to
compensation but this often is not realised in cases of VAW/DV. The measures will make significant changes to ensure compensation is
available to victims through providing information, which is currently a major barrier, make sure it is available from the state, as
perpetrators often cannot or do not pay, and make sure it is available in a timely manner, as current timeframes are very long.
The total investment required amount to 769 – 6,353 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because it could result in major changes and costs to the state in terms of
implementing the obligation on judges and prosecutors to provide information, pay compensation subsidiary, and changes to the judicial
process to ensure compensation is paid in a timely manner.
184
1.3.8. Assessment of measure 3.4.c - victim compensation
 Obligation for judges and prosecutors to inform victims of violence against
women and domestic violence about the possibility to request compensation from
the perpetrator and the steps needed.
 Right to meaningful compensation for violence against women or domestic
violence victims in criminal proceedings in line with CJEU C-129/19
 Art. 30 IC: Obligation for MS to ensure access to state compensation to those
who have sustained serious bodily injury or impairment of health, or impairment
of health, when the damage is not covered by other sources.
 Obligation for MS to provide victims of violence against women and domestic
violence with a right to a compensation decision in a reasonable time.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
No impact on this objective
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence are
effectively protected from (further)
violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Information: Member States use various way to provide information to victims about
compensation. The most common way is for victims to be informed by the police (orally
and by leaflets), or they are informed via information online. An online application form
for compensation is now available in 17 Member States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EL,
ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, NL, PT, SE, SK). However, it is widely noted by stakeholders
that victims often do not obtain information about how to claim compensation and, if
they do, it is from victims support organisations. Information provided by judges and
prosecutors would help ensure women access the information.
Access: Victims of crime can claim compensation from the perpetrator in all states.
State-funded compensation is not widely available in the EU. In 21 states, in line with
Council Directive 2004/80/EC, (BE, BG, HR, CZ, DE, EE, FI, EL, IE, IT, LV, LT, LU,
MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK, SE) state compensation is in most cases provided only to
victims of violent crimes. In 11 Member States (BE, CZ, DE, HU, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT
RO, ES) it is also available if victims have sustained serious bodily injury or impairment
of health. In the majority of states, state-funded compensation is available subsidiarily,
thus only when the victim cannot procure payment from the perpetrator, either because
they have not been identified, cannot afford the compensation, or compensation was
denied in the criminal or civil proceedings.
Time: The time taken to receive compensation is widely seen as ‘long and difficult’.
Victims often receive their compensation several years after the crime was committed. In
some Member States, there are no concrete deadlines to be compensated and, when there
are deadlines, they are not always respected. Only a few cases are closed and
compensated in a state compensation scheme within the first 12 months and 50% after 24
months. The measure may be limited in impact without clear definitions of ‘timely’ or
deadlines.
Meaningful compensation: The amount of compensation attributed in gender-based
violence cases is often very low. For example, in Spain, the average compensation is
around €150. CJEU in C-129/19 doubted that the fixed rate of €4800 for a case of sexual
violence in Italy was “not manifestly insufficient,” because “sexual violence…gives rise
to the most serious consequences of violent intentional crime”. Low compensation rates
can be particularly damaging for victims of domestic violence which can often occur in
situations of economic dependence and because it signals to the public and the victim
that such crimes are not viewed as having serious consequences to the victim.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
The measure may provide complementary to support services who often provide
information to victims about access to information.
185
and domestic violence
Ensuring that gender based harassment
of women at work is effectively
addressed
No impact on this objective
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could have a significant impact on victims as many do not currently obtain
compensation. Compensation is part of their right to access effective remedy, recognition
of the harm they have suffered and may help victims obtain the economic resources they
need to move forward. Obligating judges and prosecutors to inform victims about their
rights would help victims to access meaningful compensation, ensure it is available for
serious bodily injury or impairment of health (which is only available in 11 Member
States) and in a more timely manner.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
No impact on particular groups.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
More perpetrators may be expected to pay compensation to their victims, including
because state compensation is only available subsidiarily if a perpetrator is unable to pay.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
National authorities may have to handle more compensation cases, instil measures to
handle them more quickly, and pay more, and higher amounts, of compensation.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs This policy measure would incur additional costs from 3.4b to ensure meaningful
compensation for violence against women and domestic violence victims.
Total Min EU cost
(Millions of euros)
Total Max EU cost
(Millions of euros)
Compensation to women
victims (costs per annum)
1,569.1 1,569.1
Costs for compensation to women victims are based on estimated number of women
victims of sexual violence that apply for compensation and the maximum estimate for
the average amount of state compensation of EUR 35,000. Due to lack of available
information on women victims of violence against women and domestic violence, the
estimated number of women victims of sexual violence is used instead.
The total costs are calculated based on the number of women victims of sexual violence
that again access to state compensation in addition to women victims of physical
violence (3.4b). It is assumed that no Member States provide meaningful compensation
specifically to women victims of sexual violence in the baseline and hence, all Member
States incur costs.
Overall assessment
Overall, the measure could have a significant impact on victims and their access to justice and effective remedy. Victims have a right to
compensation but this often is not realised in cases of VAW/DV. The measures will make significant changes to ensure meaningful levels
of compensation are available to victims through providing information, which is currently a major barrier, make sure it is available from
the state, as perpetrators often cannot or do not pay, and make sure it is available in a timely manner, as current timeframes are very long.
The total investment required amount to 1,569.1 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because it could result in major changes and costs to the state in terms of
implementing the obligation on judges and prosecutors to provide information, pay compensation subsidiary, including at potentially
higher amounts, and changes to the judicial process to ensure compensation is paid in a timely manner
186
1.3.9. violence against women and domestic violenceAssessment of measure 3.6.b -
national coordination
Same as baseline.
1.3.10. Assessment of measure 3.6.c - national coordination
 Legal standing to equality bodies to assist and represent victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, including online violence against women.
 Obligation for MS to ensure equality bodies are mandated to provide information and
conduct awareness raising on violence against women and domestic violence/OVAW.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
Information and awareness-raising measures could focus, for example, on challenging
negative gender stereotypes which could act as a preventative measure.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence against
women and domestic violence are
effectively protected from (further)
violence
No impact on this objective
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Only six equality bodies have the capacity to receive gender-based violence related
complaints (AT, BE, EE, IT, PT, SL). 19 Member States report that national equality
bodies can receive claims of sexual harassment and harassment based on sex (BE, BG,
HR, CY, DK, EE, FR, DE, EL, IE, LT, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SI, SK, SE).
Equality bodies currently provide information and support and carry out awareness
raising on GBV, focusing on discrimination and sexual harassment in the workplace, for
example through webpages, written materials, training, guidance and targeted
campaigns. There is however no obligation on Member States to ensure that equality
bodies to provide information and conduct awareness raising on violence against women
and domestic violence. This measure will likely contribute to systematising efforts which
are currently ad hoc and varied across Member States.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Equality bodies as part of assisting and representing victims of violence against women
and domestic violence would provide support to victims through legal proceedings.
Information can also help victims access support.
Ensuring that gender based harassment
of women at work is effectively
addressed
The equality directives set out provisions on the role of equality bodies in combatting
sex-based discrimination, including harassment. They therefore have a core role in
ensuring that gender based harassment of women at work is effectively addressed. This
measure would ensure they can support victims of all forms of gender-based violence.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Victims in 21 Member States would have the option to be assisted and represented by
equality bodies, where previously this was unavailable. Victims would receive
information with more consistency about support available.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
Victims of gender based harassment at work would be particularly supported by this
measure.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
No specific measures target perpetrators, although awareness raising campaigns may
change the behaviour or attitude of potential perpetrators.
187
Wider society
Wider society could be impacted by awareness-raising campaigns.
National authorities
National authorities would be obliged to ensure equality bodies are mandated to provide
information and conduct awareness raising on violence against women and domestic
violence/OVAW. This would have an impact in 21 Member States where this is not
currently the case.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs to hire additional staff in equality bodies to assist and
represent victims of violence against women and domestic violence.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Equality bodies (running cost per
annum)
2.0
Costs are based on the number of additional FTE's needed in equality bodies to assist and
represent victims of violence against women and domestic violence and their national
mean annual earnings. It is assumed that there are no costs for Member States where
equality bodies already have a legal standing to receive complaints and to receive claims
of sexual harassment in the baseline. For countries where either equality bodies cannot
receive GBV complaints or receive claims of harassment, it is assumed that an additional
2 FTEs are needed. For countries (SI) with no information available on the baseline, it is
assumed no legal standing is in place and hence, an additional 2 FTEs would be needed.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure would mean victims in 21 Member States would have the option to be assisted and represented by equality bodies,
where previously this was unavailable. This would greatly strengthen their access to justice and effective remedy. Victims would receive
information with more consistency about support available, further enforcing their ability to access justice and the support needed.
The total investment required amount to 2.0 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance as it would involve significant changes in most Member States.
Problem area: support to violence against women and domestic violence victims
1.4.1. Assessment of measure 4.1.b - support to violence against women and domestic
violence victims
■ Obligation on MS to ensure availability and adequate resourcing of general
support services.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
No impact on this objective.
188
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Istanbul Convention)
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The measure is focused on providing support to victims rather than legal recourse, however a
consideration which should be taken into account is that access to services should not be
dependent on a victim’s willingness to press charges or testify against the perpetrator. For
example, in some parts of Spain, women’s access to domestic violence shelters will depend on
official recognition of her as a victim of intimate partner violence, with women’s access barred to
such shelters where protection orders are denied. This rooted practice may determine women’s
decisions to seek support from these services, affecting their rights to receive protection and
support regardless of her willingness to press charges. For this reason, GREVIO strongly
encouraged the authorities to develop, within and/or in addition to state-run services, alternative,
low threshold specialist support services acting in the interest of victims and giving them the
choice to decide whether or not to press charges against the perpetrator. This will favour access
to justice, as it will support victims through support services so that they are encouraged to seek
justice and participate in the proceedings on their own terms.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The measure will oblige Member States to ensure general support services are available to victims
of gender-based violence and domestic violence, including an obligation to ensure access to
general health care and social services.
At present, Art. 8(1) of the Victims Rights Directive requires access to general victim support
services (confidential, free of charge, acting in the interest of the victim) for all victims of all
crime. 23 Member States who responded to the targeted consultation stated that support services
(general or specialised) are available to victims of gender-based and domestic violence. 64% of
all respondents to the public consultation believe that support services are available to victims of
gender-based and domestic violence, and among respondents from Germany and Italy, the
proportion is higher at over 82%.362
However, 50% of respondents to the public consultation do not believe that general support
services systematically take into account the needs of victims of VAW/DV in their Member
State.363
The measure will address this as inclusion of this measure in an instrument specific to
gender-based violence will emphasise the importance of making these services available to and
considerate of such victims.
GREVIO noted that many general support services have insufficient funding and/or human
resources; this measure will require that general services are adequately resourced in order to
reach and support as many victims as possible.
In terms of referrals, all 24 Member States who responded stated that that general support services
refer victims to appropriate specialist services. And all but one (EL) said that law enforcement
authorities ‘can do’ (11) or ‘have to’ (12) inform a support service of cases of VAW/DV,
although this discretion may be leading to gaps as professionals of ‘an overall lack of knowledge
among professionals about the different services victims need contact with’.364
In some baseline
reports (including for BE and IT), GREVIO identified issues with regard to the training of the
relevant professionals that are directly involved in the provision of social services in relation to
the gendered dynamics of violence. GREVIO also noted issues with training of professionals in
the health sector, for example, in the reports on Finland and Spain. Lack of such training hinders
their ability to properly address victims’ needs and support them. Another benefit of the measure
will be it will require that professionals are trained to assist victims and refer them to the
appropriate services. However, a limitation of the measure is that it will not provide guidelines to
relevant health care and social services professionals, for example on how to identify and refer
victims to support services.
GREVIO has further noted that tailored support is lacking for groups including ethnic minorities
362
Public consultation q.21.
363
Public consultation q.23.
364
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 57. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
189
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
(such as Sami and Roma women), migrant women, and women with disabilities, as these women
experience cultural, language or other barriers when turning to social and health care services.
GREVIO recommended that parties ensure that service provision pay particular attention to the
needs of women victims who are or may be exposed to intersectional discrimination. The extent
to which this issue will be addressed by this measure will depend on the content of the training.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of general support to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, as when they access general services such as general health care
and social services, the services will be adequately resourced and the professionals they interact
with will be trained to assist victims and refer them to the appropriate services.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on ethnic minorities (such as Sami and Roma women), migrant women, and women
with disabilities will depend on the content of the professionals’ training.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
Professionals working in general support services such as health and social care will receive
training to help them assist victims and refer them to the appropriate services. This will raise
awareness among such professionals.
National authorities
The Victims Rights Directive requires access to general victim support services for all victims of
all crime, and nearly all Member States reported that support services are available to victims of
gender-based and domestic violence. However, the measure is still expected to have an impact, as
sufficient training and funding will need to be provided. The measure is likely to find political
acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may
have to significantly scale them up.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs N/A
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for ensuring general support services such as health and social services are available to victims of gender-
based violence and domestic violence and ensuring such services are resourced and trained in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at
violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in
many Member States. It would be important to ensure that the new legislative instrument would also set some requirements in relation to sufficient
resources, and that training pay particular attention to the needs of women victims who are or may be exposed to intersectional discrimination.
The measure will bring benefits to victims and wider society, however its ability to fully reach more vulnerable group will depend on the content
provided to the professionals, which could for example include information on ethnic minorities (such as Sami and Roma women), migrant
women, and women with disabilities, as these women experience cultural, language or other barriers when turning to social and health care services
The total investment required is negligible as general support services to victims of violence against women and domestic violence are covered in
the baseline from a costs perspective. Additional costs are derived from specialist support, support to victims of OVAW, gender-based harassment
at work and access to shelters.
190
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
1.4.2. Assessment of measure 4.1.c.I - support to violence against women and
domestic violence victims
■ Obligation on MS to ensure availability and adequate resourcing of general
support services.
■ Obligation on MS to issue guidelines to health care and social service
professionals on violence against women or domestic.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 4.1.b, authorities should develop, within and/or in addition to state-run services,
alternative, low threshold specialist support services acting in the interest of victims and giving
them the choice to decide whether or not to press charges against the perpetrator. As with
measure 4.1.b, this will favour access to justice as it will support victims through support services
so that they are encouraged to seek justice and participate in the proceedings on their own terms.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 4.1.b, the measure will oblige Member States to ensure general support services
are available to victims of gender-based violence and domestic violence, including an obligation
to ensure access to general health care and social services. This measure will also introduce an
obligation on Member States to issue guidelines to health care and social service professionals on
gender-based violence and domestic violence.
At present, Art. 8(1) of the Victims Rights Directive requires access to general victim support
services (confidential, free of charge, acting in the interest of the victim) for all victims of all
crime. 23 Member States who responded to the targeted consultation stated that support services
(general or specialised) are available to victims of gender-based and domestic violence. 64% of
all respondents to the public consultation believe that support services are available to victims of
gender-based and domestic violence, and among respondents from Germany and Italy, the
proportion is higher at over 82%.365
However, 50% of respondents to the public consultation do not believe that general support
services systematically take into account the needs of victims of VAW/DV in their Member
State.366
The measure will address this, as it will be part of a legislative instrument specific to
gender-based violence, thus emphasising the importance of making these services available to
and considerate of such victims.
365
Public consultation q.21.
366
Public consultation q.23.
191
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
GREVIO noted that many general support services have insufficient funding and/or human
resources; this measure will require that general services are adequately resourced in order to
reach and support as many victims as possible.
In terms of referrals, all 24 Member States who responded stated that that general support services
refer victims to appropriate specialist services. And all but one (EL) said that law enforcement
authorities ‘can do’ (11) or ‘have to’ (12) inform a support service of cases of VAW/DV,
although this discretion may be leading to gaps as professionals of ‘an overall lack of knowledge
among professionals about the different services victims need contact with’.367
In some baseline
reports (including for BE and IT), GREVIO identified some issues with regards to the training of
the relevant professionals that are directly involved in the provision of social services in relation
to the gendered dynamics of violence. GREVIO also noted issues with training of professionals in
the health sector, for example, in the reports on Finland and Spain. Lack of such training hinders
their ability to properly address victims’ needs and support them. Another benefit of the measure
will be it will require that professionals are trained to assist victims and refer them to the
appropriate services.
Further, at present, only a few Member States (DE, IT, PT, SE) have in place guidelines to health
care and social service professionals on violence against women and domestic violence or more
detailed minimum standards on the availability and quality of health care and social services,
including counselling, in cases of violence against women and domestic violence. A strength of
this measure over measure 4.1.b is that it will also introduce guidelines to health care and social
service professionals on gender-based violence and domestic violence, which will further enhance
the provision for such victims. Assuming that guidelines will set out how to identify and refer
victims to support services, this will enhance referrals and therefore support received by victims.
GREVIO has noted tailored support is lacking for groups including ethnic minorities (such as
Sami and Roma women), migrant women, and women with disabilities, as these women
experience cultural, language or other barriers when turning to social and health care services.
GREVIO recommended that parties ensure that service provision pay particular attention to the
needs of women victims who are or may be exposed to intersectional discrimination. The extent
to which this issue will be addressed by this measure will depend on the content of the training
and guidelines; guidelines should provide information allowing professionals to provide tailored
support and referrals for victims in vulnerable groups.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of general support to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, as when they access general services such as general health care
and social services, the services will be adequately resourced and the professionals they interact
with will be trained to assist victims and refer them to the appropriate services. Guidelines in
place for the services will also ensure victims receive the best possible support and referrals.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on ethnic minorities (such as Sami and Roma women), migrant women, and women
with disabilities will depend on the content of the professionals’ training and the guidelines.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
367
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 57. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
192
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Wider society
Professionals working in general support services such as health and social care will receive
training and guidelines to help them assist victims and refer them to the appropriate services. This
will raise the awareness among such professionals and likely have a multiplier effect amongst
their organisations.
National authorities
The Victims Rights Directive requires access to general victim support services for all victims of
all crime, and nearly all Member States reported that support services are available to victims of
gender-based and domestic violence. However, the measure is still expected to have an impact, as
sufficient training, guidelines, and funding will need to be provided. The measure is likely to find
political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although
some may have to significantly scale them up.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The total cost is estimated between € 328,418,000 and € 2,629,770,000. The minimum is
estimated based on special leave for victims of sexual physical violence, whereas the maximum
assumes all women victims of physical violence are entitled to the three-day leave.
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for ensuring general support services such as health and social services are available to victims of gender-
based violence and domestic violence and ensuring such services are resourced and trained in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at
violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in
many Member States. The measure introduces benefits over and above measure 4.1.b, as guidelines will be produced for the general services
related to gender-based violence and domestic violence, so that they are able to better identify, refer and assist victims.
The measure will bring benefits to victims and wider society, however its ability to fully reach more vulnerable group will depend on the content of
the guidelines and information provided to the professionals, which could for example include information on ethnic minorities (such as Sami and
Roma women), migrant women, and women with disabilities, as these women experience cultural, language or other barriers when turning to social
and health care services.
The total investment required amount to zero.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
1.4.3. Assessment of measure 4.1.c.II support to violence against women and
domestic violence victims
Obligation on MS to ensure availability and adequate resourcing of general support services.
Obligation on MS to issue guidelines to health care and social service professionals on
violence against women and domestic violence.
Obligation for MS to provide three days of special leave compensated at the level of sick
leave for all victims of violence against women and domestic violence.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
193
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 4.1.b, authorities should develop, within and/or in addition to state-run services,
alternative, low threshold specialist support services acting in the interest of victims and giving
them the choice to decide whether or not to press charges against the perpetrator. As with
measure 4.1.b, this will favour access to justice as it will support victims through support services
so that they are encouraged to seek justice and participate in the proceedings on their own terms.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 4.1.b, the measure will oblige Member States to ensure general support services
are available to victims of gender-based violence and domestic violence, including an obligation
to ensure access to general health care and social services. This measure will also introduce an
obligation on Member States to issue guidelines to health care and social service professionals on
gender-based violence and domestic violence.
At present, Art. 8(1) of the Victims Rights Directive requires access to general victim support
services (confidential, free of charge, acting in the interest of the victim) for all victims of all
crime. 23 Member States who responded to the targeted consultation stated that support services
(general or specialised) are available to victims of gender-based and domestic violence. 64% of
all respondents to the public consultation believe that support services are available to victims of
gender-based and domestic violence, and among respondents from Germany and Italy, the
proportion is higher at over 82%.368
However, 50% of respondents to the public consultation do not believe that general support
services systematically take into account the needs of victims of VAW/DV in their Member
State.369
The measure will address this, as it will be part of a legislative instrument specific to
gender-based violence, thus emphasising the importance of making these services available to
and considerate of such victims.
GREVIO noted that many general support services have insufficient funding and/or human
resources; this measure will require that general services are adequately resourced in order to
reach and support as many victims as possible.
In terms of referrals, all 24 Member States who responded stated that that general support services
refer victims to appropriate specialist services. And all but one (EL) said that law enforcement
authorities ‘can do’ (11) or ‘have to’ (12) inform a support service of cases of VAW/DV,
although this discretion may be leading to gaps as professionals of ‘an overall lack of knowledge
among professionals about the different services victims need contact with’.370
In some baseline
reports (including for BE and IT), GREVIO identified some issues with regards to the training of
the relevant professionals that are directly involved in the provision of social services in relation
to the gendered dynamics of violence. GREVIO also noted issues with training of professionals in
the health sector, for example, in the reports on Finland and Spain. Lack of such training hinders
their ability to properly address victims’ needs and support them. Another benefit of the measure
will be it will require that professionals are trained to assist victims and refer them to the
appropriate services.
Further, at present, only a few Member States (DE, IT, PT, SE) have in place guidelines to health
care and social service professionals on violence against women and domestic violence or more
detailed minimum standards on the availability and quality of health care and social services,
including counselling, in cases of violence against women and domestic violence. A strength of
this measure over measure 4.1.b is that it will also introduce guidelines to health care and social
service professionals on gender-based violence and domestic violence, which will further enhance
the provision for such victims. Assuming that guidelines will set out how to identify and refer
victims to support services, this will enhance referrals and therefore support received by victims.
The final type of support offered by this measure will be the obligation for MS to provide three
days of special leave compensated at the level of sick leave for all victims of violence against
368
Public consultation q.21.
369
Public consultation q.23.
370
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 57. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
194
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
women and domestic violence. This will ensure psychological, physical, and emotional space
from the workplace when a victim has experienced violence against women and domestic
violence and may help with the victim’s recover.
GREVIO has noted tailored support is lacking for groups including ethnic minorities (such as
Sami and Roma women), migrant women, and women with disabilities, as these women
experience cultural, language or other barriers when turning to social and health care services.
GREVIO recommended that parties ensure that service provision pay particular attention to the
needs of women victims who are or may be exposed to intersectional discrimination. The extent
to which this issue will be addressed by this measure will depend on the content of the training
and guidelines; guidelines should provide information allowing professionals to provide tailored
support and referrals for victims in vulnerable groups.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of general support to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, as when they access general services such as general health care
and social services, the services will be adequately resourced and the professionals they interact
with will be trained to assist victims and refer them to the appropriate services. Guidelines in
place for the services will also ensure victims receive the best possible support and referrals.
Finally, all victims will be able to take three days of special leave compensated at the level of sick
leave which will further support victims.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on ethnic minorities (such as Sami and Roma women), migrant women, and women
with disabilities will depend on the content of the professionals’ training and the guidelines.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
Professionals working in general support services such as health and social care will receive
training and guidelines to help them assist victims and refer them to the appropriate services. This
will raise the awareness among such professionals and likely have a multiplier effect amongst
their organisations.
National authorities
The Victims Rights Directive requires access to general victim support services for all victims of
all crime, and nearly all Member States reported that support services are available to victims of
gender-based and domestic violence. However, the measure is still expected to have an impact, as
sufficient training, guidelines, and funding will need to be provided. The measure is likely to find
political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although
some may have to significantly scale them up.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The total cost is estimated between € 328,418,000 and € 2,629,770,000. The minimum is
estimated based on special leave for victims of sexual physical violence, whereas the maximum
assumes all women victims of physical violence are entitled to the three-day leave.
Negligible cost of guidelines to health and social care professionals
195
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for ensuring general support services such as health and social services are available to victims of gender-
based violence and domestic violence and ensuring such services are resourced and trained in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at
violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in
many Member States. The measure introduces benefits over and above measure 4.1.b, as guidelines will be produced for the general services
related to gender-based violence and domestic violence, so that they are able to better identify, refer and assist victims.
The measure will bring benefits to victims and wider society, however its ability to fully reach more vulnerable group will depend on the content of
the guidelines and information provided to the professionals, which could for example include information on ethnic minorities (such as Sami and
Roma women), migrant women, and women with disabilities, as these women experience cultural, language or other barriers when turning to social
and health care services.
The total investment required amount to zero.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
196
1.4.4. Assessment of measure 4.2.b - specialised support
Specialist support:
– Obligation for MS to provide or arrange for immediate, short- and long-term
specialist support services in an adequate geographical distribution to victims of all
forms of violence against women and domestic violence (Art. 22(1) IC).
– Obligation to arrange for specialist women’s support services to all women victims
of violence and their children. (Art. 22(2) IC).
– Obligation for MS to ensure adequate regional availability of protection and support:
primarily in physical format and if not possible, through online provision.
– Obligation for MS to provide appropriate, easily accessible rape crisis or sexual
violence referral centres for victims in sufficient numbers. These provide: medical
and forensic examination and trauma support and counselling for victims throughout
the geographical area of the MS (Art. 25 IC).
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
A part of the measure will include ensuring appropriate, easily accessible rape crisis or sexual
violence referral centres for victims in sufficient numbers, to provide, amongst other services,
medical and forensic examination. This will facilitate more effective access to justice and
punishment for perpetrators of rape and sexual violence.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The measure will broadly improve the offer and quality of specialist support services for victims
of domestic violence and violence against women through provision of support in an adequate
geographical distribution to victims of all forms of gender-based violence and domestic violence.
Currently, Art. 8(2) of the Victims Rights Directive requires Member States to take measures to
establish specialist support services in addition to, or as an integrated part of, general victim
support services. As discussed under measure 4.1, 23 Member States who responded to the
targeted consultation stated that support services (general or specialised) were available to victims
of gender-based and domestic violence, of which 20 said there were specialist support services
accessible only to women victims. According to the targeted consultation, nearly all Member
States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, IT, LT, LU, LV, NL, PL,
PT, RO, SE, SK, SL) ensure adequate funding to specialised support services.
