New rules against feminicides: five reasons why they are not the right ones for anti-violence centres

The killing of Julia Tramontanoseven months pregnant, at the hands of her partner Alessandro Impagnatiello led the government to give the green light to a new bill with the rules against feminicides and more generally for the fight against violence against women and against domestic violence.

For Antonella Veltri, president DiRe – Women on the Net against violence the provisions of the bill cannot address the problem of male violence against women. «A package presented once again in response to an emergency that rides the emotional wave of the latest feminicide. Announced as a proposal aimed at preventing violence against women, it becomes a set of measures aimed at intervening without addressing the phenomenon at its roots”.

The law

A series of rules are included in the bill to strengthen the precautionary measures including the electronic bracelet applied as a rule. There is an obligation to comply with the minimum approach distance of 500 meters from the victim and the expansion of the types of crime for which precautionary measures can be applied, including revenge porn and acid attacks.

The penalties for the crimes of beatings, personal injury, private violence, serious threats, persecution, revenge porn, trespassing and damage are increased “if the fact is committed, in the context of domestic violence, by a person who has already been admonished. .even if the offended person is different from the one for whose protection the admonition has already been adopted».

The need for is indicated in the bill speed up for the application of precautionary measures. There must be priority in dealing with trials on gender-based and domestic violence and the specialization of prosecutors.

The goal would be prevention starting from the so-called spy crimes. The tightening of the measures mainly concerns those who have already been the recipient of a warning, therefore for repeat offenders.

Article 9 then sanctions deferred arrest in flagrante delicto providing that videos and photos can also be used to trigger arrest in cases of abuse in the family or stalking.

The ministers

The Minister for the Family and Equal Opportunities Eugenia Rockella he reiterated that, in addition to the rules, a cultural change is needed and that the theme will be brought to schools with the testimonies of those who have suffered a form of violence. «We started from continuity, from what already exists: a transversal agreement is fundamental on this issue. With the Draghi government there was a proposal signed by three ministers, then the findings of the Feminicide commission, and we also started from here and from the line of the Red Code, born from the need to give a priority path to interventions against violence “.

To stay updated on the royals, celebrities, shows and all the news from the Vanity Fair world, subscribe to our newsletters.

The location of the anti-violence centers

The response of the anti-violence centers is at least skeptical. For at least five reasons explained by Antonella Veltri, president of DiRe – Women on the Net against violence:

1. It’s not prevention. «The electronic bracelet with the minimum distance of 500 meters – albeit useful – certainly cannot be counted among the prevention, given that it intervenes after the crime has already occurred. For anti-violence centres, it is prevention to intervene on the causes that give rise to violence: training is prevention, educating to respect is prevention, activating shared responsibilities is prevention”.

2. no towarning because “it exposes women even more to danger”.

3. Not even to thesummons to the police station even without the need for a denunciation by the woman…because it does not take into account the will of the woman».

4. «We are alerted and deeply concerned about the announcements recovery paths of abusers who open up an unknown future of reintegration of male perpetrators of violence on the basis of little-tested activities and treatments».

5. Prevention. «It should by now be clear that prevention in the legal sense cannot be confused with the prevention referred to in the Istanbul Convention and which the anti-violence centers operate on a daily basis: prevention as cultural change and contrast to institutional victimization, which it goes through educational paths to break down stereotypes and to promote freedom, certainly not by showing off the pain of the victimsbut supporting the interventions in the schools of the anti-violence centers”.