However, in practice, the availability of support services is widely noted to be lacking. GREVIO
noted that there are widespread specialist support services that assist victims of domestic
violence, yet inadequacies have been identified in terms of the number, distribution, and type of
such services. For example, counselling and trauma care were scarce in countries including
Denmark and Sweden. There is also a need to set up specialist support services for forms of
violence other than domestic violence such as sexual violence, FGM, forced marriage, forced
abortion and sterilisation or sexual harassment. 64% of all respondents to the public consultation
197
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
believe that support services are available to victims of gender-based and domestic violence,
although respondents from Germany and Italy, the proportion is higher at over 82%.371
50% of
respondents do not believe that general support services systematically take into account the
needs of victims of VAW/DV in their Member State.372
The measure will address these problems
by obliging Member States to provide or arrange for immediate, short- and long-term specialist
support services to victims of all forms of gender-based violence and domestic violence, as well
as specialist women’s support services to all women victims of violence and their children. This
will ensure services are not solely focused on domestic violence, allowing victims of other forms
of violence to receive the support they need.
The measure will oblige Member States to provide appropriate, easily accessible rape crisis or
sexual violence referral centres for victims in sufficient numbers, to provide medical and
forensic examination and trauma support and counselling for victims throughout the Member
State. This will ensure victims of rape and sexual violence are medically, forensically, and
emotionally supported to the full extent.
Victim Support Europe notes that there is insufficient geographical coverage for services in
certain countries (BG, HR, CY, EL, ES, IT, LT, LU, RO, SK).373
The measure will ensure victims
across the EU will be able to access services which have an adequate geographical distribution,
and this will be further enhanced as the measure will oblige Member States to ensure adequate
regional availability of protection and support: primarily in physical format and if not possible,
through online provision.
A limitation of the measure will be its general nature and lack of focus on specific vulnerable
groups. Specific access barriers for children, migrant women and women living with a disability
have been noted by Victim Support Europe374
. GREVIO baseline evaluation reports in Member
States including Austria, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Sweden have shortcomings in the
provision of specialist support services catered to the needs of specific groups of victims such as
children and women at the intersection of discrimination, notably, women with mental health
issues, victims with a history of substance abuse, women with intellectual or physical disabilities,
irregular migrant women and women from ethnic minorities, in particular Roma women and Sami
women.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of specialist support to victims of violence
against women and domestic violence. An approach which is victim-centred and based on a
gendered understanding of violence against women will facilitate empowering victims through
assistance catered to their specific needs, including the needs of women in rural areas.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The measure is not expected to impact particular groups in a specific way, as it is aimed at women
victims of violence and domestic violence victims in general.
371
Public consultation q.21.
372
Public consultation q.23.
373
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 56. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
374
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 56. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
198
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could impact perpetrators, as when forensic capabilities are strengthened in rape
crisis or sexual violence referral centres, this will facilitate investigation, prosecution and
sanctioning of perpetrators.
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society.
National authorities
National authorities are required by the Victims Rights Directive to have specialist services in
place, therefore the measure will represent an expansion and improvement on existing provision.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar
activities in place, although some may have to significantly scale them up.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2(
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Respect for private and family life (Article 7)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)
- Integration of persons with disabilities (Article 26)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Victims of online GBV
- Protection of personal data (Article 8)
- Freedom of expression and information (Article 11)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs are expected to be borne by the EC, Member State authorities and support of other
organisations (if running specialist services). More specifically:
The EC may co-fund specialist services for victims of violence against women and domestic
violence, but the costs of these are presented below and relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for running specialist support services that are shown below.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Specialist support to women victims of
violence against women and domestic
violence (running cost per annum)
106.9
Costs are based on an estimation of the additional government expenditure needed in each
Member State to fulfil the demand for services for survivors on sexualised violence compared to
the baseline. These costs were calculated based on an estimate of the existing total government
expenditure per annum on specialised support services for women victims of GBV and the
percentage of missing services for survivors of sexualised violence. The calculated total costs
assume that all Member States require additional expenditure on specialist support that are
proportionate to number of missing services for survivors of sexualised violence.
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for ensuring specialist support services are widely available to victims of gender-based violence and
domestic violence in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen
the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in many Member States. An approach which is victim-centred and based on a
gendered understanding of violence against women will facilitate empowering victims through assistance catered to their specific needs, including
the needs of women in rural areas.
199
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
The measure will bring benefits to victims, however due to its rather general nature, it may not be able to fully reach more vulnerable groups.
The total investment required amount to 106.9 Million Euros.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
1.4.5. Assessment of measure 4.2.c - specialised support
■ Specialist support:
– Obligation for MS to provide or arrange for immediate, short- and long-term
specialist support services in an adequate geographical distribution to victims of all
forms of violence against women and domestic violence (Art. 22(1) IC).
– Obligation to arrange for specialist women’s support services to all women victims
of violence and their children. (Art. 22(2) IC).
– Obligation for MS to ensure adequate regional availability of protection and support:
primarily in physical format and if not possible, through online provision.
– Obligation for MS to provide appropriate, easily accessible rape crisis or sexual
violence referral centres for victims in sufficient numbers. These provide: medical
and forensic examination and trauma support and counselling for victims throughout
the geographical area of the MS (Art. 25 IC).
– Obligation for MS to ensure availability of support services to groups at a heightened
risk of violence (such as migrant women, victims from minority communities,
women with disabilities, women working in the sex industry and women prisoners).
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
A part of the measure will include ensuring appropriate, easily accessible rape crisis or sexual
violence referral centres for victims in sufficient numbers, to provide, amongst other services,
medical and forensic examination. This will facilitate more effective access to justice and
punishment for perpetrators of rape and sexual violence.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As with measure 4.2.b, the measure will broadly improve the offer and quality of specialist
support services for victims of domestic violence and violence against women through provision
of support in an adequate geographical distribution to victims of all forms of gender-based
violence and domestic violence. This measure will additionally oblige Member States to ensure
availability of support services to groups at a heightened risk of violence such as migrant
women, victims from minority communities, women with disabilities, women working in the sex
industry and women prisoners.
Currently, Art. 8(2) of the Victims Rights Directive requires Member States to take measures to
establish specialist support services in addition to, or as an integrated part of, general victim
support services. As discussed under measure 4.1, 23 Member States who responded to the
targeted consultation stated that support services (general or specialised) were available to victims
200
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
of gender-based and domestic violence, of which 20 said there were specialist support services
accessible only to women victims. According to the targeted consultation, nearly all Member
States (AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, IT, LT, LU, LV, NL, PL,
PT, RO, SE, SK, SL) ensure adequate funding to specialised support services.
However, in practice, the availability of support services is widely noted to be lacking. GREVIO
noted that there are widespread specialist support services that assist victims of domestic
violence, yet inadequacies have been identified in terms of the number, distribution, and type of
such services. There is also a need to set up specialist support services for forms of violence other
than domestic violence such as sexual violence, FGM, forced marriage, forced abortion and
sterilisation or sexual harassment. 64% of all respondents to the public consultation believe that
support services are available to victims of gender-based and domestic violence, although
respondents from Germany and Italy, the proportion is higher at over 82%.375
50% of respondents
do not believe that general support services systematically take into account the needs of victims
of VAW/DV in their Member State.376
The measure will address these problems by obliging
Member States to provide or arrange for immediate, short- and long-term specialist support
services to victims of all forms of gender-based violence and domestic violence, as well as
specialist women’s support services to all women victims of violence and their children. This will
ensure services are not solely focused on domestic violence, allowing victims of other forms of
violence to receive the support they need.
The measure will oblige Member States to provide appropriate, easily accessible rape crisis or
sexual violence referral centres for victims in sufficient numbers, to provide medical and
forensic examination and trauma support and counselling for victims throughout the Member
State. This will ensure victims of rape and sexual violence are medically, forensically, and
emotionally supported to the full extent.
Victim Support Europe notes that there is insufficient geographical coverage for services in
certain countries (BG, HR, CY, EL, ES, IT, LT, LU, RO, SK).377
The measure will ensure victims
across the EU will be able to access services which have an adequate geographical distribution,
and this will be further enhanced as the measure will oblige Member States to ensure adequate
regional availability of protection and support: primarily in physical format and if not possible,
through online provision.
Specific access barriers for children, migrant women and women living with a disability have
been noted by Victim Support Europe378
. GREVIO baseline evaluation reports in Member States
including Austria, Belgium, Italy, Portugal, and Sweden have shortcomings in the provision of
specialist support services catered to the needs of specific groups of victims such as children and
women at the intersection of discrimination, notably, women with mental health issues, victims
with a history of substance abuse, women with intellectual or physical disabilities, irregular
migrant women and women from ethnic minorities, in particular Roma women and Sami women.
A strong benefit of this measure will be its obligation for Member States to ensure availability of
support services to groups at a heightened risk of violence such as migrant women, victims
from minority communities, women with disabilities, women working in the sex industry and
women prisoners.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
375
Public consultation q.21.
376
Public consultation q.23.
377
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 56. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
378
Victim Support Europe (2019) ‘Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis
report’ p. 56. https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-
web.pdf.
201
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of specialist support to victims of violence
against women and domestic violence. An approach which is victim-centred and based on a
gendered understanding of violence against women will facilitate empowering victims including
women in rural areas.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
A benefit of this measure compared to measure 4.2.b will be its obligation for Member States to
ensure availability of support services to groups at a heightened risk of violence such as
migrant women, victims from minority communities, women with disabilities, women working in
the sex industry and women prisoners. This will ensure services cater to the specific needs of
these groups and women who are subject to multiple discrimination
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could impact perpetrators, as investigations and prosecutions will be facilitated
when forensic capabilities are strengthened in rape crisis or sexual violence referral centres.
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society.
National authorities
National authorities are required by the Victims Rights Directive to have specialist services in
place, therefore the measure will represent an expansion and improvement on existing provision.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar
activities in place, although some may have to significantly scale them up.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Respect for private and family life (Article 7)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights of the elderly (Article 25)
- Integration of persons with disabilities (Article 26)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Victims of online violence against women and domestic violence
- Protection of personal data (Article 8)
- Freedom of expression and information (Article 11)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs This policy option requires availability of support services to groups at heightened risk of
violence. Public authorities will incur additional costs from 4.2b to provide specialist support
services that target certain groups at heightened risk.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Specialist support to women victims of
GBV (running cost per annum)
117.6
Costs assume that an additional 10% of total expenditure estimated under the 4.2b is needed to
support groups at heightened risk.
Overall assessment
202
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for ensuring specialist support services are widely available to victims of gender-based violence and
domestic violence in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen
the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in many Member States. An approach which is victim-centred and based on a
gendered understanding of violence against women will facilitate empowering victims through assistance catered to their specific needs, including
the needs of women who are subject to multiple discrimination and women in rural areas.
The measure will bring benefits to victims, including victims who are in vulnerable groups such as migrant women, victims from minority
communities, women with disabilities, women working in the sex industry and women prisoners.
The total investment required amount to 117.6 Million Euros.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as Member States overall already have similar activities in place, although some may have to
significantly scale them up.
203
1.4.6. Assessment of measure 4.3.c - support to victims of gender-based cyber violence
■ Support for victims of victims of gender-based cyber violence: On- and offline support
for victims (incl. equipping support services with financial and human resources for
knowledge-development).
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Victims of gender-based online violence against women have benefitted somewhat from the
general EU provisions applicable to all victims. However, since these provisions do not
specifically regulate victims of gender-based online violence against women, they are unlikely to
have directly contributed to effective protection and support. GREVIO noted that despite a
growing incidence of digital violence against women, including in the context of domestic
violence, they have seen very little dedicated support services that comprehensively address the
complex issues involved. Many Member States reported a lack of support or knowledge about the
prevalence and existence of online violence against women379
. For example, in Germany, the
Federal Association of Rape Crisis Centres and Women’s Counselling Centres identified a need
for more specialist support and an integrated strategy to prevent online violence380
.
This measure will introduce on- and offline support for victims of online violence against women,
including equipping support services with financial and human resources for knowledge-
development. This will ensure that victims of such crimes are supported in a specialised and
considerate manner. Including this in a wider instrument about violence against women and
domestic violence will emphasise the importance of supporting victims of online violence.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
379
EP Study (2021): Combating gender-based violence: Cyber violence, pp 109 – 110 – SE example; the
issues/problems in general. FC – Q8
380
https://www.frauen-gegen-gewalt.de/de/aktionen-themen/bff-aktiv-gegen-digitale-gewalt/aktuelle-studien-
und-veroeffentlichungen.html
204
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of support to victims of online violence against
women, as when they access services such as general health care and social services, the services
will have developed knowledge on the topic through financial and human resources. Victims will
also be able to access online support.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on particular groups will depend on the nature of the support services.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
Professionals working in support services will develop knowledge on online violence against
women. This will raise awareness among such professionals.
National authorities
As discussed in other measures for victim support, the Victims Rights Directive does require the
existence of general and specialised support services. However, this measure will signal the
importance of the issue of online violence against women, and will integrate online violence
considerations into support services which currently exist in Member States.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs are expected to be borne by the EC, Member State authorities and support of other
organisations (if running support services). More specifically:
The EC may co-fund support services for victims of violence against women and domestic
violence, but the costs of these are presented below and relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for running support services for victims of OVAW that are
shown below.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Support to victims of OVAW (running
cost per annum)
1,159.6
Costs are based on the estimated number of women victims of online violence that report the
incident to an online platform multiplied by the number of hours of support provided and hourly
national wages of health and social workers. It is assumed that each case requires 6 sessions of 1-
hour health and social worker support each. Sufficient information is not available on the
presence of such measures in the baseline and therefore it is assumed that all Member States incur
costs.
Additional measures include provision of online support to women victims of OVAW, it is
assumed that these measured are already covered through helplines (4.6).
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for on- and offline support for victims of online violence against women, including equipping support
services with financial and human resources for knowledge-development in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against
women and domestic violence is expected to strengthen the implementation of relevant measures and improve their quality in many Member
States.
The measure will bring benefits to victims as it will allow victims of online violence to access support which is informed about their needs.
The total investment required amount to 1,159.6 Million Euros.
The measure is likely to find political acceptance, as it will involved incorporating online considerations into existing activities in Member States.
1.4.7. Assessment of measure 4.4.c - support to victims of gender-based work
harassment
205
■ Obligation for MS to ensure that medical care and counselling services are available to
all victims of work-based harassment and that victims are informed about the relevant
services. Such services could be made available by the Government, social partners or
individual employers. In implementing this provision, MS need to take into account the
situation of SME’s/employers with less than 10 employees.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
The measure will oblige Member States to ensure that medical care and counselling services are
available to all victims of work-based harassment and that victims are informed about the relevant
services. Such services could be made available by the Government, social partners or individual
employers.
Currently, sexual harassment is defined in gender-neutral terms across Directive 2006/54/EC,
2004/113/EC and 2010/41/EU, and the EELN report highlights fragmentation of the provisions
across different legal instruments as shortcomings in the implementation of the EU directives.381
Bringing in a comprehensive and specific legal framework on violence against women and
domestic violence will emphasise the experience of women at work, sending a powerful message
of zero tolerance towards gender-based violence in the work environment, and will harmonise
fragmented provisions. The measure will also clearly reference harassment on the basis of gender
rather than sex.
The EELN report states that sexual harassment and harassment related to sex are generally
prohibited at national level as a response to the EU directives on gender equality382
. It notes that
in most Member States, the scope of prohibition on sex-based harassment and sexual harassment
has been broader than in EU law and in some countries harassment and sexual harassment are
prohibited in all spheres of life. The report says ‘This seems to indicate that states considered the
current EU legal framework as insufficient to address the phenomena’ and highlights insufficient
support measures as a shortcoming in the implementation of the EU directives in terms of
effectiveness383. Similarly, social partners consider that the directives to have contributed very
little to the assistance and support they provide.
As discussed in measure 1.3.c in prevention, there are some ongoing cases of good practice which
should continue as this measure is introduced. In its baseline evaluation reports, GREVIO
highlights some examples of good practice related to harassment at work, including in Portugal,
whereby the Working Conditions Authority (i.a.) offers face-to-face counselling and a national
telephone information service, and gives attention to vulnerable groups of workers, including
immigrant workers. Also in Portugal, the Commission for Equality in Labour and Employment
provides legal support to victims. Further, social partners have engaged in a wide range of
measures and successfully provided assistance, particularly through collective bargaining.
381
EELN report p.82
382
EELN report p.82
383
EELN report p.82
206
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
The measure will ensure the availability of support for victims of workplace harassment through
provision of medical care and counselling services to all victims of work-based harassment, and
the measure will also ensure victims are informed about the relevant services.
Finally, Member States will be required to take into account the situation of SMEs and employers
with fewer than 10 employees when implementing the measure. This will ensure a greater degree
of proportionality, and limit the burden on micro enterprises.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
By providing the support described in the box above, this measure will ensure that gender-based
harassment of women at work is effectively addressed. An approach which is victim-centred and
based on a gendered understanding of violence against women will facilitate empowering victims
through assistance catered to their specific needs.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Providing medical care and counselling services to all victims of work-based harassment and
informing victims about relevant services will support victims following incidents of workplace
harassment.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
The impact on particular groups will depend on the content of the support services; for example,
they could include provisions to support employees at risk of intersectional discrimination in the
workplace, including potential victims of both gender-based and race-based harassment.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
The providers of the support services, whether they be the Government, social partners or
individual employers, will be impacted through delivering the support. Importantly, there will be
mitigated measures for SMEs / companies of less than 10 employees to ensure proportionality.
National authorities
The impact on national authorities would depend on who provided the services (could be social
partners, employees or national authorities).
Fundamental rights The measure is expected to enhance in particular the following fundamental rights.
Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Non-discrimination (Article 21)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs are expected to be borne by employers and Member State authorities (if providing the
services). More specifically:
Public authorities will incur costs for running support services for victims of OVAW that are
shown below.
Total EU cost (Millions of euros)
Support to victims of gender-based
work harassment (running cost per
annum)
198.5-627.1
Costs are based on the estimated number of estimated incidents of gender-based work harassment
207
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
multiplied by the number of hours of support provided and hourly national wages of health and
social workers. It is assumed that each case requires 6 sessions of 1-hour health and social worker
support each. Sufficient information is not available on the presence of such measures in the
baseline and therefore it is assumed that all Member States incur costs.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure would represent a large improvement over the current baseline situation. The introduction of medical care and counselling
services to all victims of work-based harassment, and the provision of information to victims about relevant services will support victims following
incidents of workplace harassment, and will ensure that victims are properly supported in all cases of workplace harassment. It will also formalise
and harmonise provisions at the EU level, sending a powerful message of zero tolerance towards gender-based violence in the work environment,
harmonising fragmented provisions.
The measure will bring benefits to victims and wider society. Depending on the content of the implemented provisions, the measure may be able to
reach more vulnerable groups as well.
The total investment required amount to 75 Million Euros.
As Member States have already taken steps beyond the content of the Directives may indicate that there is appetite for further harmonisation of
measures and action at EU level. The proportionality of the measure, as it does not apply to SMEs, may increase political acceptance from national
authorities.
208
1.4.8. Assessment of measure 4.5.b Shelters
Provision of shelters in an accessible manner and sufficient numbers.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Victims of violence against women and domestic violence who access shelters will be protected
from perpetrators during their time in the shelter, particularly if the perpetrator is someone they
live with. Ensuring shelters are easily accessible will allow a larger number of victims to be
protected in this way.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
According to the WAVE Report (2019), the number of women’s shelters in Member States varies
from zero (LT and NL) to 360 (DK), with an average of 57 shelters. The report shows that only
three Member States (LU, MT, SL) fulfil the requested number of specialised women’s shelters
per 10,000 of population recommended by the CoE.384
51% of beds needed are missing according
to this standard.385
This measure will improve upon the lack of shelters by requiring appropriate, easily accessible
shelters in sufficient numbers to provide safe accommodation for and to reach out pro-actively to
victims, especially women and their children. This will support victims as it will allow them to
access a safe space away from perpetrators as they recover from instances of violence against
women and domestic violence. However, the measure does only require “sufficient” numbers of
shelters, therefore without a clear obligation to provide a set proportionate number of spaces,
Member States would have discretion over the number of places. This could lead to sub-optimal
coverage in some areas.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of general support to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, as sufficient numbers of appropriate, easy to access shelters will
be available to them to ensure victims receive the best possible support. The measure will also
require shelters to reach out proactively to victims, especially women and their children, therefore
victims will not be unaware or confused about where they can turn. Being able to offer shelter to a
384
WAVE (2019) Wave Country Report 2019. https://www.wave-network.org/2019/12/30/wave-country-report-
2019.
385
Ibid.
209
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
larger cohort of victims will also enhance their protection, as they are out of harm’s way.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
Due to its rather general nature, the measure may not be able to fully reach more vulnerable
groups, although the increased availability of places and the proactive approach to outreach are
likely to also cover more vulnerable groups.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society.
National authorities
Some Member States do have adequate shelter capacity in their countries, for example 11
Member States reported fewer than 20 shelters in their Member State (LT, NL, CY, CZ, MT, SK,
LU, BG, LV, EE, HR) therefore this measure will have the largest impact on those without a
sufficient number of shelters / shelter places. Member States which have not ratified the Istanbul
Convention will likely need to invest the most in shelter spaces.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs for this measure are expected to be borne by the EC, Member State authorities and
support of other organisations (if running shelters). More specifically:
The EC may co-fund shelter services for women victims of violence against women and domestic
violence, but the costs of these are presented below and relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for setting-up and running accessible shelters in sufficient
numbers for victims.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of euros)
Shelters 147.8 20.49-379.8 33.12-392.4
Running costs are based on minimum and maximum estimates of the cost of maintaining one
refuge space multiplied by the estimated number of missing beds in shelters in each Member
State in the baseline.
The one-off development costs are based on the average expenditure needed to set up the missing
shelters, assuming an additional an average 125-person capacity/shelter.
Overall assessment
Overall, introducing a legal obligation for appropriate, easily accessible shelters in sufficient numbers to provide safe accommodation for and to
reach out proactively to victims, especially women and their children in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against
women and domestic violence is expected to increase the number of shelters in most Member States. The measure will bring benefits to victims
who are seeking a safe space following an episode of violence, and protect them from revictimization. Due to its rather general nature, it may not
be able to fully reach more vulnerable groups. Further, the measure only requires “sufficient” numbers of shelters, therefore without a clear
obligation to provide a set proportionate number of spaces, Member States would have discretion over the number of places. This could lead to
sub-optimal coverage in some areas.
The total investment required amount to 369 – 4,225 Million Euros.
Most Member States have at least some shelters, therefore the measure is likely to find political acceptance as it will represent scaling-up of
existing provisions.
1.4.9. Assessment of measure 4.5.c.I - shelters
210
■ Shelters:
– Provision of shelters in an accessible manner and sufficient numbers.
– Encouragement for shelter provision in line with CoE recommendation.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Victims of violence against women and domestic violence who access shelters will be protected
from perpetrators during their time in the shelter, particularly if the perpetrator is someone they
live with. As with measure 4.5.b, ensuring shelters are easily accessible will allow a larger
number of victims to be protected in this way.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As described in measure 4.5.b, there are insufficient numbers of shelters in the EU. According to
the WAVE Report (2019), the number of women’s shelters in Member States varies from zero
(LT and NL) to 360 (DK), with an average of 57 shelters.
This measure will improve upon the lack of shelters by requiring appropriate, easily accessible
shelters in sufficient numbers and in every region in a manner which corresponds to actual
need, encouraging the threshold of one family place per 10,000 of population, as recommended
by the CoE. The WAVE report shows that to date only three Member States (LU, MT, SL) fulfil
the requested number of specialised women’s shelters and that 51% of beds needed are missing
according to this standard.386
Encouraging this threshold will strongly support victims as it will ensure there are adequate
spaces available and reduce the risk of victims not being able to access a shelter when they need
one. This will remove the scope for Member State discretion present in measure 4.5.b, as Member
States will be obliged to meet a proportionate standard for the number of spaces in shelters. As
with measure 4.5.b, the measure will also require shelters to reach out proactively to victims,
especially women and their children, which further enhances the effect on this objective.
However, the CoE threshold will only be encouraged rather than required, which will leave some
discretion to Member States.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of general support to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, as needs-based numbers of appropriate, easy to access shelters
386
Ibid.
211
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
will be encouraged to be available to them to ensure victims receive the best possible support. The
measure will also require shelters to reach out proactively to victims, especially women and their
children, therefore victims will not be unaware or confused about where they can turn. Being able
to offer shelter to a larger cohort of victims will also enhance their protection, as they are out of
harm’s way.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
Due to its rather general nature, the measure may not be able to fully reach more vulnerable
groups, although the increased availability of places and the proactive approach to outreach are
likely to also cover more vulnerable groups.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society.
National authorities
Some Member States do have adequate shelters in their countries, however 51% of beds needed
will need to be added to the current shelter provision therefore this measure will represent
significant scaling-up in many countries. However note that in this measure the CoE threshold is
encouraged rather than required.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs for setting up and running spaces in shelters in additional to
4.5b.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of euros)
Shelters 147.8 20.49-379.8 33.12-392.4
Running costs are based on minimum and maximum estimates of the cost of maintaining one
refuge space multiplied by the estimated number of an additional spaces needed in each Member
State to ensure one space per 10,000 population compared to the baseline.
The one-off development costs are based on the average cost of setting up a shelter to ensure one
space per 10,000 population compared to the baseline, assuming an average 125-person
capacity/shelter.
Overall assessment
This measure will encourage a legal obligation for appropriate, easily accessible shelters in every region in a manner which corresponds to
actual need, for example providing one family place in a specialised women’s shelters per 10,000 of population (as recommended by CoE). Doing
this in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and domestic violence is expected to increase the number of
shelters in most Member States. The measure will bring benefits to victims who are seeking a safe space following an episode of violence, thus also
enhancing their protection, as they are out of harm’s way. Due to its rather general nature, it may not be able to fully reach more vulnerable groups,
although the increased availability of places and the proactive approach to outreach are likely to also cover more vulnerable groups.
The total investment required amount to 159 – 1,832 Million Euros.
Most Member States have at least some shelters, therefore the measure is likely to find political acceptance as it will represent scaling-up of
existing provisions.
1.4.10. Assessment of measure 4.5.c.II - shelters
■ Shelters:
212
– Provision of shelters in an accessible manner and sufficient numbers.
– Obligation to provide shelters in line with CoE recommendation (1
space/10,000 inhabitants).
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the
Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from
(further) violence
Victims of violence against women and domestic violence who access shelters will be protected
from perpetrators during their time in the shelter, particularly if the perpetrator is someone they
live with. As with measure 4.5.b, ensuring shelters are easily accessible will allow a larger
number of victims to be protected in this way.
Ensuring the effective access to
justice for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
As described in measure 4.5.b, there are insufficient numbers of shelters in the EU. According to
the WAVE Report (2019), the number of women’s shelters in Member States varies from zero
(LT and NL) to 360 (DK), with an average of 57 shelters.
This measure will improve upon the lack of shelters by requiring appropriate, easily accessible
shelters in sufficient numbers and in every region in a manner which corresponds to actual
need, adding the threshold of one family place per 10,000 of population, as recommended by the
CoE. The WAVE report shows that to date only three Member States (LU, MT, SI) fulfil the
requested number of specialised women’s shelters and that 51% of beds needed are missing
according to this standard.387
Adding this threshold will strongly support victims, as it will ensure there are adequate spaces
available and reduce the risk of victims not being able to access a shelter when they need one.
This will remove the scope for Member State discretion present in measure 4.5.b, as Member
States will be obliged to meet a proportionate standard for the number of spaces in shelters. As
with measure 4.5.b, the measure will also require shelters to reach out proactively to victims,
especially women and their children, which further enhances the effect on this objective.
Ensuring that gender based
harassment of women at work is
effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will clearly improve the provision of general support to victims of violence against
women and domestic violence, as needs-based numbers of appropriate, easy to access shelters
will be available to them to ensure victims receive the best possible support. The measure will
also require shelters to reach out proactively to victims, especially women and their children,
therefore victims will not be unaware or confused about where they can turn. Being able to offer
387
Ibid.
213
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
shelter to a larger cohort of victims will also enhance their protection, as they are out of harm’s
way.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
Due to its rather general nature, the measure may not be able to fully reach more vulnerable
groups, although the increased availability of places and the proactive approach to outreach are
likely to also cover more vulnerable groups.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure is not expected to impact perpetrators.
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society.
National authorities
Some Member States do have adequate shelters in their countries, however 51% of beds needed
will need to be added to the current shelter provision therefore this measure will represent
significant scaling-up in many countries.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Equality between women and men (Article 23)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs for setting up and running spaces in shelters in additional to
4.5b.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of euros)
Shelters 135.21 204.83-3,796.98 340-3,932.2
Running costs are based on minimum and maximum estimates of the cost of maintaining one
refuge space multiplied by the estimated number of an additional spaces needed in each Member
State to ensure one space per 10,000 population compared to the baseline.
The one-off development costs are based on the average cost of setting up a shelter to ensure one
space per 10,000 population compared to the baseline, assuming an average 125-person
capacity/shelter.
Overall assessment
This measure will introduce a legal obligation for appropriate, easily accessible shelters in every region in a manner which corresponds to
actual need, for example providing one family place in a specialised women’s shelters per 10,000 of population (as recommended by CoE). Doing
this in a single legislative instrument specifically aimed at violence against women and domestic violence is expected to increase the number of
shelters in most Member States. The measure will bring benefits to victims who are seeking a safe space following an episode of violence, thus also
enhancing their protection, as they are out of harm’s way. Due to its rather general nature, it may not be able to fully reach more vulnerable groups,
although the increased availability of places and the proactive approach to outreach are likely to also cover more vulnerable groups.
The total investment required amount to 159 – 1,832 Million Euros.
Most Member States have at least some shelters, therefore the measure is likely to find political acceptance as it will represent scaling-up of
existing provisions.
1.4.11. Assessment of measure 4.6.b - helplines
 Obligation to set up state‐wide 24/7 telephone helplines free of charge to provide
advice to callers, confidentially or with due regard for their anonymity, in relation to
all forms of GBVAW and DV.
214
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
Helplines can provide information that may help callers to identify ways to prevent
themselves or others from violence. As most Member States have this a helpline in place the
main impact of this measure would be ensuring the consistency and quality of the helpline
available across Member States, such as that it is available 24 hours a day and staffed by
professionals trained in GBV specifically (see row 4).
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
Helplines can provide information that might assist victims to access protection measures
which would protection them from further violence. As most Member States have this a
helpline in place the main impact of this measure would be ensuring the consistency and
quality of the helpline available across Member States, such as that it is available 24 hours a
day and staffed by professionals trained in GBV specifically (see row 4).
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Helplines can provide information about support and protection available to victims and
information their rights. This might encourage victims to report a crime and/or remained
engaged in the judicial processes which would improve access to justice. As most Member
States have this a helpline in place the main impact of this measure would be ensuring the
consistency and quality of the helpline available across Member States, such as that it is
available 24 hours a day and staffed by professionals trained in GBV specifically (see row 4).
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
The impact of this measure on Member States will be limited as the majority already have a
helpline in place, although there is variation in the scope and availability of the helpline
which this measure could help to address.
While all Member States have set up a helpline that can, to various degrees, provide women
victims of gender-based violence support and information, many do not fully meet the terms
of measure. In Malta, the Netherlands and Portugal, helplines were not dedicated to the needs
of women victims of violence, nor specialised in providing advice on the different forms of
gender-based violence against women with qualified staff. Similarly, in Belgium and France,
helplines were not available 24 hours a day, and in Portugal, outside of office hours, they
were not serviced by staff that are not sufficiently trained on violence against women. In
Finland, Malta, Portugal and Spain helplines only provide support to victims of domestic
violence.
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
The helpline would provide information relevant to gender based harassment of women at
work – as a form of GBV - so it could help victims access information they need to report
such crimes, increasing the likelihood they are effectively addressed.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will support victims of violence against women and domestic violence by
providing information which could include information about support and protection
available and their rights, which could have benefits across a range of policy objectives,
including prevention, protection, support and access to justice. As most Member States have
this a helpline in place the main impact for victims this measure would be ensuring the
consistency and quality of the helpline available across Member States.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
As the information is available confidentially it may be used by victims who are not willing
to engage with the authorities, such as irregularly staying migrants, or victims who are
hesitant about speaking out because of shame or stigma associated with the crime. As the
helpline is free of charge it will help ensure the measure can be accessed by all victims
regardless of economic status.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The helpline could be used by perpetrators who want to change their behaviour. If the
measure leads to more reporting of crimes, it could ensure more perpetrators are brought to
justice.
215
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society, although the helpline would be
available to anyone in society.
National authorities
Member State authorities would be obliged to set up helplines, although most already have
these in place so the impact would be limited and in a minority of cases adjusting how the
helpline operates.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs The costs for this measure are expected to be borne by the EC, Member State authorities and
support of other organisations (if running helplines). More specifically:
The EC may co-fund helplines women victims of violence against women and domestic
violence, but the costs of these are presented below and relate to public authorities.
Public authorities will incur costs for setting-up and running helplines.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of
euros)
Helplines 0.9 0.5 – 4.7 1.4 – 5.6
The one-off development costs are based an estimate of the budget needed to establish one
24/7 toll free helpline for women victims of violence against women and domestic violence.
It is assumed that 12 Member States that do not meet the IC standards would incur these
costs compared to the baseline.
Running costs are based on an estimated minimum and maximum budget needed to run one
helpline per annum. It is assumed that 12 Member States that do not meet the IC standards
would incur these cost compared to the baseline.
Overall assessment
Overall, a helpline will support victims of violence against women and domestic violence by providing information which could include
information about support and protection available and their rights, which could have benefits across a range of policy objectives, including
prevention, protection, support and access to justice. As most Member States have this a helpline in place the main impact of this measure would
be ensuring the consistency and quality of the helpline available across Member States, such as that it is available 24 hours a day and staffed by
professionals trained in GBV specifically.
The total investment required amount to 1.4 – 5.6 Million Euros.
Most Member States have a helpline, therefore the measure is very likely to find political acceptance as it will represent adjusting existing
provisions.
1.4.12. Assessment of measure 4.6.c - helplines
 Obligation to ensure access to a service operating a harmonised European helpline for
victims of gender-based violence against women. The helpline shall be available on
the number “116 016”.
 Obligation to make efforts to provide service also through applications and by text
message.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
216
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
Helplines can provide information that may help callers to identify ways to prevent
themselves or others from violence. As most Member States have this a helpline in place the
main impact of this measure would be ensuring the consistency and quality of the helpline
available across Member States, such as that it is available 24 hours a day and staffed by
professionals trained in GBV specifically (see row 4). A harmonised helpline will help
increase access for victims outside their normal country of residency who may not know the
number.
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
Helplines can provide information that might assist victims to access protection measures
which would protection them from further violence. As most Member States have this a
helpline in place the main impact of this measure would be ensuring the consistency and
quality of the helpline available across Member States, such as that it is available 24 hours a
day and staffed by professionals trained in GBV specifically (see row 4). A harmonised
helpline will help increase access for victims outside their normal country of residency who
may not know the number.
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Helplines can provide information about support and protection available to victims and
information their rights. This might encourage victims to report a crime and/or remained
engaged in the judicial processes which would improve access to justice. As most Member
States have this a helpline in place the main impact of this measure would be ensuring the
consistency and quality of the helpline available across Member States, such as that it is
available 24 hours a day and staffed by professionals trained in GBV specifically (see row 4).
A harmonised helpline will help increase access for victims outside their normal country of
residency who may not know the number.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
The impact of this measure on Member States may be limited as the majority already have a
helpline in place, although there is variation in the scope and availability of the helpline
which this measure could help to address.
While all Member States have set up a helpline that can, to various degrees, provide women
victims of gender-based violence support and information, many do not fully meet the terms
of measure. In Malta, the Netherlands and Portugal, helplines were not dedicated to the needs
of women victims of violence, nor specialised in providing advice on the different forms of
gender-based violence against women with qualified staff. Similarly, in Belgium and France,
helplines were not available 24 hours a day, and in Portugal, outside of office hours, they
were not serviced by staff that are not sufficiently trained on violence against women. In
Finland, Malta, Portugal and Spain helplines only provide support to victims of domestic
violence.
A harmonised helpline could help increase ease of access to helplines, especially for
victims who are not in their normal country of residency and thus might not know the
helpline number. Similarly, making the service available through smart phone applications
could increase usage among young people especially. The use of texts messages may be
more suitable for victims of domestic violence who fear the perpetrator could hear them
make a call. As this is a completely new measure (no harmonised helpline currently exists)
its exact impact is hard to anticipate.
Any harmonised helpline may also have financial and operational benefits for Member
State authorities as they do not need to run their own helplines but instead can pool resources
and knowledge.
A harmonised helpline will also help ensure the quality of the helpline is consistent across
Member States, ensuring all victims receive the same, high level of support.
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
The helpline would provide information relevant to gender based harassment of women at
work – as a form of GBV - so it could help victims access information they need to report
such crimes, increasing the likelihood they are effectively addressed.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Effectiveness – other impacts
217
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
This measure will support victims of violence against women and domestic violence by
providing information which could include information about support and protection
available and their rights, which could have benefits across a range of policy objectives,
including prevention, protection, support and access to justice. As most Member States have
this a helpline in place the main impact for victims this measure would be ensuring the
consistency and quality of the helpline available across Member States.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
The measure will have particular benefit for victims who are outside of their normal country
of origin as they may not otherwise know the number to call. As the information is available
confidentially it may be used by victims who are not willing to engage with the authorities,
such as irregularly staying migrants, or victims who are hesitant about speaking out because
of shame or stigma associated with the crime. As the helpline is free of charge it will help
ensure the measure can be accessed by all victims regardless of economic status.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The helpline could be used by perpetrators who want to change their behaviour. If the
measure leads to more reporting of crimes, it could ensure more perpetrators are brought to
justice.
Wider society
The measure is not expected to impact wider society, although the helpline would be
available to anyone in society.
National authorities
Member State authorities would be obliged to set up helplines.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
- Right to life (Article 2)
- Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
- Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
- Rights to social assistance and health care (Article 34 and 35)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Child victims /witnesses
- Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs in addition to 4.6b in order to set-up and run a
harmonisation national helpline.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of
euros)
Helplines 0.9 0.5-4.7 1.4-5.6
It is assumed 10% more budget is needed in addition to 4.6b to set-up and run a harmonised
national helpline.
Overall assessment
Overall, a helpline will support victims of violence against women and domestic violence by providing information which could include
information about support and protection available and their rights, which could have benefits across a range of policy objectives, including
prevention, protection, support and access to justice. As most Member States have this a helpline in place the main impact of this measure would
be ensuring the consistency and quality of the helpline available across Member States, such as that it is available 24 hours a day and staffed by
professionals trained in GBV specifically. A harmonised helpline will improve access, especially for victims who are outside of their normal
country of residency, and help pool resources across Member States.
The total investment required amount to 2.3 – 12.7 Million Euros.
Most Member States have a helpline, therefore the measure is likely to find political acceptance as it will represent adjusting existing provisions.
Having a harmonised helpline may increase the likelihood of political acceptance as resources and knowledge can be pooled.
218
Assessment of measure 4.7.c - coordination of measures against gender-based
work harassment
 Obligation for Member States to ensure that measures against gender-based
harassment (prevention, support and remedies) are discussed with social partners.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
As discussions would include measures to prevent gender-based harassment, impact could be
achieved in this policy objective, although as the content and parameters of the discussions is
not specified, and the measures does not include an obligations on social partners, the exact
impact of this measure on prevention is difficult to assess.
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
As discussions could include protection measures (although this is not specified) impact
could be achieved in this policy objective, although as the content and parameters of the
discussions is not specified, and the measures does not include an obligations on social
partners, the exact impact of this measure on prevention is difficult to assess.
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
As discussions would include measures remedies, for example effective complaint and
dispute resolution mechanisms and remedies, impact could be achieved in this policy
objective, although as the content and parameters of the discussions is not specified, and the
measures does not include an obligations on social partners, the exact impact of this measure
on prevention is difficult to assess.
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
As discussions would include measures to support gender-based harassment, impact could be
achieved in this policy objective, although as the content and parameters of the discussions is
not specified, and the measures does not include an obligations on social partners, the exact
impact of this measure on prevention is difficult to assess.
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
It is important that measures against gender based harassment are discussed with social
partners as they play a potentially crucial role in tackling gender based harassment of women
at work.
Discussions may bring greater systematisation and coordination to efforts. Currently, social
partners engage in a wide range of measures such as through collective bargaining but these
are carried out on ad hoc basis.
Specific discussions on GBV could also lead to a shift in current thinking away from
understanding violence and harassment as a safety and health and wellbeing at work issue
towards understanding it as an issue of discrimination and gender equality rooted in unequal
power relations. The Framework Agreement on Harassment and Violence at Work, which is
described as leading to measures in this area, for example, does not cover GBV.
As the content and parameters of the discussions is not specified, and the measures does not
include an obligations on social partners, its impact on effectively addressing gender based
harassment of women at work is hard to assess.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Coordination between social partners and Member State authorities is vital for ensuring
effective governance structures for addressing gender based harassment of women at work as
social partners are key stakeholders in this issue.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Discussions could lead to measures and a more coordinated approach between Member State
authorities and social partners for victims of gender-based harassment at work, although
exact measures are not clear from this measure.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
The measure as the potential impact on victims of gender based harassment at work.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could include preventative actions to prevent actions by potential perpetrators
219
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
or remedial actions to bring perpetrators to justice.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
The measure includes an obligation on Member State authorities to engage in discussion with
social partners about GBV which is not currently widely in place so could have a significant
impact on them.
Fundamental rights Victims of sex-based harassment
- Right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31)
- Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47)
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Low to zero – negligible costs of discussion of measures with social partners.
Overall assessment
Overall, discussions are a crucial first step in ensuring a coordinated approach between key stakeholders to prevent and tackle gender-based
harassment at work, as such discussions are not widely in place at the moment, and social partners largely engage in their own ad hoc measures
which often are not gender-sensitive. However, the extent of the impact on victims will depend on whether the discussion lead to concrete actions
by social partners.
The total investment required is negilble.
The measures will probably find political acceptance among Member States as it only requires discussion with social partners, not to
oblige/encourage social partners to take particular actions.
Problem area: coordination of measures on violence against women and domestic
violence
1.5.1. Assessment of measure 5.1.b - monitoring, including data collection
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
Data could offer information about the current need for prevention measures (such as high
prevalence) and be used as an indicator of the effectiveness of prevention measures in place
(see row 6).
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
Data could offer information to assess whether current protection measures effectively
protect victims from further violence, particularly if data includes number of emergency
barring orders/protection orders (see row 6)
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Data collection about prosecution and conviction can provide clear indicators of whether
victims have effective access to justice. Harmonisation of data across EU countries would
have a particular impact in this regard, however note that for this measure participation in
EU-level surveys is voluntary.
Currently, data is rarely disaggregated on the basis of all of the categories mentioned in
this measure, for example it is not always sex disaggregated, only includes the
perpetrator and not the victim, or does not include the type of relationship between the
perpetrator and the victim (see row 6).
Ensuring the effective availability of support
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Data collected may help support services understand the scale and need of victims and thus
better tailor their services (see row 6).
 Voluntary participation in EU-level surveys.
 Obligation to regularly collect disaggregated relevant data.
220
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
Data could offer information about a range of issue relevant to ensuring gender based
harassment of women at work is effectively addressed, including data about prevalence,
persecution and conviction related to cases in work environments (see row 6).
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
This measure will implement voluntary participation in EU-level surveys and an
obligation to regularly collect disaggregated relevant data.
Data collection is important to plan and coordinate measures effectively. Collecting
data at regular intervals allows tracking of progress over time and can form part of
monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of measures in place.
Stakeholders widely perceive that there is not sufficient data about VAW/DV. Under this
measure Member States should be obliged to collect data on victims and perpetrators
disaggregated by sex, age, type of violence, the relationship of the victim to the perpetrator
and geographical location. Recorded data should also contain information on conviction rates
of perpetrators of all forms of violence against women.
Population surveys about prevalence is also important to understand prevalence,
as low reporting meaning the true prevalence is often not captured. Although
countries do carry them out at a national level, participation in EU level surveys is
important for providing an EU-wide picture. The Fundamental Rights Agency survey
in 2014, for example, had a significant impact on the field and is widely cited so EU
Member State participation is very important. However, note that in this measure
participation in EU-level surveys is voluntary.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Improved data collection could improve a wide range of measures in place for victims.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
Data collection should aim to collect data from all victims to ensure it captures the needs and
experiences of all victims.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
Data collection could include perpetrators, for example, their relationship to the victim and
their gender. Data could inform measures that target perpetrators such as prevention
measures and increased prosecution.
Wider society
Wider society would be included in population surveys.
National authorities
The measure would have a significant impact on national authorities who would be
encouraged/obligated to collect data.
Fundamental rights The measure in itself would not have an impact on fundamental rights (with the exception of
the fact that data protection needs to be taken into account), but it would contribute to
evidence-based policy making that could enhance all fundamental rights considered.
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Low to zero – Member States have already mapped alignment with ICCS crime statistics and
therefore, no additional costs are expected
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure could address the significant lack of data on GBV, particularly in comparative form across EU Member States, and provide
crucial information to inform a wide range of measures across the policy objectives. The lack of data on prevalence in particular means the scale of
the problem is not understood. Data is crucial for monitoring of the situation and assessment of the successful of measures in place.
The total investment required is negligible.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because it would require a large administrative exercise by Member State authorities, across
different government bodies, to collect the data as data is not readily available and not in compliance with EU standards. Similarly, population
surveys involve significant resources to carry out.
1.5.2. Assessment of measure 5.1.c.I Data collection
 Obligatory participation in EU-level GBV-surveys.
221
 Obligation to regularly collect disaggregated relevant data in line with harmonised
minimum requirements.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
Data could offer information about the current need for prevention measures (such as high
prevalence) and be used as an indicator of the effectiveness of prevention measures in place (see
row 6).
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from (further)
violence
Data could offer information to assess whether current protection measures effectively protect
victims from further violence, particularly if data includes number of emergency barring
orders/protection orders (see row 6)
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
Data collection about prosecution and conviction can provide clear indicators of whether victims
have effective access to justice. Harmonisation of data across EU countries would have a particular
impact in this regard.
Currently, data is rarely disaggregated on the basis of all of the categories mentioned in this
measure, for example it is not always sex disaggregated, only includes the perpetrator and not
the victim, or does not include the type of relationship between the perpetrator and the victim
(see row 6).
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Data collected from NGOs, such as victim support services, could provide crucial information to
assess the availability of support for victims.
Ensuring that gender based harassment
of women at work is effectively
addressed
Data could offer information about a range of issue relevant to ensuring gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed, including data about prevalence, persecution and
conviction related to cases in work environments (see row 6).
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
This measure will introduce obligatory participation in EU-level GBV-surveys and an
obligation to regularly collect disaggregated relevant data in line with harmonised minimum
requirements.
Data collection is important to plan and coordinate measures effectively. Collecting data at
regular intervals allows tracking of progress over time and can form part of monitoring and
evaluating the effectiveness of measures in place.
Stakeholders widely perceive that there is not sufficient data about VAW/DV. Under this measure
Member States should be obliged to collect data on victims and perpetrators disaggregated by sex,
age, type of violence, the relationship of the victim to the perpetrator and geographical location.
Recorded data should also contain information on conviction rates of perpetrators of all forms of
violence against women.
Uniform EU-level standards for administrative data collection are not in place, such as
according to ISSC standards, which hampers the ability to understand trends across
Member States. There are differences in the legal and operational definitions of the crimes
used for data collection purposes in Member States, the methods used for recording
incidents of violence vary making comparisons between countries impossible and
availability of national administrative data is limited. The measure will introduce an
Obligation to regularly collect disaggregated relevant data in line with harmonised minimum
requirements, which will improve on the issues described.
Population surveys about prevalence is also important to understand prevalence, as low
reporting meaning the true prevalence is often not captured. Although countries do carry
them out at a national level, participation in EU level surveys is important for providing an
EU-wide picture. The Fundamental Rights Agency survey in 2014, for example, had a
significant impact on the field and is widely cited so EU Member State participation is very
important. The measure will introduce obligatory participation in EU-level GBV-surveys
which will greatly enhance understanding.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Improved data collection could improve a wide range of measures in place for victims.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
Data collection should aim to collect data from all victims to ensure it captures the needs and
222
experiences of all victims.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
Data collection could include perpetrators, for example, their relationship to the victim and their
gender. Data could inform measures that target perpetrators such as prevention measures and
increased prosecution.
Wider society
Wider society would be included in population surveys.
National authorities
The measure would have a significant impact on national authorities who would be
encouraged/obligated to collect data.
Fundamental rights The measure in itself would not have an impact on fundamental rights (with the exception of the fact
that data protection needs to be taken into account), but it would contribute to evidence-based policy
making that could enhance all fundamental rights considered.
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs for participating in centralisation surveys at the EU-level and to
collect disaggregated statistical data meeting ICCS standards.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of
euros)
Monitoring and
data collection
0.1 3.7 3.8
The one-off development costs are based on the estimated cost changing the national data collection
system to record by ICCS standard. This is measured by the estimated hourly rate of web developed
assuming that 100 hours of web-development are needed to change to data collection system.
Running costs are based on estimated costs to fill questionnaires both for a centralised survey at the
EU-level and the national administrative collection. For the former, costs are calculated by
multiplying the expected hours needed to complete data for one respondent in the sample (approx.1-
hour) with the estimated sample size of EU-surveys with the national hourly wage of public
administrators. For the latter, costs are calculated by multiplying the hours needed to complete data
for three administrative data collections (approx.100-hours each) with the national hourly wage of
public administration. Furthermore, maintenance costs of estimated for the administrative data
collections. The baseline assessment finds that no MS collects data with ICCS standards so all MS
would costs.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure could address the significant lack of data on GBV, particularly in comparative form across EU Member States, and provide
crucial information to inform a wide range of measures across the policy objectives. The lack of data on prevalence in particular means the scale of
the problem is not understood. Data is crucial for monitoring of the situation and assessment of the successful of measures in place.
The total investment required amount to 3.8 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because it would require a large administrative exercise by Member State authorities, across
different government bodies, to collect the data as data is not readily available and not in compliance with EU standards. Similarly, population
surveys involve significant resources to carry out.
1.5.3. Assessment of measure 5.1.c.II - data collection
 Obligatory participation in EU-level GBV-surveys.
 Full harmonisation of administrative data collection on violence against women and
domestic violence.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for
preventing gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
(in line with Chapter III of the Istanbul
Convention)
Data could offer information about the current need for prevention measures (such as high
prevalence) and be used as an indicator of the effectiveness of prevention measures in place (see
row 6).
223
Ensuring that victims and potential
victims of gender-based violence
against women and domestic violence
are effectively protected from (further)
violence
Data could offer information to assess whether current protection measures effectively protect
victims from further violence, particularly if data includes number of emergency barring
orders/protection orders (see row 6)
Ensuring the effective access to justice
for victims of all forms of gender-
based violence against women and
domestic violence
Data collection about prosecution and conviction can provide clear indicators of whether victims
have effective access to justice. Harmonisation of data across EU countries would have a particular
impact in this regard.
Currently, data is rarely disaggregated on the basis of all of the categories mentioned in this
measure, for example it is not always sex disaggregated, only includes the perpetrator and not
the victim, or does not include the type of relationship between the perpetrator and the victim
(see row 6).
Ensuring the effective availability of
support for victims of all forms of
gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence
Data collected from NGOs, such as victim support services, could provide crucial information to
assess the availability of support for victims.
Ensuring that gender based harassment
of women at work is effectively
addressed
Data could offer information about a range of issue relevant to ensuring gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed, including data about prevalence, persecution and
conviction related to cases in work environments (see row 6).
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
This measure will introduce obligatory participation in EU-level GBV-surveys and full
harmonisation of administrative data collection on violence against women and domestic
violence, which will greatly improve data collection.
Data collection is important to plan and coordinate measures effectively. Collecting data at
regular intervals allows tracking of progress over time and can form part of monitoring and
evaluating the effectiveness of measures in place.
Stakeholders widely perceive that there is not sufficient data about VAW/DV. Under this measure
Member States should be obliged to collect fully harmonised data on victims and perpetrators
disaggregated by sex, age, type of violence, the relationship of the victim to the perpetrator and
geographical location. Recorded data should also contain information on conviction rates of
perpetrators of all forms of violence against women.
Uniform EU-level standards for administrative data collection are not in place, such as
according to ISSC standards, which hampers the ability to understand trends across
Member States. There are differences in the legal and operational definitions of the crimes
used for data collection purposes in Member States, the methods used for recording
incidents of violence vary making comparisons between countries impossible and
availability of national administrative data is limited. The measure will introduce full
harmonisation of administrative data collection on violence against women and domestic
violence, which will greatly improve data collection.
Population surveys about prevalence is also important to understand prevalence, as low
reporting meaning the true prevalence is often not captured. Although countries do carry
them out at a national level, participation in EU level surveys is important for providing an
EU-wide picture. The Fundamental Rights Agency survey in 2014, for example, had a
significant impact on the field and is widely cited so EU Member State participation is very
important. The measure will introduce obligatory participation in EU-level GBV-surveys
which will greatly enhance understanding.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
Improved data collection could improve a wide range of measures in place for victims.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of intersectional
discrimination)
Data collection should aim to collect data from all victims to ensure it captures the needs and
experiences of all victims.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
Data collection could include perpetrators, for example, their relationship to the victim and their
gender. Data could inform measures that target perpetrators such as prevention measures and
increased prosecution.
Wider society
Wider society would be included in population surveys.
National authorities
224
The measure would have a significant impact on national authorities who would be
encouraged/obligated to collect data.
Fundamental rights The measure in itself would not have an impact on fundamental rights (with the exception of the fact
that data protection needs to be taken into account), but it would contribute to evidence-based policy
making that could enhance all fundamental rights considered.
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Public authorities will incur costs for participating in centralisation surveys at the EU-level and to
collect disaggregated statistical data meeting ICCS standards.
One-off
development cost
Running cost per
annum
Total EU cost
(Millions of
euros)
Monitoring and
data collection
0.1 3.7 3.8
The one-off development costs are based on the estimated cost changing the national data collection
system to record by ICCS standard. This is measured by the estimated hourly rate of web developed
assuming that 100 hours of web-development are needed to change to data collection system.
Running costs are based on estimated costs to fill questionnaires both for a centralised survey at the
EU-level and the national administrative collection. For the former, costs are calculated by
multiplying the expected hours needed to complete data for one respondent in the sample (approx.1-
hour) with the estimated sample size of EU-surveys with the national hourly wage of public
administrators. For the latter, costs are calculated by multiplying the hours needed to complete data
for three administrative data collections (approx.100-hours each) with the national hourly wage of
public administration. Furthermore, maintenance costs of estimated for the administrative data
collections. The baseline assessment finds that no MS collects data with ICCS standards so all MS
would costs.
Overall assessment
Overall, this measure could address the significant lack of data on GBV, particularly in comparative form across EU Member States, and provide
crucial information to inform a wide range of measures across the policy objectives. The lack of data on prevalence in particular means the scale of
the problem is not understood. Data is crucial for monitoring of the situation and assessment of the successful of measures in place.
The total investment required amount to 3.8 Million Euros.
The measure may struggle to find political acceptance because it would require a large administrative exercise by Member State authorities, across
different government bodies, to collect the data as data is not readily available and not in compliance with EU standards. Similarly, population
surveys involve significant resources to carry out.
1.5.4. Assessment of measure 5.2.b – multi-agency service provision
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary, social
and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of support
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms may particularly help referrals
to support agencies and improve access to support for victims.
225
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms is important to allow for a
comprehensive and appropriate handling of referrals of cases of GBVVAW between
different actors involved in the governance structures of GBVAW.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could improve referrals between actors who make up the governance structure
related to GBVAW and ensure victims can access support and protection available.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
No impact.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
No impact.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms will help ensure the smooth
referral of cases between different actors involved in the governance structures of GBVAW
and thus shape the functioning of national authorities.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to life (Article 2(
 Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
 Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
Child victims /witnesses
 Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs Zero – costs covered in training of relevant professionals as part of prevention measures.
Overall assessment
Overall, Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary, social and health services by coordinated referral
mechanisms is important to allow for a comprehensive and appropriate handling of referrals of cases of GBVVAW between different actors
involved in the governance structures of GBVAW. It can help improve the overall governance structure and ensure victims access support and
protection available.
The total investment required is negligible.
It is difficult to determine whether political acceptance of this measure.
1.5.5. Assessment of measure 5.2.c.I – multi-agency service provision
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary, social
and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms.
Obligation to provide one-stop online access to relevant protection and support services.
Encouragement to locate a number of services in the same premises.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
No impact on this objective.
226
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of support
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms may particularly help referrals
to support agencies and improve access to support for victims.
Victims will also be more able to locate and access support through the obligation to provide
one-stop online access to relevant protection and support services, and the location of a
number of services in the same premises. However, co-locating relevant services will only be
encouraged, rather than required.
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms, as well as a one-stop online
access to relevant protection and support services, and the location of a number of services in
the same premises is clearly important to allow for a comprehensive and appropriate
handling of referrals of cases of GBVVAW between different actors involved in the
governance structures of GBVAW.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could improve referrals between actors who make up the governance structure
related to GBVAW and ensure victims can access support and protection available.
One-stop online access to relevant protection and support services, and the location of a
number of services in the same premises will also help victims locate and access varied
support services much more easily.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
No impact.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
No impact.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms will help ensure the smooth
referral of cases between different actors involved in the governance structures of GBVAW
and thus shape the functioning of national authorities.
National authorities will also be required to provide one-stop online access to relevant
protection and support services, and will be encouraged to locate a number of services in the
same premises.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to life (Article 2(
 Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
 Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
Child victims /witnesses
 Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs An annual cost of € 3,571,651 to run the information centres. This is based on a minimum of
four employees per country, increased for larger countries.
227
Overall assessment
Overall, measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary, social and health services by coordinated referral
mechanisms is important to allow for a comprehensive and appropriate handling of referrals of cases of GBVVAW between different actors
involved in the governance structures of GBVAW. The obligation to provide one-stop online access to relevant protection and support services and
the encouragement to locate a number of services in the same premises will also help achieve this aim and will make it easier for victims to locate
appropriate support. It can help improve the overall governance structure and ensure victims access support and protection available.
The total investment required is negligible.
It is difficult to determine political acceptance of this measure.
1.5.6. Assessment of measure 5.2.c.II – multi-agency service provision
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary, social
and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms.
Obligation for MS to provide multi-agency and multi-disciplinary one-stop access to relevant
protection and support services in the same premises.
Assessment criterion Score Assessment
Effectiveness: contributing to achieving the policy objectives
Ensuring effective measures for preventing
gender-based violence against women and
domestic violence (in line with Chapter III
of the Istanbul Convention)
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring that victims and potential victims
of gender-based violence against women
and domestic violence are effectively
protected from (further) violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective access to justice for
victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring the effective availability of support
for victims of all forms of gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms may particularly help referrals
to support agencies and improve access to support for victims.
Victims will also be more able to locate and access support through the obligation to provide
one-stop online access to relevant protection and support services, and the location of a
number of services in the same premises.
Ensuring that gender based harassment of
women at work is effectively addressed
No impact on this objective.
Ensuring more effective governance
structures in relation to gender-based
violence against women and domestic
violence
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms, as well as a one-stop online
access to relevant protection and support services, and the location of a number of services in
the same premises is clearly important to allow for a comprehensive and appropriate
handling of referrals of cases of GBVVAW between different actors involved in the
governance structures of GBVAW.
Effectiveness – other impacts
Social impacts Victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The measure could improve referrals between actors who make up the governance structure
related to GBVAW and ensure victims can access support and protection available.
One-stop online access to relevant protection and support services, and the location of a
number of services in the same premises will also help victims locate and access varied
support services much more easily.
Particular groups of victims (child victims and witnesses, victims at risk of
intersectional discrimination)
228
No impact.
Perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence
No impact.
Wider society
No impact.
National authorities
Measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary,
social and health services by coordinated referral mechanisms will help ensure the smooth
referral of cases between different actors involved in the governance structures of GBVAW
and thus shape the functioning of national authorities.
National authorities will also be required to provide one-stop online access to relevant
protection and support services, and will be required to locate a number of services in the
same premises.
Fundamental rights Victims of violence against women and domestic violence:
 Right to life (Article 2(
 Right to the integrity of the person (Article 3)
 Prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 4)
Child victims /witnesses
 Protection of the rights of the child (Article 24).
Environmental impacts No impacts expected.
Efficiency: comparison of benefits and costs
Administrative and compliance costs An annual cost of € 3,571,651 to run the information centres. This is based on a minimum of
four employees per country, increased for larger countries.
Overall assessment
Overall, measures strengthening multi-agency cooperation between law enforcement, judiciary, social and health services by coordinated referral
mechanisms is important to allow for a comprehensive and appropriate handling of referrals of cases of GBVVAW between different actors
involved in the governance structures of GBVAW. The obligation to provide one-stop online access to relevant protection and support services and
the requirement to locate a number of services in the same premises will also help achieve this aim and will make it easier for victims to locate
appropriate support. It can help improve the overall governance structure and ensure victims access support and protection available.
The total investment required is negligible.
It is difficult to determine political acceptance of this measure.
229
ANNEX 6: Overview of available data on gender-based violence against women
The Fundamental Rights Survey - Crime, Safety and Victims’ Rights, European
Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2021)388:
 Nearly one in 10 people (9 %) in the EU-27 experienced physical violence in the five
years before the survey, and 6 % experienced physical violence in the 12 months
before the survey. This corresponds to more than 22 million people experiencing
physical violence in one year in the EU-27 (an estimate based on the results of the
survey relative to the EU’s population).
 Incidents of physical violence against men (excluding specifically sexual violence)
most often took place in public settings (39 %), such as streets, parks or other public
places. Incidents of physical violence against women (again excluding specifically
sexual violence) most often took place in their own home (37 %).
 For men, these incidents most often involved a perpetrator they did not know
(42 %). In contrast, physical violence against women most often involved a family
member or a relative as the perpetrator. These survey results should be read
alongside the earlier findings of FRA’s violence against women survey, which
measured in more detail women’s experiences of violence, including intimate partner
violence and sexual violence, which disproportionately affect women.
 In the majority of cases of physical violence, the perpetrator was a man or a group
of men. This was the case in 72 % of incidents of physical violence against men and
60 % of those against women.
 In the EU-27, two in five people (41 %) experienced harassment – ranging from
offensive and threatening comments in person to offensive and threatening gestures
and messages sent online, including through social media – in the five years before the
survey. In the 12 months before the survey, 29 % experienced harassment. This
corresponds to almost 110 million people in the EU-27 experiencing harassment in
a year (an estimate based on the results of the survey relative to the EU’s population).
 Overall, 14 % of people in the EU experienced cyber-harassment in the five years
before the survey. This could involve receiving offensive or threatening emails or text
messages, or coming across offensive or threatening comments about oneself
disseminated online.
 Three in five people (61 %) in the age group 16–29 years experienced harassment
in the five years before the survey. Overall, in the same age group and time frame,
27 % experienced cyber-harassment. These are the highest rates in all the age groups,
with harassment experiences decreasing with age.
 While the prevalence of harassment is similar for women and men, 18 % of women
described the most recent incident of harassment as being of a sexual nature,
compared with 6 % of men.
 Most incidents of physical violence and harassment are not reported to the police.
388
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2021-crime-safety-victims-rights-summary_en.pdf
FRA guidance: These survey results should be read alongside the earlier findings of FRA’s violence against women survey,
which measured in more detail women’s experiences of violence, including intimate partner violence and sexual violence,
which disproportionately affect women.
230
 For fear of being physically or sexually assaulted, or harassed, women engage in active
risk avoidance more than men in the three situations listed in the survey: avoiding
places where there are no other people around, avoiding certain streets or areas, and
avoiding being alone with someone they know.
 Whereas 64 % of women at least sometimes avoid going to places where there are
no other people around, 36 % of men do so. Avoiding certain situations and places is
also more common among young people, but with noticeable gender differences. In the
age group 16–29 years, 83 % of women and 58 % of men avoid one or more of the
three situations listed in the survey, for fear of assault or harassment.
 Specifically, 41 % of women at least sometimes avoid being alone with someone
they know, for fear of assault or harassment, compared with 25 % of men.
‘The Covid-19 pandemic and intimate partner violence against women in the
EU’, EIGE (2021)389:
This study offers a preliminary overview of the measures undertaken across the EU to support
victims of violence during the Covid-19 outbreak (from March until the end of September
2020), identifies examples of promising practices and provides initial recommendations for
the EU and Member States on how to better support victims during the pandemic, as well as
in other potential crises.
An online survey was sent to 196 support services across the EU; the survey ran for a
relatively long period, from 7 September to 28 September 2020, in order to maximise the
response rate. There were 35 responses received in total (an 18 % response rate), from 17
Member States.
Regarding the services provided:
 Fourteen survey respondents (40 %), from DK, IE, EL, HR, LT, AT and SE, indicated that
a reduction in services had been one of the main challenges resulting from the
pandemic
 Twenty-six survey respondents (74 %) (BG, DK, EE, IE, EL, HR, CY, LV, LT, HU, AT,
RO, SK, FI and SE) reported that demand for their services was either ‘somewhat’ or
‘much’ higher than prior to the pandemic with the highest levels occurring once
restrictions had started to lift three interviews with service providers, one with a
government representative and one with an academic.
 Twenty-eight survey respondents (80 %) (BG, DK, EE, IE, EL, HR, CY, LV, LT, HU, AT,
PT, RO, SK, FI and SE) reported that the levels of distress of victims were at least
‘somewhat’ higher during Covid-19, with 18 of these (BG, DK, EL, HR, CY, LV, HU,
PT, RO and SE) considering them to be ‘much higher’
Regarding the violence:
 All participants estimated that the violence perpetuated on the basis of gender was the
same or increased during the lockdown.
389
The Covid-19 pandemic and intimate partner violence against women in the EU, EIGE (2021), available on:
https://eige.europa.eu/publications/covid-19-pandemic-and-intimate-partner-violence-against-women-eu
231
 Over 57% of participants felt that the frequency of violence was somewhat higher.
 More than 50% - or one out of two respondents - felt that the distress level of the
victims was much higher during the lockdown
‘Tackling violence against women and domestic violence in Europe: The added
value of the Istanbul Convention and remaining challenges’, European Parliament,
(2020)390
 Stakeholders noted an increase in contact to helplines for victims of VAW during the
COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland and Romania. This increase
ranged from 25 % in Ireland, 30 % in Germany, and over 50 % in Belgium, to 233 %
in Romania and 694 % in Finland. The periods over which these increases were
measured differed between countries and refer to individual helplines. Other countries
reported increases but did not provide supporting data.
 Certain stakeholders noted an increase in the demand for specialised support services
for victims of VAW (emergency accommodation, counselling services) and emergency
protection orders issued for DV cases during the COVID-19 pandemic.
 Stakeholders reported an increase in the number of risk factors for VAW due to the
pandemic (e.g. isolation, stress, working from home), coupled with a decrease in
accessibility of support available to victims.
 Almost one-in-three (29 %) stakeholders who noted that the COVID-19 pandemic and
lockdown measures have resulted in an increase in VAW reported that this was due to a
lack of access to support services. Barriers to accessing support services included reduced
staffing levels, limited capacity due to social distancing requirements and fear of accessing
shelters and exposure to the virus.
 Over half (51 %) of respondents to the online consultation noted that they had
partially closed or limited the provision of some services due to lockdown measures.
One in ten (10%) had to completely close their service.
 Across the 28 countries covered by this study, an average of six measures were
implemented per country in relation to VAW - seven in countries that have ratified the
Istanbul Convention (from two in Estonia to 14 in Austria) and four in those that have not
390
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658648/IPOL_STU(2020)658648_EN.pdf
232
(from 0 in Hungary and Slovakia to eight in Czechia). Measures included strengthening of
services, awareness-raising campaigns, integration of VAW in the Covid-19 response
plans, additional funding as well as legal and judicial measures.
Combatting gender-based violence: cyber violence, European Parliament
(2021)391
 4 to 7 % of women in the EU-27 have experienced cyber harassment during the past 12
months, while between 1 and 3 % have experienced cyber stalking.392
 The economic assessment estimated the overall costs of cyber harassment and cyber
stalking at between €49.0 and €89.3 billion.
 The overall costs of cyber harassment and cyber stalking perpetrated against women
over 18 years of age were estimated to range from €49.0 to 89.3 billion.
 38% of harassed women found their most recent experience with online harassment
extremely or very upsetting, compared to only 17% of harassed men based on research
by Pew Research Centre.
 51% of young women and 42% of young people are reluctant to participate in online
debates because they were harassed online (EIGE).
 42% of LGBTQ interviewees from around the world said they are harassed because of
their gender or sexual identity.393
 56% of respondents from eight countries (UK, US, Sweden, New Zealand, Italy, Spain,
Denmark, and Poland) were less able to focus on everyday tasks after being subjected
to cyber harassment.394
Open public consultation: Combating gender-based violence – protecting victims and
punishing offenders, European Commission (2021)395
 94.2% of respondents considered that it is very important that their Member State takes
measures to prevent violence against women and domestic violence.
 61.1% are not aware of prevention programmes set up at the national or local levels for
perpetrators of violence against women or domestic violence.
 52.1% thought the law enforcement authorities and judicial authorities of their Member
State don’t ensure an appropriate follow-up to reports of violence against women and
domestic violence.
 70.6% considered that the relevant authorities or services ensure that risk factors, such
as serious safety concerns of the victim and risk of repeated violence, are not
sufficiently take into account at all stages of investigation and court proceedings.
391
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_STU(2021)662621.
392
Compare to FRA estimates that 1 in 10 women (11 %) have experienced cyber harassment or cyber stalking since the age
of 15
393
Toxic Twitter. Amnesty International. (2020). Chapter 3: Women’s Experience of Violence and Abuse on Twitter.
394
Toxic Twitter. Amnesty International. (2020). Chapter 3: Women’s Experience of Violence and Abuse on Twitter.
395
Open public consultations are not, by nature, statistically representative of the population (unlike, for example, public
opinion polls). Therefore, their purpose is not to find answers that could be generalised, but rather to gain in-depth insights
that can shed new light on a range of issues.
233
 67% considered that further measures to improve access to justice in matters of
violence against women and domestic violence could improve the situation of victims
at both national and EU level.
 50.6% are not aware of a workplace policy on sex-based harassment in their company,
including but not limited to identification, prevention and control of risks, complaint
and investigation procedures, as well as trainings and awareness raising.
 51% do not know which national authorities or other bodies they can contact in their
Member State in cases of sex-based harassment at work.
 61% considered illegal and harmful gendered online content become more common in
recent years in their Member State.
 42.6% think the existing preventive, intervention or support measures for victims of
harmful practices against women are not effective.
 47.9% are not aware of any specific measures in their Member Stat to address
psychological violence, including coercive control, been effective.
 55.1% considered there is a regional differences in the availability of preventive,
protection and support services regarding gender-based violence against women or
domestic violence.
 60.8% considered of the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on gender-based and
domestic violence in their Member State as severe.
Gender, Institutions and Development – OECD (2019)396
396
OECD (2021), Violence against women (indicator). doi: 10.1787/f1eb4876-en (Accessed on 15 April 2021) available on
http://www.oecd.org/gender/vaw.htm
397
This table highlights the percentage of women who have experienced physical and/or sexual violence from an intimate
partner at some time in their life.
398
The index provides a measure of the legal frameworks according to this logic:
0: The legal framework protects women from violence including intimate partner violence, rape and sexual harassment,
without any legal exceptions and in a comprehensive approach.
0.25: The legal framework protects women from violence including intimate partner violence, rape and sexual harassment,
without any legal exceptions. However, the approach is not comprehensive.
0.5: The legal framework protects women from violence including intimate partner violence, rape and sexual harassment.
However, some legal exceptions occur.
0.75: The legal framework protects women from some forms of violence including intimate partner violence, rape or sexual
harassment but not all.
1: The legal framework does not protect women from violence nor intimate partner violence nor rape and sexual harassment.
399
The percentage of women who agree that a husband/partner is justified in beating his wife/partner under certain
circumstances
EU Member
state in 2019
Prevalence of violence
against women in the
lifetime397:
Legal framework on
violence against
women398
Attitudes toward
violence399:
Austria 13% 0.25 3%
Belgium 24% 0.5 2%
Bulgaria 23% 0.75 18.2%
234
EIGE administrative data and statistics on GBV (2018)
Croatia 13% 0.25 4.4%
Cyprus 15% 0.25 10.5%
Czech
Republic
21% 0.75 2%
Denmark 32% 0.5 0%
Estonia 20% 0.25 16.9%
Finland 30% 0.75 11.2%
France 26% 0.25 6.6%
Germany 22% 0.75 19.6%
Greece 19% 0.25 2%
Hungary 21% 0.75 8.7%
Ireland 15% 0.25 1%
Italy 19% 0.75 5.3%
Latvia 32% 0.75 2%
Lithuania 24% 0.5 2%
Luxembourg 22% 0.75 2%
Malta 15% 0.25 0%
Netherlands 25% 0.75 6.4%
Poland 13% 0.75 7.9%
Portugal 19% 0.25 2%
Romania 24% 0.25 7.5%
Slovak
Republic
23% 0.25 5%
Slovenia 13% 0.25 15.8%
Spain 13% 0.5 0.6%
Sweden 28% 0.25 10.2%
235
EIGE’s statistics on Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)400
result from a joint effort with Member
States to improve the quality and availability of data on violence against women, to monitor
institutional progress, and to establish a robust and coordinated response to data collection.
Data displayed by EIGE on IPV is based on national administrative data collected by EIGE
against 13 indicators. The increased harmonisation of data collection across the Member
States will eventually allow for a comparison of scope and trends between the Member States
based on the 13 indicators.
The 13 indicators on intimate partner violence are as follows:
Annual number of women victims of intimate partner violence (aged 18 and over) committed
by men (aged 18 and over), as recorded by police
Number of reported offences related to intimate partner violence against women committed
by men (aged 18 and over)
Number of men perpetrators of intimate partner violence against women (and percentage of
male population that are perpetrators)
Annual number of women victims of physical intimate partner violence (aged 18 and over)
committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
Annual number of women victims of psychological intimate partner violence (aged 18 and
over) committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
Annual number of women victims of sexual intimate partner violence (aged 18 and over)
committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
Annual number of women victims of economic intimate partner violence (aged 18 and over)
committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
Annual number of women victims reporting rape (aged 18 years and over) committed by men
(aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
Women victims of intimate femicide (aged 18 and over) committed by a male intimate
partner (aged 18 and over), as a share of the women victims of homicide aged 18 and over
Number of protection orders applied and granted in cases of intimate partner violence against
women by type of courts
Number of men (aged 18 and over) prosecuted for intimate partner violence against women
Number of men (aged 18 and over) sentenced for intimate partner violence against women
Annual number of men (aged 18 and over) sentenced for intimate partner violence against
women held in prison or with a sanction involving a form of deprivation of liberty
400
Intimate partner violence is ‘[a]ny act of physical, sexual, psychological or economic violence that occurs between former
or current spouses or partners, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the victim’
(EIGE, 2017b). This definition includes all forms of intimate partner violence. This violence ‘constitutes a form of violence
which affects women disproportionately and which is therefore distinctly gendered’ (EIGE, Glossary and Thesaurus).
236
The administrative data on intimate partner violence is not harmonised at EU level and does
not enable comparison among the majority of Member States. Some comparison can be
conducted among four Member States: the Czech Republic, Germany, Latvia, Slovenia.
Figure 43 - Source: EIGE, https://eige.europa.eu/gender-
statistics/dgs/indicator/genvio_int_adm_ipv__ipv_indic_1/datatable; ESTAT
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/demo_pjan/default/table?lang=en
In addition to intimate partner violence, EIGE’s gender statistics database includes data on
various forms of violence against women, such as homicide, sexual violence and sexual
harassment at work.
Data on violence against women published on EIGE’s gender statistics database:
Physical violence
Homicide
Administrative data
 Available national administrative data on homicide (available for all MS, 2016)
 Intentional homicide and sexual offences by sex of the victim and by sex of the
perpetrator or suspected perpetrator - number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-
2018)
 Intentional homicide by sex of the perpetrator or suspected perpetrator - number and rate
for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
 Intentional homicide by sex of the victim - number and rate for the relevant sex group
(2008-2018)
 Intentional homicide by sex of the victim and by sex of the perpetrator or suspected
perpetrator - number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
 Intentional homicide committed by family members other than intimate partners - number
and rate for the relevant sex group of victim (2008-2018)
 Intentional homicide victims by age and sex - number and rate for the relevant sex and age
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Annual number of women victims of intimate partner violence
(18+) by men (18+) recorded by police
(per hundred thousands of total population)
Czech Republic Germany Latvia Slovenia
237
groups (2008-2018)
 Intentional homicide victims by victim-offender relationship and sex - number and rate for
the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
Other physical violence than homicide (IPV and non-IPV)
Survey data
 Over the last 12 months, during the course of your work have you been subjected to
physical violence? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2010, 2015)
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence by intimate partners since the age of 15 and
during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the
victim and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence by persons other than intimate partners since
the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and
main activity of the victim (2012)
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence since the age of 15 and during the 12 months
prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and
relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of physical violence by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the 12
months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and
relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of physical violence by persons other than intimate partners since the age of 15
and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of
the victim (2012)
 Prevalence of physical violence since the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior to the
interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and relationship between
the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
Sexual violence
Rape
Survey data (IPV and non-IPV)
 Prevalence of rape by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior
to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and relationship
between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of rape by persons other than intimate partners since the age of 15 and during
the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim
(2012)
 Prevalence of rape since the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior to the interview by
the age, education, and main activity of the victim and relationship between the victim and
the perpetrator (2012)
Administrative data
 Available national administrative data on rape (available for all MS)
 Rape by sex of the perpetrator or suspected perpetrator - number and rate for the relevant
238
sex group (2008-2018)
 Rape by sex of the victim - number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
 Rape by sex of the victim and by sex of the perpetrator or suspected perpetrator - number
and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
Sexual assault (IPV and non-IPV)
Survey data
 Over the last month, during the course of your work have you been subjected to unwanted
sexual attention? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (1995, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015)
 Prevalence of sexual assault by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the 12
months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and
relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual assault by persons other than intimate partners since the age of 15
and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of
the victim (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual assault since the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior to the
interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and relationship between
the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
Administrative data
 Available national administrative data on sexual assault (available for all MS apart from
IT and BG).
 Sexual assault (other than rape) by sex of the perpetrator or suspected perpetrator -
number and rate for the relevant sex group(2008-2018)
 Sexual assault (other than rape) by sex of the victim - number and rate for the relevant sex
group (2008-2018)
 Sexual assault (other than rape) by sex of the victim and by sex of the perpetrator or
suspected perpetrator - number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
Sexual harassment at work
Survey data
 Over the last 12 months, during the course of your work have you been subjected to
harassment? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2005, 2010, 2015)
 Over the last month, during the course of your work have you been subjected to unwanted
sexual attention? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (1995, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015)
Physical and sexual violence by IPV and non-IPV
Survey data
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence by intimate partners since the age of 15 and
during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the
victim and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
239
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence by persons other than intimate partners since
the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and
main activity of the victim (2012)
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence since the age of 15 and during the 12 months
prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and
relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual violence by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the 12
months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and
relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual violence by persons other than intimate partners since the age of 15
and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of
the victim (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual violence since the age of 15 and during the 12 months prior to the
interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and relationship between
the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
Administrative data
 Available national administrative data on other sexual offences (available for AT, BE, FI,
FR, DE, DU, IE, LV, LT, MT, NL, RO, SK Sl, ES, SE)
 Intentional homicide and sexual offences by sex of the victim and by sex of the
perpetrator or suspected perpetrator - number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-
2018)
 Sexual offences by sex of the perpetrator or suspected perpetrator - number and rate for
the relevant sex group
 Sexual offences by sex of the victim - number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-
2018)
 Sexual offences by sex of the victim and by sex of the perpetrator or suspected perpetrator
- number and rate for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
Psychological violence
Survey data on discrimination and harassment in general and at work
 In the past 12 months have you personally felt discriminated against or harassed on the
basis of one or more of the following grounds? (Percentage of respondents who mentioned
each ground of discrimination) (2015, 2019)
 Over the last 12 months, during the course of your work have you been subjected to
bullying? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2010, 2015)
 Over the last 12 months, during the course of your work have you been subjected to
harassment? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2005, 2010, 2015)
 Over the last month, during the course of your work have you been subjected to
humiliating behaviours? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2015)
 Over the last month, during the course of your work have you been subjected to threats?
(% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2015)
 Over the last month, during the course of your work have you been subjected to verbal
240
abuse? (% of respondents, 15+ workers) (2010, 2015)
Administrative data on stalking
 Available national administrative data on stalking (available for BE, HR, CZ, DE, IE, IT,
MT, NL, RO, SK, SI, ES, SE)
Intimate partner violence
Physical violence
Survey data on physical and sexual violence by intimate partners
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence by intimate partners since the age of 15
and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main
activity of the victim and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of physical violence by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the
12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim
and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
Sexual violence by intimate partners
 Prevalence of physical and sexual violence by intimate partners since the age of 15
and during the 12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main
activity of the victim and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of rape by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the 12 months
prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim and
relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual assault by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the 12
months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim
and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
 Prevalence of sexual violence by intimate partners since the age of 15 and during the
12 months prior to the interview by the age, education, and main activity of the victim
and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator (2012)
Intimate partner violence indicators
Administrative data
 Annual number of women victims of intimate partner violence (aged 18 and over)
committed by men (aged 18 and over), as recorded by police
 Number of reported offences related to intimate partner violence against women
committed by men (aged 18 and over)
 Number of men perpetrators of intimate partner violence against women (and
percentage of male population that are perpetrators)
 Annual number of women victims of physical intimate partner violence (aged 18 and
over) committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
 Annual number of women victims of psychological intimate partner violence (aged 18
and over) committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
241
 Annual number of women victims of sexual intimate partner violence (aged 18 and
over) committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
 Annual number of women victims of economic intimate partner violence (aged 18 and
over) committed by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
 Annual number of women victims reporting rape (aged 18 years and over) committed
by men (aged 18 and over) as recorded by police
 Women victims of intimate femicide (aged 18 and over) committed by a male intimate
partner (aged 18 and over), as a share of the women victims of homicide aged 18 and
over
 Number of protection orders applied and granted in cases of intimate partner violence
against women by type of courts
 Number of men (aged 18 and over) prosecuted for intimate partner violence against
women
 Number of men (aged 18 and over) sentenced for intimate partner violence against
women
 Annual number of men (aged 18 and over) sentenced for intimate partner violence
against women held in prison or with a sanction involving a form of deprivation of
liberty
Other administrative data
 Available national administrative data on intimate partner violence (available for BE,
HR, CY, CZ, EE, FI, FR, DE, EL, HU, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SI, ES,
SE)
 Intentional homicide victims by victim-offender relationship and sex - number and
rate for the relevant sex group (2008-2018)
Violence against Women Prevalence Estimates, World Health Organization
(2018)401
The report, Global, regional and national estimates for intimate partner violence against
women and global and regional estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women
was developed by WHO and the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special
Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP)
for the United Nations Inter-Agency Working Group on Violence Against Women Estimation
and Data.402
Global, regional and national prevalence estimates of intimate partner violence:
Lifetime prevalence (since age 15 years):
401
WHO, on behalf of the United Nations Inter-Agency Working Group on Violence Against Women Estimation and Data
(VAW-IAWGED) available on https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/violence-against-women-prevalence-estimates
402
This report presents data from the largest ever study of the prevalence of violence against women, conducted by WHO on
behalf of a special working group of the United Nations. Based on data from 2000 to 2018, it updates previous estimates
released in 2013.
242
 Globally, 26% (UI403
22–30%) of ever-married/partnered women aged 15 years
and older have been subjected to physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence
at least once in their lifetime.
 641 million (26%) and up to 753 million (27%) ever married/partnered women aged
15 years and older had been subjected to physical and/or sexual intimate partner
violence at least once since the age of 15.
 In each of the subregions of Europe, which mainly comprise high-income countries, the
estimated lifetime prevalence of intimate partner violence ranges from 23% in Northern
Europe (UI 16–33%) to 16% (UI 12–21%) in Southern Europe.
Prevalence of physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence
 In each of the subregions of Europe, which mainly comprise high-income countries, the
estimated lifetime prevalence of intimate partner violence ranges from 23% in
Northern Europe (UI 16–33%) to 16% (UI 12–21%) in Southern Europe. Even the
relatively low prevalence estimates in these subregions are still unacceptably high.
 As for the prevalence rates of past 12 months physical and/or sexual intimate partner
violence the prevalence estimates among women aged 15–49 range from 4–5% in
Southern, Western and Northern Europe, to 7% in Eastern Europe.
Country-level prevalence of physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence
 Twelve countries and two areas fell into the group with the lowest prevalence estimates
for lifetime physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence among ever-
married/partnered women aged 15–49 (i.e. prevalence of 10–14%; see Fig. 4.1).
o Six of the 12 countries are in the subregions of Europe (Albania, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and Switzerland [all 12%], Croatia, North Macedonia and Poland
[all 13%]).
o Six additional countries in the subregions of Europe (Austria, Cyprus, Ireland,
Italy, Montenegro and Spain).
Global and regional prevalence of non-partner sexual violence
 Globally, it is estimated that 6% (UI 4–9%) of women aged 15–49 have been
subjected to sexual violence from someone other than a current or former
husband or male intimate partner at least once in their lifetime, since age 15.
 Estimated prevalence of non-partner sexual violence since age 15 in Northern
Europe is (10%, UI 6–16%).
Global and regional combined prevalence estimates of intimate partner violence and
non-partner sexual violence
 Globally, 31% (UI 27–36%) of women aged 15–49 and 30% (UI 26–34%) of
women aged 15 years and older have been subjected to physical and/or sexual violence
from any current or former husband or male intimate partner, or to sexual violence
403
The uncertainty interval (UI) indicates the range within which an estimate’s true value falls (i.e. there is an almost 50%
probability that the value lies between 22 and 26% or between 26 and 30%, with 26% as most probable value).
243
from someone who is not a current or former husband or intimate partner, or to both
these forms of violence at least once since the age of 15.
 These findings suggest that on average 736 million and up to 852 million women
who were aged 15 years or older in 2018 have experienced one or both of these
forms of violence at least once in their lifetimes.
 Prevalence estimates of lifetime physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence
(IPV) or non-partner sexual violence (NPSV) or both among all women aged 15–
49 years in Europe is 26% (UI 21-31%)
Violent sexual crimes recorded in the EU, Eurostat (2019)404
• Almost 178,000 violent sexual crimes were recorded by the police in the EU in 2019.
• Over a third of these (more than 60,000) were rapes.
• More than 9 in 10 rape victims and more than 8 in 10 sexual assault victims were girls
and women, while nearly all those imprisoned for such crimes were male (99%).
In 2019, in absolute terms the highest number of reported sexual offences was recorded in
the following EU27 countries: France (55,229of which 23,236 recorded as rapes, i.e. 42%),
Germany (40,724 of which 9,576 as rapes, i.e. 24%) and Sweden (19,960 of which 8,271
rapes i.e. 41%). As a relative to population size these numbers translate into 195.113
reported sexual offences per hundred thousands inhabitants in Sweden and respectively
82.21 and 49.05 for France and Germany.
Estimating the costs of gender-based violence in the European Union, EIGE
(2014).405
This report from 2014 by EIGE provides an analysis of methodological options on the cost of
gender-based violence and intimate partner violence, by studying different literatures and
studies, and provides recommendations. It includes a case study on the cost of intimate
partner violence against women in the UK during 2012 and provides a calculation of the costs
in the EU. EIGE is also in the process of finalising a new study on the estimation of the costs
of gender-based violence during June-July 2021.
 intimate partner violence against women costs more than 13.5 billion euros;
 of intimate partner violence against women and men is more than 15 billion;
 the cost of gender-based violence against women almost 28.5 billion;
 the cost of gender-based violence against women and men is more than 32.5 billion
euros.
 By extrapolating the cost for the UK to the EU, proportionally to the population, the
costs of gender-based violence against women in the EU is almost 226 billion euros.
 This represents 87 % of the total cost of gender-based violence against women and men
to the EU close to 256 billion euros.
404
Eurostat – Recorded offences by offence category - police data [crim_off_cat] (here); Intentional homicide and sexual
offences by legal status and sex of the person involved - number and rate for the relevant sex group [crim_hom_soff] (here);
Prisoners by offence category and sex - number and rate for the relevant sex group [crim_pris_off] (here) .
405
https://eige.europa.eu/publications/estimating-costs-gender-based-violence-european-union-report.
244
Violence against Women: an EU-wide Survey, the European Union Agency for
Fundamental Rights (2014)406
 One in three women (33 %) has experienced physical and/or sexual violence since
the age of 15, EU-28. The range was from 10 % to 50 % of women experiencing
physical and/or sexual violence across the different EU-28.
 One in 20 women (5 %) has been raped since the age of 15, EU-28.
 Out of all women who have a (current or previous) partner, 22 % have experienced
physical and/ or sexual violence by a partner since the age of 15, EU-28.
 Overall, 43 % of women have experienced some form of psychological violence by
an intimate partner, EU-28.
 Every second woman (55 %) in the EU has experienced sexual harassment at least
once since the age of 15, EU-28.
 13 % of women have experienced some form of economic violence in past
relationships, some 5 % of women have experienced economic violence in their current
relationships, EU-28.
 18 % of women have experienced stalking since the age of 15, EU-28.
 5 % of women have experienced stalking in the 12 months preceding the survey which
corresponds to about 9 million women experiencing stalking within a period of 12
months, EU-28.
 Some 12 % of women indicate that they have experienced some form of sexual abuse
or incident by an adult before the age of 15, which corresponds to about 21 million
women, EU-28.
 30 % of women who have experienced sexual victimisation by a former or current
partner also experienced sexual violence in childhood. Of those women who have
not experienced sexual victimisation in their current or former relationship, 10 %
indicate experiences of sexual violence in their childhood, EU-28.
 Half of all women in the EU (53 %) avoid certain situations or places, at least
sometimes, for fear of being physically or sexually assaulted, EU-28.
 11% of women since the age of 15 have received unwanted, offensive, sexually explicit
emails or SMS messages, or inappropriate advances on social networking sites at some
point in their lives, EU-28.
406
Available on: https://fra.europa.eu/en/news/2019/towards-european-survey-gender-based-violence
1
ANNEX 7: Monitoring and evaluation
Implementation of the initiative will be monitored against the specific objectives (by problem
area). The table below includes such further indicators that could be used to assess the
progress and effectiveness of the preferred option. The Commission will identify suitable
indicators for each area in its questionnaire.
Table 1: Summary of monitoring and evaluation indicators
Specific
objectives
Operational measurable
objectives
Key performance indicators Sources and tools
Ensuring
effective
prevention
of
violence
against
women
and
domestic
violence
The general public is aware of
violence against women and
domestic violence and
information is available in
concrete cases;
Relevant practitioners are
aware of violence against
women and domestic violence
and targeted information is
available for professional
group to tackle violence
against women and domestic
violence cases appropriately;
Availability of other measures
in the prevention problem
area.
Monitoring through qualitative
indicators developed in
cooperation with Eurostat and
EIGE at https://composite-
indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ges-
monitor/maps.
Potential indicators depending
on information availability:
- Number of campaigns
organised / audience
reached;
- Number of perpetrator
programmes available /
audience reached /
terms of participation.
For all problem areas:
Monitoring through the
information and data reported by
Member States to the
Commission pursuant to the
reporting obligation in the act.
Number, complexity and
effectiveness of infringements
pursued at EU level.
2
Ensuring
effective
protection
of
violence
against
women
and
domestic
violence
victims
Increased violence against
women and domestic violence
reporting;
Targeted training on violence
against women and domestic
violence is provided;
Increase in risk assessments
conducted;
Increase in protection orders
issued in cases of violence
against women and domestic
violence;
Monitoring through qualitative
indications developed in
cooperation with Eurostat and
EIGE at https://composite-
indicators.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ges-
monitor/maps. Number of
training courses provided /
number of participants.
Potential indicators depending
on information availability:
- Number of risk
assessments conducted
by MS in violence
against women and
domestic violence
cases;
- Number of protection
orders issued in cases
of violence against
women and domestic
violence
As above.
3.
Ensuring
effective
access
to
justice
in
cases
of
violence
against
women
and
domestic
violence
Number of violence against
women and domestic violence
cases handled by equality
bodies.
Number of violence against
women and domestic violence
prosecutions and convictions.
Increase in requests for and
level of compensation in
violence against women and
domestic violence cases.
Reporting by equality bodies.
Reporting by Member States.
As above.
3
4.
Ensuring
effective
victim
support
in
cases
of
violence
against
women
and
domestic
violence
General support services are
available to victims of
violence against women and
domestic violence.
Specialised support services
are available to victims of
violence against women and
domestic violence.
Potential indicators depending
on information availability:
- Number of shelter
places available by
MS;
- Number of helplines
available to victims of
violence against
women and domestic
violence by MS;
- Issuance of violence
against women and
domestic violence-
specific guidelines to
health and social
service providers.
As above.
5.
Strengthened
coordination
in
preventing
and
combatting
violence
against
women
and
domestic
violence
Participation of all MS in EU-
wide survey.
Minimum standards on
administrative data collection.
Increased multi-agency
coordination.
Increased referral between
national law enforcement,
support service and judicial
authorities and actors.
All MS participate in the GBV
survey coordinated at EU level.
More comparable data are
available to Eurostat and EIGE.
Establishment and frequency of
meetings of coordination bodies
at EU level.
Where available through MS
reporting, information on the
number of referrals between
authorities by MS.
As above.
6.
Ensuring
that
gender-
based
harassment
at
work
is
effectively
addressed
Reduction of sexual
harassment at work.
Number of cases of sexual
harassment at work handled by
equality bodies
Potential indicators depending
on information availability:
- Number of cases on
sexual harassment
before the courts;
EU survey/administrative data.
Reporting by MS.
Questionnaires to equality bodies.
Survey among social partners.
7.
Ensuring
that
gender-based
cyber
violence
is
effectively
addressed
Potential indicators depending
on information availability:
reduction of cyber violence
cases as indicated by admin.
data; no. and type of support
measures
EU survey + administrative data
4
5
ANNEX 8 Gap analysis and good practices
6
This gap analysis evaluates to what extent the existing EU legislation and national policy and
legislative measures in place are effective in preventing and tackling violence against women
and domestic violence and in addressing the specific needs of victims of such violence. The
analysis is carried out in the five problem areas identified in the impact assessment report:
prevention, protection, access to justice, victims’ support and coordination.
The first section of the gap analysis evaluates to what extent the EU legal framework
effectively addresses victims’ needs in the identified problem areas. The main findings of this
section are illustrated in table 1.
The second section of the gap analysis examines the measures in place in the EU Member
States in the five problem areas. The aim of this analysis is to assess whether, despite the gaps
in EU law identified in the first section, Member States adopted sufficient and effective
measures to address the problems. Member State action may be the result of the
implementation of the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combatting violence against
women and domestic violence, other international legal frameworks, such as in particular
CEDAW Convention, or self-standing action at national level. This section also highlights
best practices found in the Member States. The findings are summarised in table 2.
The gap analysis is based on various studies, partly conducted in support of this initiative,
results of monitoring by international bodies (e.g. baseline reports of the Council of Europe
Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence
(GREVIO)), and a broad consultation process with substantial input from a variety of
stakeholders.
The scope of this analysis is violence against women and domestic violence, as explained in
the impact assessment report.
I. Gap analysis of the EU legal framework in the areas of prevention, protection,
access to justice, victims’ support and coordination at national level
At the time of proposing EU accession to the Istanbul Convention,407
the Commission
identified 14 instruments of EU law, which could potentially contribute to addressing the
problem of violence against women and domestic violence in the areas of prevention,
protection, access to justice, victims’ support and coordination. These instruments are set out
below.
The Istanbul Convention itself is not covered by the gap analysis because it does not form part
of the EU acquis, hence does not form part of the EU legal and policy framework which
should be evaluated.
Victims’ rights and protection measures
407
Roadmap on a possible EU Accession to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and
combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention), at https://ec.europa.eu/smart-
regulation/roadmaps/docs/2015_just_010_istanbul_convention_en.pdf.
7
 Directive 2012/29/EU establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and
protection of victims of crime (‘Victims’ Rights Directive’);408
 Directive 2011/99/EU on the European protection order (‘EPO Directive’);409
 Regulation (EU) No 606/2013 on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil
matters (‘Mutual Recognition Regulation’);410
 Council Directive 2004/80/EC relating to compensation to crime victims
(‘Compensation Directive’);411
 Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on combating
the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and
replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA (‘CSA Directive’);412
 Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and
protecting its victims (‘Anti-Trafficking Directive’).413
Gender Equality Directives
 Directive 2006/54/EC on the implementation of the principle of equal opportunities
and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and occupation
(‘Gender Equality Recast Directive’);414
 Council Directive 2004/113/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment
between men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services (‘Goods
and Services Directive’);415
 Directive 2010/41/EU on the application of the principle of equal treatment between
men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity (‘Self-employed
Directive’).416
Asylum Directives
408
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing
minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework
Decision 2001/220/JHA, OJ L 315, 14.11.2012, p. 57–73.
409
Directive 2011/99/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the European
protection order, OJ L 338, 21.12.2011, p. 2–18.
410
Regulation (EU) No 606/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 on mutual
recognition of protection measures in civil matters, OJ L 181, 29.6.2013, p. 4–12.
411
Council Directive 2004/80/EC of 29 April 2004 relating to compensation to crime victims, OJ L 261,
6.8.2004, p. 15–18.
412
Directive 2011/93/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the
sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework
Decision 2004/68/JHA, OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1–14.
413
Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and
combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1–11.
414
Directive 2006/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the implementation of
the principle of equal opportunities and equal treatment of men and women in matters of employment and
occupation, OJ L 204, 26.7.2006, p. 23–36.
415
Council Directive 2004/113/EC of 13 December 2004 implementing the principle of equal treatment between
men and women in the access to and supply of goods and services, OJ L 373, 21.12.2004, p. 37–43.
416
Directive 2010/41/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the application of the
principle of equal treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity, OJ L
180, 15.7.2010, p. 1–6.
8
 Directive 2013/33/EU laying down standards for the reception of applicants for
international protection (recast); (‘Reception Conditions Directive’);417
 Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing
international protection (recast) asylum procedures directive; (‘Asylum Procedures
Directive’);418
 Directive 2008/115/EC on common standards and procedures in Member States for
returning illegally staying third-country nationals; (‘Return Directive’);419
 Directive 2011/95/EU on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or
stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for
refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the
protection granted; (‘Qualification Directive’).420
International instruments
 Article 16 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
(UNCRPD); - freedom from exploitation, violence and abuse.421
While these instruments are mainly gender-neutral, they are relevant for victims of violence
against women and domestic violence, because they either apply to all victims of crime422
or
cover victims of specific forms of violence against women and domestic violence423
.
The main deficiency in the EU legal framework as a whole is precisely that it is not
focussed on violence against women and domestic violence. With the exception of the
Anti-trafficking and the CSA Directives, the EU framework focusses on the rights and
protection of all victims of crime, or specific crimes, and of all applicants of international
protection regarding their qualification, reception and return, without a gender-sensitive
approach. It thus addresses the protection and needs of victims of violence against women and
417
Directive 2013/33/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards
for the reception of applicants for international protection (recast), OJ L 180, 29.6.2013, p. 96–116.
418
Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures
for granting and withdrawing international protection (recast) asylum procedures directive, OJ L 180, 29.6.2013,
p. 60–95.
419
Returns Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on
common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L
348, 24.12.2008, p. 98–107.
420
Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for
the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a
uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection
granted, OJ L 337, 20.12.2011, p. 9–26.
421
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 13 December 2006; Council Decision
concerning the conclusion, by the European Community, of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, 26 November 2009, pp. 35-36.
422
For instance, the Victims’ Rights Directive and the European Protection Order (EPO).
423
For instance, the directives on child sexual abuse or trafficking in human beings, the gender equality
directives insofar as they regulate sex-based, including sexual harassment, and the UN Convention on the rights
of persons with disabilities (UNCRPD) which requires Parties to ensure that women and children with
disabilities enjoy equal rights and that persons with disabilities are protected against exploitation, violence and
abuse. The EU is a party to this Convention together with the Member States.
9
domestic violence mainly by way of general obligations and recommendations. While in some
instances, e.g. in the Victims Rights’ Directive, women are included in the category of
‘vulnerable groups’ entitled to specific protection, the lack of explicit measures for this group
of victims leads to a lack of implementation at national level with a focus on this group.
The gender-neutral approach of EU law provisions is problematic because it does not provide
women victims of violence and domestic violence effective protection, support and access to
justice. GREVIO noted with respect to states parties to the Istanbul Convention that a gender
neutral approach in legislation may not always do justice to the particular experiences of
victims of violence against women, who are more frequently and more severely impacted. For
example, it can result in a policy approach which does not recognise violence against women
as a form of discrimination against women and that does not consider the specific experiences
of women experiencing violence, such as the setting up of specialised support services or
trainings for practitioners. It does not take into account the specific problems of systemic
under-reporting (due to the lack of follow-up by law enforcement, perceived shame and
embarrassment surrounding this type of violence, the fear of retaliation especially when the
perpetrator is a relative or otherwise close acquaintance, including at work), disrupted
criminal proceedings, the commonly sexual nature of crimes and a high prevalence of
elements of coercive control.424
In addition, EU law does not recognise violence against women and domestic violence as a
form of discrimination. Only the Gender Equality Directives recognise, within their limited
scope, sex-based and sexual harassment as discrimination. The Victims’ Rights Directive
limits itself to underlining the importance of treating violence against women and domestic
violence as a violation of fundamental rights.425
This leads to unequal and insufficient
measures across the EU, since victims of all forms of such violence do not unequivocally
have access to non-discrimination remedies, such as equality bodies.
A detailed gap analysis of the EU legal framework in the five problem areas is set out below:
Prevention of violence against women and domestic violence
a. Awareness-raising and information provision
As outlined in the impact assessment report, prevention measures of this kind of violence
usually consist of awareness-raising and information provision measures, training of
professionals and perpetrator programmes.
The relevant EU legal framework contains obligations regarding awareness-raising in Article
18(2) of the Anti-Trafficking Directive, Article 23(2) of the CSA Directive and Article 26(2)
of the Victims’ Rights Directive.
424
FRA, Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. Main results report, 2014; Infra 490.
425
According to the EELN report, only nine Member States recognise to some extent (gender-based) violence
against women as a form of discrimination or an equality issue (FR, DE, EL, MT, PL, PT, RO, ES, SE), while in
11 States there is no explicit recognition of violence against women and domestic violence as an
equality/discrimination issue (BE, HR, CY, HR, DE, FI, IE, LV, LT, SI, SK).
10
These provisions have proven to be somewhat effective, even though shortcomings remain.
The problems identified in this regard426
include, in particular, the fact that the provisions
either focus on a broader subject-matter, such as rights of all victims’ (as for instance in
Article 26 the Victims’ Rights Directive on all groups of victims, even if groups at risk such
as children, victims of gender-based violence427
and violence in close relationships428
are to
be specifically targeted). The provisions can also be narrower in scope, such as the Gender
Equality Directives, which include a general obligation for the Member States to prevent sex-
based and sexual harassment as one form of prohibited discrimination.
In the targeted consultation of Member States, 25 Member States reported having organised
awareness-raising campaigns on violence against women and domestic violence.429
This
information is somewhat corroborated by the open public consultation, where 60% of
respondents indicated knowing about such campaigns in their Member States. However,
GREVIO has noted challenges related to awareness-raising in terms of a narrow focus on
domestic violence, short duration of the campaigns and lack of intersectionality.430
Awareness-raising can also be provided through education to develop skills, such as on non‐
violent conflict resolution and tackling harmful stereotypes. EU law does not currently oblige
Member States to conduct awareness-raising or provide information on violence against
women and domestic violence in particular. In addition, EU action in the field of education is
limited to supportive action as established in Article 165 TFEU.
b. Perpetrator programmes
Programmes for perpetrators are included only in the CSA Directive. Article 22 of the CSA
obliges Member States to provide for access to effective intervention programmes or
measures designed to evaluate and prevent the risk of committing child sexual abuse offenses
covered by the Directive for persons at risk of offending. The implementation report
highlighted that challenges remain in several Member States in the areas of prevention and, in
particular, concerning prevention programmes for offenders and for people who fear that they
might offend.431
According to the European Network for Work with Perpetrators (WWP EN), the relevant
provisions in the instruments under review had limited effectiveness in this area.432
In the targeted consultation, all but one country – Hungary – reported having set up support
programmes for perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence.433
However, a
426
Study conducted in support of the impact assessment report. ICF 2021 [upcoming].
427
This notion is understood in this gap analysis as covering violence against women
428
This notion is understood in this gap analysis as covering domestic violence.
429
Targeted consultation of Member States, responses to question no. 10. No response from HU and MT.
430
GREVIO, Mid-term Horizontal Review of GREVIO baseline evaluation reports, 2021, pp. 53-57, available at:
(https://rm.coe.int/horizontal-review-study-2021/1680a26325).
431
European Commission, Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council assessing
the extent to which the Member States have taken the necessary measures in order to comply with Directive
2011/93/EU of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child
pornography, COM(2016) 871 final, 16 December 2016.
432
Interview with European Network for Work with Perpetrators (WWP EN), 2 July 2021.
433
Targeted consultation of Member States, responses to q. no. 29. No response from PL, HR, LT.
11
descriptions of the measures show that most target only domestic violence and not all are
compulsory.
c. Training of professionals
Key provisions regarding the training of relevant professionals likely to come into contact
with victims of this kind of violence are in the Victims’ Rights Directive,434
the Anti-
Trafficking Directive,435
and the Gender Equality Recast Directive436
.
The relevant EU provisions on training are however not specific to violence against women
and domestic violence. They thus disregard the specific needs of this group of victims and do
not require specific skills and competences from the trainers themselves. For instance, Article
25 of the Victims’ Rights Directive sets out a requirement to provide training to ‘officials
likely to come into contact with victims’, without specifying any particular groups of victims.
d. Coherence with international standards
The EU legal framework as set out above can generally be considered not to be in line with
the standards set in the Istanbul Convention, in particular its Article 13 which contains an
obligation to raise awareness on all manifestations of violence against women in cooperation
with other stakeholders, particularly women’s organisations, and its Article 15 which requires
to offer appropriate training to relevant stakeholders and professionals that come into contact
with victims or perpetrators of acts of violence. The requirements of Article 16 of the Istanbul
Convention on perpetrator programmes are included only in the CSA Directive and therefore
limited to perpetrators of child sexual abuse.
e. Conclusion
The EU Framework contains prevention obligations in a fragmented manner. This creates gaps
in relation to the contexts in which and the forms of violence against women and domestic
violence that are to be targeted. The EU legal framework is insufficiently in line with the
requirements of the Istanbul Convention.
2. Protection of victims of violence against women and domestic violence
The European Protection Order Directive (‘EPO’)437
and the Mutual Recognition
Regulation438
allow for the cross-border recognition of protection orders439
issued within the
EU.440
The EPO provides an obligation to recognise criminal law protection orders issued by
judicial authorities from other Member States. It is thus a mechanism based on mutual
recognition, not a harmonisation instrument and therefore it does not include provisions on
when and how the protection measures should be applied in the Member States. The Mutual
434
See: Art. 25.
435
See: Art. 18.
436
See: Art. 25.
437
Supra 409.
438
Supra 410.
439
Measures issued by law enforcement or judicial authorities for the protection of the life, physical or
psychological integrity, dignity, personal liberty or sexual integrity of victims.
440
Council of the European Union, Initiative for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on
the European Protection Order - Explanatory memorandum, 2010/0802(COD), 5677/10, 22 January 2010.
12
Recognition Regulation provides for the recognition of protection measures issued as civil
law measures.
These instruments were set out to be gender-neutral and non-specific to victims of violence
against women and domestic violence. Nevertheless, the Regulation recognizes the aim of
preventing any form of gender-based violence or violence in close relationships, such as
physical violence, harassment, sexual aggression, stalking, intimidation or other forms of
indirect coercion, while underlining that it is applicable to all victims.441
Provisions on protection of victims are also included in the Victims’ Rights Directive
(Chapter IV), the CSA Directive (Articles 18 and 20) and the Anti-trafficking Directive
(Articles 12 and 13).
In particular, Article 22 of the Victims’ Rights Directive requires Member States to undertake
an individual assessment of victims to identify specific protection needs. EU law however
does not include an obligation to assess the risk posed by the alleged perpetrator of this
kind of violence on the victim. This creates a gap with regard to Article 51 of the Istanbul
Convention, which requires all relevant national authorities to carry out an assessment of the
‘lethality risk, the seriousness of the situation and the risk of repeated violence’.
Since there are currently no specific training obligations in EU law as regards this kind of
violence, EU law does not currently require the provision of specific training for law
enforcement authorities either. Training on violence against women and domestic violence
would be needed to understand why their interventions in situations of domestic violence is
needed and what is expected of their intervention.442
a. Protection of child victims or witnesses of violence against women and domestic
violence
The Victims’ Rights Directive requires specific protection for vulnerable groups through
individual assessment of victims’ needs in relation to protection during criminal
proceedings.443
In addition, Article 24 establishes special rules on the right to protection of
child victims of all crimes during criminal proceedings.
Comprehensive information about the special protection measures granted in the Member
States for child victims of violence against women under Article 24 of the Victims’ Rights
Directive is not available. Problems with practical implementation of these measures were
identified in a few Member States.444
. In addition, Article 24 applies to child victims, but does
not explicitly apply to child witnesses of violence. This creates a protection gap for child
441
Supra 410, Recital (6).
442
FRA, Women as victims of partner violence – Justice for victims of violent crime, Part IV, 2019, p. 12,
available at: (https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2019/women-victims-partner-violence-justice-victims-violent-
crime-part-iv).
443
Supra 408.
444
European Commission, Report on the implementation of Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament
and of the Council establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and
replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, COM(2020) 188 final, 11 May 2020
13
witnesses of violence against women and domestic violence, since such violence is found to
be equally traumatising to children witnessing it445
.
In addition, Articles 13, 14, 15 and 16 of the Anti-Trafficking Directive include targeted
protection measures for child victims of trafficking in human beings. Those provisions
foresee that this specific group of child victims shall be provided with protection measures
and that the child’s best interests shall be a primary consideration.
Article 20 of the CSA Directive provides for measures for protection of child victims of
sexual abuse and exploitation in the course of criminal investigations and proceedings. The
scope of the Directive is limited to this specific form of violence.
EU law includes gaps in that it does not provide for the child-sensitive protection of children
victims of other forms of violence against women and domestic violence. Reporting of
violence by children should be child-friendly446
, and there should be a possibility for visits
with family members suspected of this kind of violence to take place in a safe, surveyed place
and in the best interest of the child447
.
b. Protection of victims living with a disability
Article 16 UNCRPD requires the parties to the Convention to protect persons with disabilities
from all forms of exploitation, violence and abuse and obliges them to take into account
gender- and age-specific needs. In addition, Article 6 UNCRPD requires states parties to
recognise multiple forms of discrimination against women and girls with disabilities and
guarantee equality and the full enjoyment of their rights.448
The practical implementation of the UNCRPD in the EU and its Member States continues to
face challenges. Specifically in regard to violence against women and domestic violence, the
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities’ noted with concern in its
concluding observations to the EU in 2015 that, in the EU, ‘persons with disabilities,
especially women, girls and boys, and older persons, are subjected to violence, abuse and
exploitation, especially in institutional settings’.
445
See e.g. Explanatory Report to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating
violence against women and domestic violence.
446
https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/child-friendly_justice_20180625-26_background_paper_final.pdf,
at 3. Also meeting with Victim Support Europe, 24 November 2021.
447
According to information gathered in October 2021 from the European Judicial Network, access between
family members and children in cases of alleged domestic violence can be organised as surveyed meetings in
safe places in the presence of child protection officials e.g. in ES, FI, DE and MT. In addition, Brussels IIa
Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No. 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the
recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility,
repealing Regulation (EC) No. 1347/2000) contains rules on cross-border family law matters, such as parental
responsibility, custody rights and international child abduction. The Regulation is intended to supplement the
rules of the 1980 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (HC80), to which all
EU Member States are signatories. HC80 aims at resolving cross-border disputes and includes specific
provisions, which are also applicable in situations involving suspicions of this kind of violence. The “Brussels
IIa Recast” Regulation (Council Regulation 2019/1111 of 25 June 2019 on jurisdiction, the recognition and
enforcement of decisions in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility, and on international
child abduction (recast)) will apply from 1 August 2022 onwards and will lead to substantial improvements in
judicial cooperation in matters of parental responsibility for the benefit of the children concerned.
448
Supra 421, Art. 6.
14
Training of professionals is key to recognise the specific risks and needs also with regard to
this group of victims. EU law does not foresee specific training for professionals dealing with
person with disabilities who have experienced violence (see above on training). The
supporting study shows limitations in the protection to victims with disabilities in most of the
Member States, including an important lack of sensitization and training of such
professionals449
. The supporting study also notes a lack of measures responding to multiple
forms of discrimination, taking into account both sex and disability in most Member
States450
. In its Concluding observations to the initial periodic report of the EU451
, the UN
Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recommended for the EU to mainstream
disability in all legislation, policies and strategies for combating violence, abuse and
exploitation and provide effective protection from violence, abuse and exploitation to all
people with all sorts of disabilities within and outside the home environment.
c. Ensuring continued protection in cross-border situations
Cross-border protection of victims of violence against women and domestic violence is
ensured in EU law by the EPO instruments. These instruments provide for the cross-border
recognition of protection orders issued under national law. Such mutual recognition continues
to be a challenge, particularly because of the large divergence of existing orders at national
level.452
The EPO instruments have been very little used.453
In the targeted consultation454
,
two Member States report that foreign protection orders are not recognised and enforced.455
Several countries identified a lack of awareness of the measure by relevant authorities456
,
divergences in sanctions457
and in differences in type and scope of protection measures
between Member States458
as challenges. However, in cases where the mutual recognition
instruments were applied, they were mainly used with regard to protection of women ‘in cases
of intimate partner or domestic violence, harassment, stalking or sexual assault’.459
449
AT, HR, LT, PL, PT, ES.
450
For example, Luxembourg and Romania have an action plan related to disability that does not address victims
of violence against women and domestic violence and the Netherlands, Belgium and Poland have national
policies related to this kind of violence that pay very limited attention to disability.
451
UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, Concluding observations on the initial report of the
European Union, CRPD/C/EU/CO/R.1, 1 September 2015, available at: (https://documents-dds-
ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G15/226/55/PDF/G1522655.pdf?OpenElement).
452
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q. 19.
453
Statistics provided by Member States for the years 2015-2018 record a total of 37 EPOs issued and the
majority were EPOs issued by one Member State (27 out of 37). Only 15 EPOs were recognised and led to the
adoption of protection measures in the executing State.
454
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q.18.
455
J. Candido, et al., Slachtoffer en de rechtspraak – Handleiding voor de strafrechtspraktijk, 2017, p. 213,
available at: (https://www.rechtspraak.nl/SiteCollectionDocuments/Slachtoffer-en-de-Rechtspraak.pdf
). Figures from the Public Prosecution Service in NL also show that EPOs are not yet being used in practice in
this country. The other Member State is CZ.
456
NL, CZ, FI, BE, FR.
457
NL, BG.
458
NL, RO.
459
European Commission, Report on the implementation of Directive 2011/99/EU of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on the European protection order, COM(2020) 187 final, 11 May
2020, p. 3, available at: (https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/770f93b9-9369-11ea-aac4-
01aa75ed71a1/language-en).
15
Most importantly, however, the EPO instrument do not ensure that effective protection
orders are available and speedily granted at national level. Emergency protection orders
are available in only 18 States. In some Member States – such as FR, PT - protection orders
are only available for victims of domestic violence. Further problems reported concern the
lack of (multilingual) information and lengthy proceedings.460
In addition, the VOCIARE
report identifies the lack of availability of interpretation and translation services461
at
national level. This right is particularly important for migrant women. In the targeted
consultation, four countries462
stated that information was not available in all languages.463
The VOCIARE report suggests that the problem could be more widespread and notes a lack
of interpreters and/or translators in six countries464
and a lack of general information (e.g.
information in public websites)465
available in other languages.466
d. Protection of migrant women and girls victims of violence against women and
domestic violence
The Victims’ Rights Directive provides that services should be available on a non-
discriminatory basis to all victims ‘regardless of residence status’.467
In contrast, residence
status should be taken into account during individual assessments.468
The Family Reunification Directive provides that Member States must issue an autonomous
residence permit to third-country nationals who have entered their territory by virtue of family
reunification in the event of particularly difficult circumstances (Article 15(3) second
sentence).469
Member States are required to lay down provisions in national law for this
purpose . Such obligation has been interpreted to include situations of domestic violence and
violence against women.470
This enables women to leave a situation of domestic violence
No monitoring reports have been issued on directives 2004/113/EC and 2010/41/EU. Concerning the Goods and
Services Directive, see: EPRS, Gender Equal Access to Goods and Services Directive 2004/113/EC – European
Implementation Assessment, 2017, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/593787/EPRS_STU(2017)593787_EN.pdf).
460
Supra
461
A right set out in Art. 7 Victims’ Rights Directive.
462
EE, AT, LV, FR.
463
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q.28.
464
AT, CZ, ES, FI, PT and RO.
465
PT and RO.
466
Supra, p. 79. FRA report states that the police, not just support services, provide information in several
languages in most (25) Member States. Half of the support services offer translation and interpretation services.
Some of the support services offering information in other languages do so in many different languages. Even
though most provide information in less than a handful of languages, some victim support organisations offer
information in 10 (CY, HU), 20 (DK, FI and SE) and even 50 (AT) languages, as well as (upon request)
potentially up to 200 in the UK.
467
See: Art. 1.
468
See: Art. 22.
469
For cases of domestic violence, the Court has recently confirmed in a decision concerning the validity of
Article 13(2) of Directive 2004/38/EC, that Article 15(3) of Directive 2003/86 pursues the objective of ensuring
protection for family members who are victims of domestic violence (Judgement of 2 September 2021, X v
Belgian State (C‑930/19), paragraphs 70 and 89).
470
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., p. 19 and Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament
and the Council on guidance for application of Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification, COM/2014/0210
final.
16
without having to fear the loss of their status and further victimization due to the precarity of
their immigration status.
Such obligation has been interpreted to include situations of domestic violence and violence
against women.471
In case of undocumented migrants, however, the Returns Directive
provides that Member States have the discretion to provide residence permits for
humanitarian or compassionate purposes (Article 6(4)). This provision is not connected to
victims of violence, but their victimhood could play a role in the decision to grant or refuse
residence.472
Therefore, while the EU framework thus provides for protection, such protection
is lower for undocumented migrant victims of violence against women or domestic violence.
Despite these provisions in EU law, a report based on the Asylum Information Database
(AIDA) notes that the ‘fragmented legal framework for identifying vulnerable categories
of asylum seekers, as well as defining the special guarantees necessary to preserve their
ability to enjoy their rights and comply with their obligations in the asylum process leads to a
lack of protection.473
A Council of Europe report notes that ‘many women and girls have
been and are subjected to severe forms of violence against women and domestic violence in
accommodation, reception and detention facilities throughout Europe and gender-sensitive
measures to address this are often absent’.474
In the targeted consultation, eight Member States475
replied to the question on what extent
access to support services is conditional upon the victim’s residence status, but it was not
clear from their answers whether such access was limited to migrants with legal status.476
The
European Network of Migrant Women notes that there is strong evidence that support is not
always available for irregularly-staying migrants (i.e. those without a legal status).
Similarly the VOCIARE report notes that the status of victim is often conditional on formal
requirements, such as legal residence.477
The NGO ‘Platform for International Cooperation for Undocumented’ (PICUM) further notes
a high degree of hesitancy among irregularly-staying migrants to seek support for fear of the
exchange of information between services and immigration enforcement. PICUM also
notes that the needs-based approach in the Victims’ Rights Directive combined with the
provisions in the Anti-Trafficking Directive that enable provisions from Directive
2004/81/EC to apply, could have as a consequence that the issuance of residence permits to
third-country national victims of trafficking in human beings is conditional on their
471
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., p. 19 and Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament
and the Council on guidance for application of Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification, COM/2014/0210
final.
472
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined..
473
AIDA is the Asylum Information Database that is managed by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles,
and contains information on asylum procedures, reception conditions, detention and content of international
protection across 23 countries, including 19 MS, as explained on their website: (asylumineurope.org/about-
aida/). The findings are from the following report: AIDA, The concept of vulnerability in European asylum
procedures, 2017, p. 53, available at: (https://asylumineurope.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/11/aida_vulnerability_in_asylum_procedures.pdf).
474
L. Hooper, Gender-based asylum claims and non-refoulement: Articles 60 and 61 of the Istanbul Convention,
Council of Europe, 2019, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/conventionistanbularticle60-61-web/1680995244).
475
EE, HU, LV, BG, DK, LT, BE, FR.
476
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q.33.
477
Supra, p. 172.
17
willingness to cooperate with the authorities.478
The inconsistency between the Victims’
Rights Directive and the asylum directives regarding the conditions for access to support and
their limited gender-sensitive approach479
has resulted in protection gaps for women asylum-
seekers in particular for those at risk of violence during the asylum process.
e. Protection of victims of sex-based harassment at the workplace
Under international law, sex-based and sexual harassment are considered as forms of violence
against women. The overarching challenge in matters of sex-based harassment has been the
‘slow transition’ from sexual harassment at work as a health and safety problem to an
approach recognising it as rooted in discrimination and a form of violence against women
and domestic violence.480
EU law recognised sex-based harassment as a form of
discrimination in 2002.481
The EELN confirms that sex-based and sexual harassment in relation to work are generally
prohibited at national level as a response to the EU directives on gender equality.482
In most
Member States, the scope of prohibition of sex-based harassment and sexual harassment has
been broader than in EU law, going beyond the context of employment and occupation,
covering all spheres of life. The report views this as an indication that Member States
consider the current EU legal framework as insufficient, in particular as regards its scope.
Some trade unions have put considerable effort into mainstreaming violence against women
and domestic violence in occupational safety and health measures, especially by addressing
psychosocial risks in risk assessments and in company policies.483
However, such
frameworks have not proven very effective for lack of gender-sensitivity, thus hindering the
delivery of protection and support at the workplace. Social partners reported that violence
against women and domestic violence are still ‘not seen as a structural gender equality
478
Interview with PICUM, 2 July 2021. Trafficking victims can be eligible for residency permits but these are
often temporary. Article 11 (3) of the Anti-Trafficking Directive in fact states that Member States shall take the
necessary measures to ensure that assistance and support for a victim are not made conditional on the victim’s
willingness to cooperate in the criminal investigation, prosecution or trial, without prejudice to Directive
2004/81/EC or similar national rules. Article 8 of Directive 2004/81/EC states that with regard to the issue and
renewal of the residence permit MS authorities need to consider among other factors whether the third-country
national has shown a clear intention to cooperate and Article 14 on withdrawal specifies that the residence permit
may be withdrawn (among other factors) if the competent authority believes that the victim's cooperation is
fraudulent or that his/her complaint is fraudulent or wrongful; or when the victim ceases to cooperate. Thus the
Anti-Trafficking Directive in itself contains a provision to the contrary, but provides for a way for the provisions
of Directive 2004/81/EC to apply that put a cooperation obligation on the third-country national victims of
human beings seeking residence permits.
479
The Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32 requires gender competence during the interview (Article
15(3)(a)), an interviewer of the same sex (Article 15(3)(b)), an interpreter of the same sex (Article 15(3)(c)), the
assessment of vulnerabilities, i.e. that an applicant is in need of special procedural guarantees (Article 24(1)) and
adequate support if applicants need special procedural guarantees as a result of rape or other serious forms of
psychological, physical or sexual violence (Article 24(3)). Furthermore, dependent adults must consent to the
lodging of applications on their behalf, following dedicated and in private information about the consequences
(Article 7(2)). They must also have an opportunity for a separate personal interview (Article 14(1)(3)).
480
While not all harassment is violence, sex-based and sexual harassment are recognised as a form of violence
against women and domestic violence.
481
Infra.
482
Supra, p. 82.
483
Safe at work report p. 23 and social partner workshop.
18
issue’.484
Nonetheless, they have engaged in a wide range of measures and provided
assistance, particularly through collective bargaining (see e.g. Framework Agreement on
Harassment and Violence at Work, to which they link most of their action at least at EU
level485
).486
Another important gap is the lack of measures, at the workplace, to address the effects of
domestic violence at work. Domestic violence is considered largely unrelated to
employment, and occurring in the private sphere, thus not triggering action on the part of
employers.487
Nevertheless, domestic violence has an impact at the workplace, for instance in
terms of prolonged absences and reduced productivity. This gap has been recognized at
international level (ILO Recommendation, no. 206), but not in the Gender Equality
Directives at EU level.
f. Protection of victims of cyber violence against women
The general provisions of EU law applicable to all victims of all crime do not address victims
of cyber violence against women specifically. According to the EELN report, no countries –
except Romania– have a specific legal definition of cyber violence against women. 11
Member States488
have criminalized or are about to criminalize the non-consensual
dissemination of intimate/private/sexual images.489
All forms of cyber violence against
women are hence not criminalised in the Member States, and no targeted criminalisations
exist at the EU-level. Victims of cyber violence are therefore in most cases not eligible for
the protection measures under the Victims’ Rights Directive, which apply to victims of
crime.
The limited effect of the directives marks a significant protection gap, given the high
prevalence of this phenomenon.490
A European Parliament study491
found EU legislation to be
‘inadequate’. Firstly, the absence of a harmonised definition creates wide disparities in
protection between Member States, despite the cross-border nature of the violence. This also
brings several legal challenges such as the difficulties in accessing evidence in the online
environment and in conducting cross-border investigations in the EU.
Secondly, due to the persistent lack of awareness of those forms of crimes, for various
reasons, including persisting gender stereotypes, victims may not be aware of their rights
484
COM/ICF meeting with social partners 29 June 2021; COM meeting with a number of employer associations,
30 June 2021 (see annex 2).
485
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Framework agreement on harassment and violence at work,
2017, available at: (https://osha.europa.eu/en/legislation/guidelines/framework-agreement-on-harassment-and-
violence-at-work).
486
ETUC, Safe at home, safe at work: Trade union strategy to prevent, manage and eliminate work-place
harassment and violence against women, 2017, available at:
(https://www.etuc.org/sites/default/files/document/files/en_-_brochure_-_safe_at_home_1.pdf).
487
COM/ICF consultation with social partners, 30 June 2021.
488
BE, FR, IE, IT, MT, NL, PL, PT, ES, SE.
489
Supra, p. 9.
490
EPRS, Combating gender-based violence: Cyberviolence, European added value assessment, 2021, p. 8,
available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662621/EPRS_STU(2021)662621_EN.pdf). FRA
estimates that 11% of women have experienced cyber harassment or cyber stalking since the age of 15.
491
Supra 490, pp. 12-13.
19
and/or may face many obstacles in obtaining protection, reporting crimes, being taken
seriously, and recovering from the incident.492
EIGE held that the response of law
enforcement as well as treatment of victims across the EU are deeply inadequate.493
Literature
attributes these shortcomings to the lack of specific legal instruments targeted to address this
type of violence.494
g. Protection of women and girls victims of trafficking
The Anti-Trafficking Directive has effectively contributed to addressing trafficking in women
and girls as a form of violence against women and domestic violence. All but one Member
States – Germany – have some cooperation mechanisms (formal or informal) in place
according to Article 11(4) of the directive, to improve early identification, assistance and
support to victims of trafficking.495
Gender-specific measures include policy instruments
informing healthcare on how to identify victims trafficked for sexual exploitation, training
and guidance for immigration authorities on violence against women and domestic violence,
and assistance especially addressing victims in hotspots.496
A gender-sensitive interpretation of the directive has improved its effectiveness.497
According to EIGE, the EU measures promote gender responsive legal or policy measures498
and the provisions on identification, support and protection are satisfactory.499
Gender
sensitivity is also a response to empirical trends, showing that sexual exploitation makes up
60% of trafficking cases and 90% of victims are female.500
Legal and policy measures overall
are reported as strong. According to the EELN report, all states criminalise sexual violence
explicitly in connection to trafficking in human beings, except for IT and SI.501
Potential protection gaps nevertheless exist for women victims of trafficking, relating to the
difficulties in presenting and substantiating an application for international protection
492
Supra 490, p. 232.
493
EIGE, Cyberviolence against women and girls, 2017, available at: (https://eige.europa.eu/publications/cyber-
violence-against-women-and-girls).
494
K. Barker & O. Jurasz, “Online violence against women as an obstacle to gender equality: a critical view
from Europe”, European Equality Law Revision, Vol. 2020/1, 2020, pp. 47-60.
495
European Commission, Study on reviewing the functioning of Member States’ National and Transnational
Referral Mechanisms, HOME/2018/ISFP/PR/THB/0000, 2018, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/anti-
trafficking/sites/antitrafficking/files/study_on_reviewing_the_functioning_of_member_states_national_and_tran
snational_referral_mechanisms.pdf).
496
European Commission, Third report on the progress made in the fight against trafficking in human beings
(2020) as required under Article 20 of Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human
beings and protecting its victims, COM(2020) 661 final {SWD(2020) 226 final}, 20 October 2020, available at:
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0661).
497
European Commission, The EU Mutual Learning Programme in Gender Equality: Combatting trafficking in
women and girls for the purpose of sexual exploitation, Spain, 29-30 October 2018, Summary Report, 2018,
available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/mlp-gender-equality-seminar-combatting-trafficking-women-
and-girls-purpose-sexual-exploitation-madrid-29-30-october-2018_en).
498
EIGE, An analysis of the Victims’ Rights Directive from a gender perspective, 2016, available at:
(https://eige.europa.eu/publications/analysis-victims-rights-directive-gender-perspective).
499
EIGE, Gender-specific measures in anti-trafficking actions: report, 2018, available at:
(https://eige.europa.eu/publications/gender-specific-measures-anti-trafficking-actions-report).
500
Supra 496, pp. 3-4.
501
The report does not clarify the situation in Italy or Slovenia. Italy nonetheless has strong measures in place for
anti-trafficking in Decree 2014/24 (transposing Directive 2011/36) (Italy country report).
20
under the asylum directives. This could lead to a lack of identification of victims of
trafficking or at risk of being exploited among applicants and thus to ineffective referral to
adequate support.502
Another challenge in addressing trafficking is the low level of
prosecution and conviction.503
h. Coherence with international standards
While EU law contains several provisions on protection of victims, including on restraining
and protection orders, as well as regarding the assessment of the protection needs of particular
categories of victims, it however fails to address the specific protection needs of victims of
violence against women and domestic violence as required by the Istanbul Convention
(Chapter IV). In particular, EU law does not require the provision of specific training for law
enforcement authorities would be needed to understand why their interventions in situations
of domestic violence is needed and what is expected of their intervention.504
Compared to EU law, the Istanbul Convention and ILO Convention No. 190 have widened
the scope of the protection from sexual harassment and harassment based on sex to include
behaviours in spheres of life that are not limited to employment, occupation, and the provision
of and access to goods and services505
. This is an important gap in EU law, even if it applies
to the anti-discrimination legal framework at EU level more generally.
The EU legal framework can generally be considered in line with the Istanbul Convention’s
standards on the protection of women asylum seekers who are victim of violence against
women or domestic violence; however EU law fails in addressing the requirements on
protection prescribed by the UNCRPD.
i. Conclusion
The EU law framework contains protection obligations in a fragmented manner. Either the
measures target victims of all types of crime (as for the Victims’ Rights Directive and the
EPO Directive) or target very specific group of victims, such as children victims of sexual
abuse and victims of trafficking in human beings.
The instruments on the mutual recognition of protection orders are mainly applied to cases of
violence against women and domestic violence. National requirements on the modalities of
protection measures however vary considerably, which has led to the EU-level instruments
being considerably underused. In addition, the lacking availability of interpretation and
502
Supra 496, p. 9.
503
The EU framework addresses these issues through the Victims’ Rights Directive (chapter 4), the Anti-
trafficking Directive (Article 12), the European Protection Order Directive, and the Protection Measures
Regulation and the Gender Equality Directives (prohibition of discrimination).
504
FRA, Women as victims of partner violence – Justice for victims of violent crime, Part IV, 2019, p. 12,
available at: (https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2019/women-victims-partner-violence-justice-victims-violent-
crime-part-iv).
505
European network of legal experts in gender equality and non-discrimination, Thematic Report on the
Criminalisation of gender-based violence against women in European States, including ICT-facilitated violence,
at 4.4.
21
translation services at national level is a particularly important obstacle especially for migrant
women, for whom the fragmented legal framework also leads to a lack of protection.
Sex-based and sexual harassment in relation to work and the access to and supply of goods
and services are generally prohibited at national level as a response to the Gender Equality
Directives. These obligations however do not contain explicit provisions on measures to be
taken for the protection of the victim in concrete cases of sex-based harassment. Despite the
international recognition (in particular in ILO Recommendation no. 206) that domestic
violence experienced in private life can have an impact on work, the Gender Equality
Directives do not address this issue at EU level. This means that employers are not obliged to
inform victims of protection measures provided outside the workplace.
The EU provisions do not address victims of cyber violence against women or between
intimate partners, resulting in a lack of effective protection. Victims of different forms of
cyber violence are not eligible for protection under the Victims’ Rights Directive, if the
conduct is not criminalised under national law. There are currently no targeted EU-level
criminalisations.
EU law provisions thus fail to address the specific protection needs of victims of violence
against women and domestic violence as required by the Istanbul Convention.
The lack of provisions taking into account multiple discrimination occurring at the
intersection of sex and disability is a barrier for the full protection of women with disabilities
from violence targeting them.
3. Access to justice for victims of violence against women and domestic violence
a. Criminalisation
Only the CSA and Anti-Trafficking Directives currently include EU-level criminalisations of
specific forms of violence against women and domestic violence. The Gender Equality
Directives require Member States to sanction sex-based work harassment in employment and
in the access to and supply of goods and services; this does however not necessarily include
criminalisation. The majority of respondents to the public consultation are of the opinion that
sanctions in their Member States for this kind of violence are not sufficient (75%). Only 11%
said they were sufficient.
While most conduct related to violence against women and domestic violence is criminalized
at national level, this does leave important gaps.
A significant gap exists in the area of cyber violence against women. Cyber violence against
women is a relatively new phenomenon which has so far not been addressed in EU law. The
forthcoming DSA impose certain obligations on intermediary service providers to act upon
notification and tackle illegal content; however, the DSA does not itself define what
constitutes illegal content. In the absence of an EU-wide definition of cyber violence against
women, the application of the DSA will depend on the level of criminalisation of such
violence at national level, which for the time being is rather limited. The lack of
criminalisations directly affects the victims’ access to justice: if other remedies, such as
measures of civil and administrative law, are not available in individual cases, and if victims
are unable to obtain the removal of the content from the platform, criminalisation of serious
22
forms of such cyber violence enable the state to guarantee victims’ access to justice and the
offender’s entitlement to due process506
.
Another gap exists with regard to sex-based harassment at work: the background studies
conducted for the initiative show that the implementation of the relevant provisions has not
been effective, and sexual harassment continues to remain common in the Member States. 507
b. Reporting
Despite the measures to protect victims from intimidation, retaliation and repeat victimisation
in the Gender Equality Directives and the Victims’ Rights Directive, Member States refer to
the lack of reporting as a serious problem to effectively address violence against women and
domestic violence.508
This is also confirmed by the recent FRA survey “Crimes, Safety and
Victims’ Rights”.509
Further, with the exception of the CSA Directive, the EU acquis does not
sufficiently ensure reporting by third-parties, indicating a lack of training on identifying
potential victims of this kind of violence or concerns about breaching professional
confidentiality rules.510
The targeted consultation showed that relevant professionals are not
obliged to report, in particular, suspicions of early, child or forced marriages or FGM in five
Member States.511
There are several reasons for underreporting, which is very specific to the area of violence
against women and domestic violence. First of all, victims of violence against women and
domestic violence are particularly sensitive to secondary victimisation, including the stigma,
victim-blaming512, and the risk of retaliation by way of a defamation claim513
that are often
associated with this type of violence. The problem of underreporting also specifically affects
victims of violence against women at the workplace, due to victims’ fear of career-related
retaliation, high societal tolerance for sex-based harassment514
, a lack of information and
reporting mechanisms515
, and a lack of awareness at the most senior levels of employers.516
506
EELN 2021, at 9.
507
Supra 505.
508
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q. 43.
509
FRA survey, Crime, Safety and Victims’ Rights, 2021, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2021-crime-safety-victims-rights_en.pdf). Only 30% of
incidents involving physical violence, and 11% of those involving harassment were reported.
510
Supra 430.
511
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q. 45 and 46.
512
European Commission, Special Eurobarometer 449 – Report Gender-Based Violence, 2016, p. 58, available
at: (https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/2115): more than one in five respondents (22%) across the
EU agree women often make up or exaggerate claims of abuse or rape, although this figure masks a wide
variation between countries. Respondents in MT (47%), CY (44%) and LT (42%) are the most likely to agree,
compared to 8% in SE and 13% in FR and IT.
513
Supra, p. 82.
514
Eurofound, Violence and harassment in European workplaces: Causes, impacts and policies, 2015, p. 52,
available at:
(https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ef_comparative_analytical_report/field_ef_documents/ef14
73en.pdf).
515
(https://eige.europa.eu/publications/sexism-at-work-handbook/part-1-understand/under-reporting-sexual-
harassment), last visited (18/08/2021).
23
In addition, the lack of information on the follow-up to complaints517
is one of the factors
highlighted by EIGE as discouraging in particular victims of domestic violence from
reporting.518
Also, when victims report, they are often subject to secondary victimisation.
Only the CSA and Anti-Trafficking Directives ensure that prosecution is not dependent on the
cooperation of the victim. Prosecution ex officio for most serious forms of violence against
women and domestic violence crime would alleviate the burden of cooperation for victims.
Furthermore, victims of in particular domestic violence often have financial barriers which
prevent them from seeking access to justice. Even though legal aid is available in most
Member States, in line with the Victims’ Rights Directive519
, access is barred by lengthy and
difficult processes to prove eligibility and lack of information on conditions and procedural
rules at national level.520
Even if this problem may exist for all victims, it particularly hits
victims of domestic violence who may depend for their living on the perpetrator. Problems
have also been highlighted for victims of sex-based harassment; the assessment of the
implementation of the Self Employed Directive found that in Estonia, reimbursement claims
for legal assistance had to be filed separately and claimants could wait several years before
receiving recovery of costs and compensation. Similarly, in Hungary, it was reported that the
law made it difficult for women to seek effective and proportionate penalties and in Slovakia,
the claimant was required to pay 3% of the sum claimed in court fees.521
Asylum-seekers can
face additional barriers including caps on the amount of time a legal representative can spend
on a case (NL), and legal aid representatives who do not sufficiently understand asylum law
or violence against women and domestic violence (FI).522
A further important obstacle to reporting is the clear evidence of low conviction and
prosecution of violence against women and domestic violence.523
Victims do not feel taken
seriously and prefer not to report if they doubt whether any follow-up will be given. Training
of law enforcement professionals is also relevant for the purposes of securing adequate
prosecution and convictions.
Closely linked to the low prosecution and conviction rate is the difficulty to prove a case of
violence against women and domestic violence.524
The instruments under analysis fail to
recognise that most forms of violence produce little traditional evidence. Victims of violence
516
P. Petroglou, “Sexual harassment and harassment related to sex at work: time for a new directive building on
the EU gender equality acquis”, European Equality Law Review, Vol. 2, 2019, p. 19.
517
See: Art. 5 Victims’ Rights Directive.
518
EIGE written submission to public consultation.
519
See: Art. 13.
520
Supra 430.
521
EELN¸ Self-Employed: The Implementation of Directive 2010/41 on the application of the principle of equal
treatment between men and women engaged in an activity in a self-employed capacity, 2015, available at:
(https://www.equalitylaw.eu/component/edocman/self-employed-en).
522
Supra 430.
523
For instance, in the area of trafficking, the third progress report 2017-2018 reports 11,788 suspects, 6,163
prosecutions and 2,426 convictions in the EU. Figures for cases related to sexual exploitation or other forms of
violence against women and domestic violence are not available, although 60% of trafficking victims are victims
of sexual exploitation.
524
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q. 43.
24
against women and domestic violence are often reluctant/unable to testify in proceedings or
are pressured to withdraw reports, and protection and support measures are often not
sufficient to help victims overcome this reluctance. Victims often feel that the court only
looked at one violent incident in isolation without recognising the severity of the harm
inflicted overall.525
The complexity in anti-trafficking cases leads to additional difficulties in
international evidence gathering.526
Guidance to prosecutors on how to approach and handle
cases of violence against women and domestic violence with regard also to the difficulties in
gathering and assessing evidence would be welcomed by many stakeholders.527
c. Compensation
The 2019 Milquet report on compensation prepared for Commission President Juncker
highlighted violence against women as one of the three areas of crime where access to
compensation is particularly problematic.528
This is the case despite the minimum standards
set in the Compensation Directive and, at least for certain types of sex-based harassment, the
Gender Equality Directives and the Victims’ Rights Directive.
Levels of compensation are inadequate. The Gender Equality Directives require ‘real and
effective’ compensation, but without further guidance on what this should mean in practice.
Even if victims can claim compensation, such as healthcare costs and other quantifiable
damages, from the perpetrator in all States,529
the Milquet report concludes that ‘the amount
of compensation attributed in violence against women and domestic violence cases is often
very low. This might in part be related to a lack of awareness and training of judges on the
dynamics and traumatic consequences of this type of crime. The amount of compensation
should reflect the wide-ranging and long-term harm of gender-based violence, going beyond
potential medical and therapy costs, to also cover loss of earnings and broader psychological
damages. Compensation should serve as a means for re-building an independent and violence-
free life of dignity”.530
In several States,531
rehabilitation is regularly provided through public services. State
compensation is usually granted subsidiarily, in the absence of compensation obtained from
the perpetrator or other sources. The Compensation Directive establishes a mechanism
facilitating access to state compensation in cross-border cases for all victims of violent
intentional crimes. The Court of Justice has recently clarified that the Compensation Directive
also imposes an obligation on Member States to set up national state compensation schemes
including in cases without a cross border nature and ensure an adequate level of compensation
at national level. In line with the Compensation Directive, State compensation is mostly
525
FRA, Sanctions that do justice – Justice for victims of violent crimes, Part III, 2019, p. 19, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2019/sanctions-do-justice-justice-victims-violent-crime-part-iii).
526
Supra 496.
527
See annexes 2 and 4.
528
European Commission, Strengthening Victims’ Rights: from compensation to reparation. For a new EU
Victims’ rights strategy 2020-2025. Report of the Special Adviser, J. Milquet, to the President of the European
Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, 2019, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/files/summary-report-
strengthening-victims-rights-compensation-reparation_en).
529
Supra 528, p. 185.
530
Supra 133, p.32.
531
HR, EE, FI, DE, EL, LT, ES.
25
restricted to victims of violent crimes, and in at least 12 States,532
this option is only available
if victims have sustained serious bodily injury or impairment of health – thus excluding
other forms of violence. This is especially a problem, for instance, in the area of
trafficking:533
when pimps or traffickers have no assets – or they cannot be found – women
often receive no compensation or compensation is simply too low.534
Problems with compensation are not limited to the level of compensation, they also concern
the procedure for claiming compensation itself. The VOCIARE report notes that while the
vast majority of Member States guarantee the right of the victim to seek compensation within
criminal proceedings535
, criminal judges are not always obliged to decide on such claims. As a
result, victims may have to re-testify in the subsequent civil proceedings.536
Art. 16(1) of
the Victims’ Rights Directive leaves it up to Member States to allow victims to seek
compensation within the criminal proceedings or to refer them to separate civil proceedings,
thus exposing them to high risks of secondary victimisation.
Furthermore, almost half of the respondents of the public consultations (49%) do not believe
that information on access to compensation is available in their Member States.537
84%
described the process of pursuing compensation as difficult and long.538
d. Coherence with international standards
With regards to compensation, Article 30 of the Istanbul Convention provides for the right of
the victims to claim compensation from the perpetrator for all forms of violence against
women and domestic violence. Compensation can also be sought from insurance companies
or from state-funded health and social security schemes. This Article also establishes a
subsidiary obligation for the state to compensate. The Compensation Directive facilitates
access to state compensation for victims of violent intentional crimes, committed in other EU
Member States or in their Member State of residence.539
It obliges Member States on whose
respective territories the crime has occurred to establish a national scheme on compensation
and guarantee victims’ access to fair and adequate compensation.540
However the way
national authorities develop, implement and understand the right for compensation is left to
the discretion of the Member States. In several States541
, rehabilitation is regularly provided
through public services. In line with the Compensation Directive, it is mostly restricted to
victims of violent crimes, and in at least 12 States542
, this option is only available if victims
have sustained serious bodily injury or impairment of health – thus excluding other forms of
violence.
532
BE, CZ, DE, HU, LU, MT, NL, PL, PO, RO, ES.
533
See the mutual learning seminar on trafficking, Supra 497.
534
For example, in Spain, the average compensation is around €150.
535
Infra 547.
536
Infra 547, p. 121.
537
See: Art. 9 Victims’ Rights Directive.
538
Public consultation q. 19.
539
See also: CJEU, Case C-129/19 (Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri v. BV), ECLI:EU:C:2020:566, 16 July
2020.
540
Supra 411, Recital (11) & Art. 12 (2).
541
HR, EE, FI, DE, EL, LT, ES.
542
BE, CZ, DE, HU, LU, MT, NL, PL, PO, RO, ES.
26
With few exceptions (child sexual abuse and trafficking in human beings), EU law does not
provide for the criminalisation of most of the forms of violence against women and domestic
violence.
e. Conclusion
The current EU law framework fails to address targeted needs of victims of violence against
women and domestic violence with regard to their access to justice.
The reporting rate of such violence is very low and has been recognised by several EU
Member States as a problem to be urgently addressed.
Regarding cyber violence against women and intimate partners, the EU legal framework does
not include specific criminalisations or other targeted measures to facilitate this group’s
access to justice. 11 Member States have criminalised or are about to criminalise some forms
of such violence. Since the Victims’ Rights Directive applies to criminalised conduct, victims
of cyber violence against women are often not eligible for protection and support measures
under the Directive.
Lack of adequate compensation remains a challenge and obstacle for this group of victims in
accessing justice, despite the minimum standards of the Compensation Directive and, for sex-
based harassment, the Gender Equality Directives. A report on victims’ compensation from
2019 concludes that ‘the amount of compensation attributed in violence against women and
domestic violence cases is often very low’ and compensation is not granted in adequate time.
4. Support to victims of violence against women and domestic violence
a. General support
The EU framework, mainly through the Victims’ Rights and Anti-trafficking Directives,
provides that victims of all crime and victims of trafficking respectively receive appropriate
information in their first contact with authorities, assistance to participate in criminal
proceedings and a variety of support services, including specialised support services, such as
shelters or interim accommodations and specialised counselling (Chapter II and III of the
Victims’ Rights Directive; Article 11 of the Anti-trafficking Directive). They also guarantee
that women victims of violence receive individualised protection to reduce possible re-
victimisation (Chapter IV of the Victims’ Rights Directive; Article 12 of the Anti-trafficking
Directive).
Despite this acquis, gaps remain in the EU framework. The Victims’ Rights Directive, mainly
in Articles 4 and 7, requires Member States to ensure that if needed there are interpretation
and translation services available to woman victims so that they can understand the
information they receive. However, while foreseeing such right for victims when making a
complaint and during criminal proceedings, it does not foresee it in relation to, or as part of,
the access to protection and support offered to all victims. Hence an important gap exists in
this regard. Moreover, such protection is also not available to victims in the European
Protection Order procedure and the cross-border recognition of protection measures in civil
law procedure. In addition, the EU framework does not provide a procedure to ensure that
women victims receive equivalent support measures if they move cross-border.
27
b. Specialised support
Helplines
The EU framework does not provide for the establishment of a harmonised helpline to support
and assist women victims of gender-based violence. The EU has made such requirement
regarding e.g. children’s helplines (Article 96 Directive (EU) 2018/1972).Work towards such
an EU-level helpline has been set up by the German Presidency in 2019; so far 15 Member
States have signed up to it. An EU level obligation on Member States would ensure the
success of this helpline.
Shelters
On access to shelters543
, the Commission found implementation problems in several Member
States, including as regards the availability of shelters for victims of certain types of crime
and an insufficient number of shelters. Such shortcomings tend to particularly affect victims
of violence against women and domestic violence.
The WAVE Report (2019) shows that only three countries544
fulfil the requested number of
specialised women’s shelters per 10,000 people recommended by the Istanbul Convention.545
51% of beds needed are missing.546
Victim Support Europe notes547
insufficient geographical
coverage in a number of countries.548
There are access barriers for children, migrant women
and women with a disability. Given the lack of knowledge concerning victims’ support
services amongst relevant authorities, their discretion on referral to support services could
lead to gaps.549
Women with disabilities
Article 3(2) of the Victims’ Rights Directive requires Member States to ensure that
communication with victims takes into account possible disabilities which may affect the
ability of victims to understand or to be understood. This limited provision in EU law does not
address the many challenges faced by women with disabilities, as recognised by the CRPD
which requires addressing the needs of persons with disabilities specifically. The main
problem is that, apart from Article 3(2) Victims’ Rights Directive, the EU framework
considers women with disabilities within the broader category of vulnerable victims and not
as a group with specific needs and rights.
543
See: Art. 9(3).
544
LU, MT, SL.
545
WAVE, Wave Country Report 2019 – The Situation of Women’s Specialist Support Services in Europe, 2019,
available at: (https://www.wave-network.org/2019/12/30/wave-country-report-2019).
546
Supra 545.
547
Victim Support Europe, Victims of Crime Implementation Analysis of Rights in Europe: Synthesis Report,
2019, p. 56, available at: (https://victimsupport.eu/activeapp/wp-
content/uploads/2019/08/VOCIARE_Synthesis_Report-web.pdf).
548
BG, HR, CY, EL, ES, IT, LT, LU, RO, SK.
549
Supra 547, p. 57.
28
The supporting study shows limitations in the support to victims with disabilities in most of
the MS, including an important lack of sensitization and training of professionals550
and lack
of support services more generally551
. Other challenges concern victims with disabilities more
generally, including victims of violence against women and domestic violence. For instance,
in the Targeted Consultation, only about half of Member States reported having fully
accessible support services (i.e. availability of barrier-free environment, easy to read and
understand language, sign language interpretation, etc.).552
In its written submission to the
public consultation, the European Disability Forum notes barriers throughout the entire
criminal justice process, including to victims’ support services because of a lack of qualified
interpreters for deaf and deafblind women.
The EU legal framework therefore does not guarantee disability inclusiveness of the support
services provided to women victims of violence against women and domestic violence as
required by Article 16(3) CRPD. Furthermore, the EU framework does not ensure that people
involved with persons with disabilities (including victims of violence against women and
domestic violence) receive appropriate training, as required by Article 4(1)(i) CRPD. In
addition, the EU framework is not consistent with the requirements of Article 13 CRPD
regarding effective access to justice for persons with disabilities, including victims of violence
against women and domestic violence) in court, investigative and other proceedings, as it does
not provide any procedural accommodation in that regard. Hence, important gaps exist in
relation to the rights and protection of people with disabilities, including victims of violence
against women and domestic violence.
Children
While children are generally recognised as a particularly vulnerable group of victims of crime
in EU law (see Article 24 of the Victims’ Rights Directive; Articles 13-16 of the Anti-
trafficking Directive), their status is uncertain when they are not direct victims of violence but
witnesses of violence. This is especially problematic in situations of domestic violence.
A recent Study on the added value of tackling violence against women553
highlighted that
currently in the EU Member States there are insufficient measures to ensure the safety of
mothers who are victims of domestic violence and their children in the decision and exercise
of child custody and visitation rights in all Sate Parties reviewed to date. Shortcomings are
also noted in custody and visitation decisions and the ban on obligatory mediation in civil
procedures. With regard to support, in the targeted consultation only 13 Member States
reported that their specialist support services systematically take into account the special
needs of child victims or witnesses of domestic violence554
and 10 more Member States
reported to apply a child sensitive approach555
, but not systematically.556
A FRA report
550
AT, HR, LT, PL, PT, ES.
551
AT, HR, LT, PL, PT, ES.
552
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q.31.
553
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658648/IPOL_STU(2020)658648_EN.pdf at
105.
554
DE, IE, NL, AT, PL, LV, BG, LU, DK, ES, BE, HR, IT.
555
SL, SK, EE, CZ, FI, PT, EL, SK, RO, CY.
556
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q.22. No response from HU, LT and HR.
29
concluded that children in several countries believe that ‘victim and witness support
specialists are not widely available or play too passive a role’557
.
A key challenge affecting the effectiveness of the existing EU law is that courts still legally
categorise child witnesses as indirect victims, despite it being standard practice in child
protection to consider child witnesses as direct victims due to the psychological harm
inflicted.558
This can hinder children’s access to services such as counselling as they are not
considered ‘victims’ within the meaning of Art. 9 Victims’ Rights Directive.
As mentioned above, in the targeted consultation all but one responding Member States –
Denmark559
– reported to provide specialised training on working with child victims or
witnesses of violence against women and domestic violence, encompassing a child-sensitive
approach.560
c. Victims of sex-based and sexual harassment
EU law provides for the support by equality bodies under the Gender Equality Directives.
Such support is, however, only available for sex-based harassment within the scope of these
directives. This leaves the vast array of victims of other forms of violence against women and
domestic violence outside the scope of these directives without access to assistance and
advice in legal procedures.
Even where the support comes in the competence of equality bodies, these bodies do not
always have the necessary powers to provide effective support.561
One major deficiency exists
in those States where equality bodies do not have legal standing to represent victims in court.
Only in nine Member States, can equality bodies act on behalf of victims. Also, equality
bodies cannot act on behalf of a group of victims, except in four Member States. This limits
collective action, something that may be particularly useful in cases of workplace harassment.
An Equinet survey noted the following challenges expressed by equality bodies: a lack of
clarity on their mandate relating to sex-based discrimination, including sexual and sex-based
harassment, a lack of attention to gender-based cyber violence and problems in adequately
addressing intersectionality.562
d. Compliance with international standards
557
FRA, Child-friendly justice - Perspectives and experiences of children involved in judicial proceedings as
victims, witnesses or parties in nine EU Member States, 2017, p. 79, available at:
(https://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2017/child-friendly-justice-perspectives-and-experiences-children-involved-
judicial).
558
Supra, p. 6; Luxembourg Country Report.
559
Denmark is not bound by the Victims’ Rights Directive.
560
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q.12 No response from MT and DE.
561
Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation q. 39.
562
Equinet, Tackling Violence against Women and Gender-Based Violence: Equality Bodies’ Contribution¸ 2019,
available at: (https://equineteurope.org/2019/tackling-violence-against-women-and-gender-based-violence-
equality-bodies-contribution/).
30
The Istanbul Convention entails a set of provisions regarding assistance and support measures
for women victims of violence, including access to information, general (Article 20) and
specialist support services (Article 22) to victims of violence and sexual violence (Article 25),
shelters (Article 23), telephone helplines (Article 24), assistance in complaint procedures
(Article 21) and protection of child victims and witnesses (Article 26).
Regarding gaps in EU law compared to the standards set by the Istanbul Convention, as
mentioned above, the EU framework does not address the issue of witnesses of violence
against women and domestic violence, particularly child witnesses. The framework does
address the needs of child victims of violence (Article 24 of the Victims’ Rights Directive,
Articles 13-16 of the Anti-trafficking Directive), but only when they are considered direct
victims themselves.
Lastly, the EU framework does not yet provide for the establishment of a harmonised helpline
to support and assist women victims of gender-based violence. However, the EU has made
such requirement regarding e.g. children’s helplines (Article 96 Directive (EU) 2018/1972).
e. Conclusion
For support measures the EU framework provides general measures such as for example
interpretation and translation, but since those are not provided for victims of all forms of
violence against women, their lack in access to protection or support services can lead to
important gaps for victims.
Among specialised support services the EU law does not provide for a helpline for victims of
violence against women and domestic violence, and the availability of shelters for victims is
insufficient. Access to shelters is not specifically ensured for certain groups of victims such as
children on women with disabilities.
EU law considers women with disabilities within the broader category of vulnerable victims
and not as a group with specific needs and rights, and does not follow the approach of CRPD
which requires addressing the needs of persons with disabilities specifically.
Stakeholders reported a lack of support services fully accessible to women with disabilities
(i.e. availability of barrier-free environment, easy to read and understand language, sign
language interpretation, etc.),563
and barriers throughout the entire criminal justice process,
including to victims’ support services because of a lack of qualified interpreters for deaf and
deafblind women.564
A key challenge affecting the effectiveness of the existing EU law is that courts still legally
categorise child witnesses as indirect victims, despite it being standard practice in child
protection to consider child witnesses as direct victims due to the psychological harm
563
Submission for the Member States targeted consultation q.31.
564
European Disability Forum, Recommendations on EU policies to combat violence against women and girls
with disabilities https://www.edf-feph.org/publications/edf-position-paper-on-violence-against-women-and-girls-
with-disabilities-in-the-european-union/ at p. 11.
31
inflicted.565
This can hinder children’s access to services such as counselling as they are not
considered ‘victims’, and shortcomings are noted in custody and visitation decisions and the
ban on obligatory mediation in civil procedures.
EU law provides for the support by equality bodies under the Gender Equality Directives,
which is however only available to victims of sex-based harassment, leaving victims of all
other forms of violence against women and domestic violence without access to assistance
and advice in legal procedures. Equality bodies also often lack sufficient powers to grant this
assistance where mandated with it.
The lack of specific provisions for witnesses, particularly children witnesses of violence
against women and domestic violence leaves a gap compared to international requirements,
especially in the Istanbul Convention.
5. Coordination at national level and data collection
a. Coordination at national level
Several of the instruments of the EU framework require Member States to engage in dialogue
with non-governmental organisations (Article 22 Gender Equality Recast Directive) or to
facilitate the involvement of such organisations in providing support to victims (Article 8
Victims’ Rights Directive), providing support in judicial proceedings (Article 7 Directive
2010/41/EU) or providing support in the asylum application procedures (Article 10 Asylum
Procedures Directive). However, the EU framework does not foresee a consultation with civil
society during the development, implementation, and evaluation of national policies. Such
involvement is essential in ensuring that the needs of women victims of violence are
addressed effectively. In addition, EU law does not provide for coordinated action among all
actors involved in the fight against violence against women and domestic violence, despite
such coordination generally being recognised as absolutely necessary for an effective
response.
b. Data collection
As regards the collection of disaggregated statistical data on all forms of violence against
women and domestic violence, the EU framework requires some data collection that is
relevant to violence against women and domestic violence, in particular from equality bodies
(Gender Equality Directives). It also entails obligations on data collection on victims’ rights
(Article 28 the Victims’ Rights Directive and Article 22 the EPO Directive) but such data are
not specific on violence against women and domestic violence. EIGE has worked for many
years on the improvement of administrative data collection, including progress towards more
comparability of data; also these efforts remain dependent on the political will at national
level and have not lead to the desired results.
565
Supra, p. 6; Luxembourg Country Report.
32
An EU-wide prevalence survey is being developed and rolled out by Eurostat; however,
participation by Member States is voluntary and only 18 Member States participate despite
financial support by the European Commission.
The supporting study566
highlighted awareness among Member States on the need for data
collection and comparison at the EU level on violence against women (AT, BE, CY, DK, EL,
IE, IT, LU). For example, in Denmark this was seen as being useful to better target prevention
measures, develop new and innovate concepts for training, and concepts to support women
victims of violence or domestic violence. In some Member States, it was seen as useful to
particularly collect information on vulnerable groups. Reports also highlighted the need for –
and current lack of – strong data collection to support measures to address violence against
women and domestic violence567
and recommend further guidance on data that Member
States should collect568
and promoting high quality survey and administrative data569
.
c. Compliance with international standards
EU law can generally be considered not to be in line with the obligations set out in the
Istanbul Convention. In particular, the lack of coordination mechanisms is not in line with
Article 10 of the Convention. The lack of consultation of organisations working with women
with disabilities is not in line with Article 4(3) UNCRPD. As to data collection, Article 11 of
the Istanbul Convention requires State Parties to take action in order to collect disaggregated
statistical data on all forms of violence against women and domestic violence. The EU
framework requires some data collection that is relevant to VAW/DV from Equality Bodies
(Gender Equality Directives) but such data is limited to sex-based and sexual harassment. It
also entails obligations on data collection on victims’ rights (Article 28 the Victims’ Rights
Directive and Article 22 the EPO Directive). However, there is not an obligation on the
Member States to collect data specifically on violence against women and domestic violence.
d. Conclusions
There is no requirement in EU law to consult civil society during the development and
evaluation of national policies and coordinated action is not required among all actors
involved although both of those measures would enhance the effectiveness of all measures
targeting violence against women and domestic violence.
566
Study conducted in support of the impact assessment report. ICF 2021 [upcoming].
567
European Parliament, Study for the FEMM Committee: Tackling violence against women and domestic
violence in Europe – The added value of the Istanbul Convention and remaining challenges, 2020, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/658648/IPOL_STU(2020)658648_EN.pdf);
EAVA, European Added Value Assessment: Combatting violence against women, 2013, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/504467/IPOL-
JOIN_ET(2013)504467_EN.pdf).
568
EPRS, The Victims’ Rights Directive 2012/29/EU – European Implementation Assessment, 2017, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2017/611022/EPRS_STU(2017)611022_EN.pdf).
569
EPRS, Gender-based violence as a new area of crime listed in Article 83(1) TFEU – European added value
assessment, 2021, available at:
(https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/662640/EPRS_STU(2021)662640_EN.pdf).
33
There is no requirement in EU law to collect disaggregated data specifically on violence
against women and domestic violence, efforts remain dependent on the political will at
national level and have not lead to the desired results. Stakeholders also emphasized the need
for, and the current lack of strong data collection to support measures to address violence
against women and domestic violence.
EU law can generally be considered not to be in line with the obligations set out in the
Istanbul Convention as a result of the obligation on the Member States to collect data
specifically on violence against women and domestic violence, and the lack of coordination
mechanisms. Similarly to the latter, the lack of consultation of organisations working with
women with disabilities is not in line with the UNCRPD.
34
6. Overview of existing provisions in EU law
The table below summarises the provisions under EU law which concern the prevention,
protection, access to justice, victim support, and coordination/data collection.
Section II. Gaps and good practices on the measures to tackle violence against women
and domestic violence in the 27 EU Member States.
35
570
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 2.
571
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 3.
572
BG and HU, Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation.
573
Resolution of 26 October 2017 on combating sexual harassment and abuse in the EU (2017/2897/(RSP)), OJ
C 346, 27.09.2018, p. 192. See in its preamble: ‘D… sexual violence and harassment are contrary to the
principle of gender equality and equal treatment and constitute gender-based discrimination’ and ‘I… the
persistence of gender stereotypes, sexism, sexual harassment and abuse is a structural and widespread problem
throughout Europe and the world … gender stereotypes and sexism, including sexist hate speech, offline and
online, are root causes of all forms of violence against women’.
575
EWL, Towards a Europe Free From Male Violence Against Women and Girls - Recommendations from the
European Women’s Lobby to end violence against women and girls in Europe once and for all, 2020, available
at: (https://womenlobby.org/IMG/pdf/ic-2.pdf).
576
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined..
577
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined..
Member States’ measures
Problem
areas
Subareas Gaps Best practices
1.
Prevention
Awareness-
raising
(including
harassment at
work)
- Lack of awareness-raising initiatives to tackle
underlying patriarchal and stereotypical attitudes
(BE, IT, NL, PT570
)
- Insufficient teaching material on issues such as
equality between women and men, gender roles, etc.
(FI, IT, MT, SE571
)
- Prevention strategies limited to DV (BG, HU572
).
Stakeholders’ view
OPC: lack of services and activities to empower
survivors and encourage them to break the silence
(73%).
NGO: highlighted the need to further address
harmful gender stereotypes as one of the main root
causes of gender-based violence and the education
sector has a pivotal role in addressing them.
[harassment]
European Parliament: need to tackle sexual
harassment and sexual abuse against women and
girls through a Directive573
.
INGOs: guidance, resources, training and other
relevant tools in accessible format for employers’
and workers’ organizations, on violence and
- Awareness raising
of VAWG and DV and training
of professionals
intensified after the ratification of the Istanbul
Convention (AT, FI, FR, EL, IT, LU, NL, PT, RO,
ES, SE575
).
- Development of School education programmes on
the topics of gender equality
and VAWG after the ratification of the Istanbul
Convention (DK,IT, NL, PT, RO)576
- Development of early detection
and intervention programmes (ES577
).
[harassment]
- Awareness-raising campaigns on sexual harassment
relayed by national media;
face-to-face counselling and a national telephone
information service. This include specific attention
to vulnerable groups of workers, including
immigrant workers;
The Commission for Equality in Labour and
Employment disseminates information on redress for
victims of gender discrimination in the workplace
provides legal support to victims and receives
36
574
ILO submission on the targeted consultation.
578
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 25.
579
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 27.
580
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 11, pp. 78-79.
581
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 11, p. 79.
582
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 11, p. 78.
583
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 36.
584
Supra 504, pp. 12 & 34.
harassment, including domestic violence, to be able
to support anyone seeking for information574
.
complaints on which it renders its legal opinion;
Multi stakeholder initiative which resulted in the
development of information material and tools to
support self-regulation to prevent and combat sexual
harassment in the workplace (PT578
).
To incentivise employers’ respect of gender equality,
the National Commission on the Promotion of
Equality (NCPE) awards companies an Equality
Mark Certification when employers give priority to
gender equality. One of the criteria on the basis of
which the certification is granted is whether the
company has put in place a sexual harassment policy
(MT579
).
Training of
professionals
- Lack of initial and in-service trainings and lack of
guidelines based on a gendered understanding of
violence against women and domestic violence (AT,
BE, DK, FI, FR, IT, MT, NL, PT, ES, SE580
)
- Lack of training of social workers and relevant
court appointed professionals (FR, IT, MT, PT581
)
- Need to expand training on different manifestations
of violence against women, their detection and root
causes (AT, BE, FI, FR, IT, MT, PT582
)
- Insufficient training or lack of sensitivity of
professionals involved in providing medical care and
forensic examinations in the area of sexual violence
(IT, MT, NL583
)
Stakeholders’ view:
FRA: FRA’s VAW survey highlighted the
“considerable potential for health professionals to
identify violence, inform the police, secure forensic
evidence and initiate intervention processes that set
out to end violence”. FRA recommended Member
States to pass specific guidelines on how
professionals working in healthcare services should
respond to indications of partner violence584
.”
37
585
Hungary submission for the MS targeted consultation.
586
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 22.
587
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 23.
588
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 23.
589
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 12.
590
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 24.
591
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 20.
592
EE, DK, FI, DE, NL, SE, Submission for the Member States Targeted Consultation.
593
Supra 505, at. 2.3.
594
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 31.
Work with
perpetrators
- Programmes are not set up (HU585
)
- Insufficient availability or low attendance of
programmes for perpetrators of DV (DK, IT, PT,
AT, FI, MT, NL586
).
- Referrals to perpetrator programmes are not
integrated into the criminal justice system as a tool to
reduce recidivism (FI, MT, NL587
)
- Perpetrator programmes are ordered to replace
prosecution, conviction or sentencing, contrary to the
principle of victims’ access to fair and just legal
processes (AT, PT588
).
- Lack of gendered understanding of violence against
women in the programmes (BE, NL589
).
- Perpetrator programmes focus too
strongly/exclusively on medical treatment for
substance abuse or mental health issues (FR590
).
Stakeholders’ view
NGOs: called for EU level minimum standards on
prevention and protection measures including on
work with perpetrators
- Consolidated guidelines for perpetrators
programmes (IT591
).
- Prevention of violent behaviour is addressed
through education programmes and support groups
for men, boys and young men. The available
education programmes, support groups and helplines
promote the recognition and prevention of violent
behaviours. Moreover, in these Member States,
voluntary programmes for offenders and inmates
offer counselling, psychological treatment and
support to change their behaviour. (EE, DK, FI, DE,
NL, SE592
).
2.
Protect
ion
Protection from
repeat
victimization
- Repetition or regularity of violent acts in definition
of domestic violence (HU, IE, IT, PT, SE593
).
- Lack of gendered understanding of violence against
women (BE594
)
- Disempowering and repeat victimising
interventions, such as asking victims to
38
595
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para 32.
596
Supra 504, pp. 36-37.
597
Supra 504, pp. 36-39.
598
NGOs workshop (see Annex 2).
599
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2019-justice-for-victims-of-violent-crime-part-4-
women_en.pdf at 42.
600
GREVIO, Baseline evaluation report: Poland, 2021, p. 75, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-baseline-
report-on-poland/1680a3d20b).
601
Baker McKenzie, Fighting Domestic Violence: Czech Republic, 2021, available at:
(https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/fighting-domestic-violence/europe/czech-republic).
602
GREVIO, Baseline Evaluation Report: Finland, 2019, pp. 40-41, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-
report-on-finland/168097129d).
603
Supra 430, pp. 112-113.
604
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), case of O.C.I. and Others v. Romania.
accommodate perpetrators’ behaviour, change their
own behaviour, etc. (NL595
).
Stakeholders’ view
FRA: need for legislation and trainings for law
enforcement authorities to improve protection
against repeat victimisation.
training596
.
Protection
orders,
emergency
barring orders
- Lack of effective and immediate protection after
reporting (AT, FE, DE, NL, PL,PT597
)
Stakeholders’ view
NGOs: lack of resources for issuing emergency
barring orders598
FRA: lack of immediate action by law enforcement
authorities waiting for the prosecution service or a
court to seize the initiative 599
.
- Introduction of emergency barring orders which
allow law-enforcement agencies, for the first time in
Poland, to temporarily evict a domestic abuser from
the family residence. This measure is accompanied
by extensive training initiatives throughout the
country to implement a system of emergency and
protection orders (PL)600
.
Special child
protection
measures in the
context of
domestic
violence
- Lack of special rules for custody or visitation rights
in cases of DV (CZ601
) (FI602
) (BE, IT603
).
- Lack of risk assessment for children experiencing
domestic violence (IT, RO604
).
Stakeholders’ view
European Parliament: When examining custody
cases, the child shall also be provided with the
39
605
European Parliament, Draft Report on the impact of intimate partner violence and custody rights on women
and children, 2019/2166(INI), 2021, available at:
(https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/ficheprocedure.do?lang=en&reference=2019/2166(INI)).
606
Supra, p. 154.
607
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 71-72.
608
Social partners’ workshop (Annex 2).
609
GREVIO, Baseline Evaluation Report: Portugal, 2018, para. 201, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-
reprt-on-portugal/168091f16f).
610
Supra 505, Chapter 8.
611
Supra 505, at 4.3.
612
Supra 505, at 3.2 b) i).
613
Supra 505, at 3.2 b) i).
614
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 66.
opportunity to be heard and, in cases where intimate
partner violence is suspected, hearings must be
conducted in a child-friendly environment by trained
professionals. Children who have witnessed
domestic violence should be recognised as victims of
gender-based violence and receive better legal
protection and psychological support605
.
Risk assessment
and
management
- Individual assessments are absent in seven Member
States (CZ, BE, EE, LU, RO, SI and SK606
).
- Lack of standardized and systematized procedures
(IT, MT607
).
Stakeholders’ view
Social partners: highlighted (with regards to sex-
based and sexual harassment at work) that very few
risk assessments are carried out and when they are,
they do not include psychosocial risks608
.
- Risk assessment is mandatory in cases of domestic
violence, and it is based on standardised forms.
After the risk assessment is completed, a safety plan
is developed for the victim, an application for
protective measures is made, and the seizure of
weapons is also provided for (PT)609
.
3.
Access
to
justice
Criminalisation - Lack of criminalization of non-consensual
dissemination of intimate/private/sexual images
(online) (AT, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, DE, EL,
HU, LV, LT, LU, RO, SK, SL610
).
- Aggravating factors for sexual harassment
committed online (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK,
EE, FI, DE, HU, IE, IT,LU, LV, LT, MT, NL, PL,
PT, RO, SK, SL, ES, SE611
)
- Consent requirement in criminalization of rape
(AT, BG, CZ, EE, FI, FR, EL, HU, IT, LV, LT, NL,
PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, ES612
).
- Non gender-neutral definition of rape (SK613
)
Right to
Information
- Not all relevant stakeholders pro-actively and
systematically provide information on services and
measures available (IT, MT614
)
- Development of examples of active outreach to
inform victims on their rights and the services
available (e.g. “Come to Us” campaign, online portal
40
615
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 67.
616
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 76.
617
Supra 504, p. 73.
618
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 64.
619
Supra 504, pp. 34-35.
620
Submission for the MS targeted consultation question n. 43.
621
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 75.
622
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., p. 37.
623
Supra 528, p. 23.
624
Baker McKenzie, Fighting Domestic Violence: Greece, 2021, at 4.2.4., available at:
(https://resourcehub.bakermckenzie.com/en/resources/fighting-domestic-violence/europe/greece).
625
CJEU, Case C-129/19 (Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri v. BV), ECLI:EU:C:2021:140, 25 February
2021.
627
Supra 528, p. 24.
- Insufficient information on forms of violence
against women other than domestic violence (AT,
BE, DK, FI, FR, IT, MT,NL, PL, PT,SI, ES615
)
- Lack of accessible information for women with
disabilities / mothers of children with disabilities
(BE, FR, IT, PT616
).
Stakeholders’ view
FRA: women who are victims of partner violence
are significantly more dissatisfied than other victims
of violent crime with their limited role in the
proceedings and with the limited information about
their potential role available to them617
.
www.youmo.se) (SE618
).
Violence
reporting
- Lack of measures protecting victims against
retaliation and repeat victimization (AT, FR, DE,
NL, PL, PT619
)
- A lack of reporting was highlighted by six Member
State authorities in the targeted consultation as one
of the main challenges in the prosecution of cases of
GBV (BE, BG, CY, DE, IE, RO620
).
- Barriers for migrant and asylum seeking women’s
ability to report violence to the police (MT, NL, ES,
SE621
).
Stakeholders’ view
INGOs: highlighted the need for clear and easy to
access reporting mechanisms including anonymous
reporting.
- Legislative amendments to allow professionals who
had previously been bound by confidentiality rules to
notify statutory agencies where they suspect a risk to
the life of a woman or child in the context of
domestic violence (FI622
).
Victim
compensation
- Restrictive time limits to apply for state
compensation (AT, CY, HR, HU623
) and for
perpetrator’s and state compensation (EL624
).
- In cases of sexual violence the seriousness of the
consequences for the victims of the crime committed
is not taken into account and the fixed rate
compensation does not represent an appropriate
contribution to the reparation of the harm suffered
(IT625
).
- Criminal sanctions as pressure on the offender to
make payments to the victim -compensation in lieu
of punishment- (DE627
).
41
626
Open public consultation q.20.
628
Supra 505, at 11.3 b).
629
Supra 505, at Table 30.
630
Submission for the MS targeted consultation question n. 39.
631
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 26.
632
Supra 430, p. 87.
633
GREVIO, Baseline evaluation report: Belgium, 2020, para. 119, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-report-on-
belgium/16809f9a2c); Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., paras.105-106; Infra Error! Bookmark not defined., para.
141; Infra Error! Bookmark not defined., para. 152.
634
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 75.
638
GREVIO, Baseline evaluation report: Denmark, 2017, p. 32, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-first-
baseline-report-on-denmark/16807688ae).
Stakeholders’ view
OPC: 49% of the respondents do not believe that
information on how victims can obtain compensation
(from the offender and/or the state) is available in
their Member State.626
Role of Equality
Bodies
- National equality bodies cannot receive claims of
sexual harassment (AT, CZ, FI, IT, LT, LU, ES628
).
- National Equality Bodies can deal with claims on
cases of sexual harassment but not with claims on
other forms of VAW/DV(BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, FI,
FR, EL, HU, IE, IT, LT, LV, LU, MT, NL, PL, RO,
SK, ES629
)
Effective
remedies in
cases of gender-
based work
harassment
- Collective redress in cases of gender-based work
harassment is not widely available in all Member
States. Only in four Member States equality bodies
can act on behalf of a group of victims of VAW/DV
in legal proceedings (BE, LV, PT, EE) and in five
equality bodies assist a group of victims of
VAW/DV in legal proceedings (EE, LV, LT, SK,
BE630
).
- French Law No. 2018 771 of 5 September 2018
also provides for a series of measures, such as the
establishment in any company employing at least
250 employees of an adviser responsible for guiding,
informing and assisting employees in the fight
against sexual harassment and sexist behaviour,
aimed at providing victims with better access to
information on possible remedies (FR631
).
4.
Victim
support
General support - Difficult access (in practice) to public housing and
financial assistance (BE, FI, FR, IT, MT, NL632
).
- Lack of trainings of relevant professionals
operating in general support services (BE, FI, IT,
ES633
).
- Significant barriers for migrant and asylum
seeking women to access general and/or specialised
support services (BE, DK,IT, NL,ES, SE634
)
- Guidelines have been developed for social workers
on how to assist victims of domestic violence. For a
woman seeking refuge at a shelter, the municipality
is obliged to provide initial and coordinated
counselling to identify their needs and offer solutions
(DK638
).
42
635
Open Public Consultation (see annex 2).
636
Supra 504, p. 13.
637
Submission for the INGO targeted consultation: United Nations – Joint Paper-Consultation on Preventing and
combatting gender-based violence against women and domestic violence.
639
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 59.
640
Supra 430, p. 90.
641
Supra 430, p. 91.
642
Supra 430, p. 91.
643
WAVE, WAVE Report 2015 on the role of specialist women’s support services in Europe, 2015, p. 90.
644
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., p. 90.
645
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., p. 90.
648
Supra 504, p. 56.
Stakeholders’ view
OPC: As to whether further measures should be
taken to improve the support to victims of
VAW/DV, the majority (77%) believe they should,
at national and EU level635
.
FRA: rarely law enforcement authorities refers
victims to a support organisation636
.
INGOs: protection and support services are
negatively affected by inadequate infrastructure, long
waiting periods, insufficient funding or limited
geographical coverage, and lack of
specialized/trained personnel637
.
Specialized
support
(including
shelters and
helplines)
- Insufficient rape crisis centres and/or sexual
violence referral centres to ensure proper coverage
and easy access by victims of sexual violence (AT,
BE, FR, IT, NL, PT, ES, SE639
).
- Low number of specialised support services dealing
with forms of violence other than domestic violence
such as sexual violence, FGM, forced marriage,
forced abortion and sterilisation or sexual harassment
(AT,BE,FR,MT,PT, ES640
)
- Inadequate number and/or distribution of specialist
services for domestic violence (BE, DK, FI, FR, DK,
IT, MT, DK, SE641
)
- Shortcomings in the provision of specialist support
services catered to the needs of specific
groups of victims (AT, BE, IT, PT, SE642
)
- Lack of national state-wide helplines (BE, HR, CZ,
LV, LT, MT, NL, PL, PT643
)
- Lack of national state-wide 24/7 and free of charge
helplines (BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, FI, FR, EL, HU, IE,
LV, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SL644
)
- Lack of multilingual support on national women’s
helplines (BE, HR, CZ, HU, LV, LT, MT, NL, PL,
PT, SL645
).
Stakeholders’ view
NGOs: lack of availability (including geographical
- Protection centres specialised in dealing
exclusively with cases of domestic violence. Some of
these organisations have a decentralised structure
allowing them to better cover rural areas. The core
staff members are paid professionals (AT648
).
43
646
NGOs workshop (see annex 2).
647
INGO workshop (see annex 2).
649
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 43.
650
651
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 75.
652
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 76.
653
EDF, Position Paper on Violence against women and girls with disabilities in the European Union, 2021, pp.
12-13, available at: (https://www.edf-feph.org/publications/edf-position-paper-on-violence-against-women-and-
girls-with-disabilities-in-the-european-union/).
distributions) lack of funding for victim support
services646
.
INGOs: identified as the main gaps in the lack of
gendered understanding of violence by professionals
and the insufficient availability of shelters647
.
Specialized
support for
children
Lack of awareness among the professionals
concerned (social workers, legal and health
professionals, and psychologists) of the harmful
effects of witnessing domestic violence on children
and to provide access for child witnesses to
appropriate, age specific support services based on a
gendered understanding of violence against women
and pay due regard to the best interests of the child
(FR, IT649
).
Stakeholders’ view:
INGOs: highlighted the need for Member States to
invest more in services and support for child
witnesses of violence against women and domestic
violence650
.
Specialized
support for
vulnerable
groups
- Limited support available for migrant and asylum
seeking women to report violence or access services
(BE, DK, IT, MT, NL, ES, SE651
)
- Inaccessibility of police premises for women with
disabilities / mothers of children with disabilities
(BE, FR, IT, PT652
).
Stakeholders’ view
NGOs: lack of accessibility of services (including
shelters) for women and girls with disabilities
victims of gender-based violence653
.
The General Secretariat for Gender Equality (GSGE,
Ministry of Interior) developed the ‘Protocol of
Cooperation’ in 2017 to provide protection and
support for refugee women at risk of gender-based
violence. It constitutes an innovative, coordinated,
and gender-sensitive network of services for
vulnerable refugee women, who are victims of
gender-based violence and their children. It utilises
existing resources and services to help staff in public
administration, municipalities, and NGOs to
cooperate and find common solutions. The Protocol
coordinates services provided through the ‘National
Network of Structures for Preventing and Combating
Violence against Women’, comprising 40
Counselling Centres, 21 Shelters and a 24-hour SOS
44
654
European Commission, MLP in gender equality seminar - Support services for victims of violence in asylum
and migration, 2018, available at: (https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/mlp-gender-equality-seminar-support-
services-victims-violence-asylum-and-migration-february-2018-greece_en).
655
(https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/2020-12-08/33/), last visited (10/11/2021).
656
ETUC, Safe at home, safe at work: Trade union strategies to prevent, manage and eliminate work-place
harassment and violence against women, 2017, at 49.
657
GREVIO, Baseline Evaluation Report: Italy, 2019, p. 48, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-report-italy-
first-baseline-evaluation/168099724e).
658
Supra 505, at.4.4.
659
Social partners workshop (see annex 2).
660
Supra 430, pp. 42-46.
661
Supra 430, p. 46.
663
Supra Error! Bookmark not defined., para. 60.
helpline (GR654
).
Support for
victims at the
workplace
- Limited availability of special leaves for victims of
sex-based harassment, sexual harassment and
domestic violence (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK,
EE, FI, FR, DE, GR, HU, IR, LV, LT, LU, MT, NL,
PL, PT, RO, SK,SI, , ES, SE655
).
- Victims of VAW have the right to abstain from
work as long as protection by employer is not
ensured (FR656
).
- Victims of VaW are entitled to special paid leave,
allowing them to reduce their working schedule
while retaining their full pay and pension benefits
(IT657
)
Specific
measures for
cases of cyber
violence against
women
- Lack of measures tackling specifically Cyber
harassment (AT, BE, BG, HR, CY, CZ, DK, EE,
FI,DE,GR, HU, IR, IT, LV, LT, MT, NL, PL, PT,
RO, SK, SL, ES, SE658
).
Stakeholders’ view
Social partners: noted that online harassment is
increasing, also in work contexts, and taking new
forms. Certain professions are more at risk, such as
female journalists. It was considered that more action
is needed including training and encouragement to
report cyber violence, user friendly tools to report
and flag online content, a national media
regulatory659
.
5.
Coordination
Data collection -The criminal justice system does not collect sex
disaggregated data on victims/perpetrators of
violence against women (BE, DK, MT, NL660
)
- Lack of harmonisation of data from one public
body to another across the criminal justice sector
(AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, IT, MT, SE661
).
Stakeholders’ view
- Data from law-enforcement bodies and the
judiciary must be collated to reconstruct the entire
criminal proceedings chain, from the filing of the
complaint to the delivery of the judgment. A
standard form is used to record domestic violence
(PT663
).
- The Ministry of Interior compiles and publishes
monthly data on the number of cases of intimate
partner violence against women entered by law-
enforcement agencies and other public institutions
45
662
664
GREVIO, Baseline Evaluation Report: Spain, 2020, para. 58, available at: (https://rm.coe.int/grevio-s-report-
on-spain/1680a08a9f).
665
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 50.
666
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 51.
667
668
GREVIO submission targeted consultation, para. 49.
NGOs: lack of comparable and comprehensive
disaggregated data to understand the scale of the
problem and better identify victims662
.
into the Integrated Monitoring System for cases of
Gender Violence (VioGen). These cases are then
classified by the level of risk assessed by Spanish
standardised risk-assessment tools (Police Risk
Assessment (VPR) and Police Assessment of Risk
Evolution (VPER)) and disaggregated by
geographical location (ES664
).
Multi-agency
cooperation (at
national level)
- Cooperation limited to DV /or intimate partner
violence (FI, MT,ES665
)
- Lack of effective co-operation and multiagency
approach to the protection and support of victims in
the area of domestic violence (IT, DK, PT, SE666
).
Stakeholders’ view
NGOs: highlighted the need for comprehensive
long-term and multiagency coordination and
cooperation for the protection of victims667
.
- Support and protection measures for victims of
intimate partner violence to be offered in an
integrated manner and on the basis of multi-agency
co-operation among law-enforcement agencies,
specialist courts on violence against women, health
services and any entities providing legal counselling
to women. Legislation specifically requires
specialist knowledge and effective service delivery,
for example by offering these services in the same
facility (“one-stop shop”) and includes longer-term
economic empowerment measures (ES668
).