Session
5
In
Japan, on 13th of October 2001, Law for the Prevention of
Spousal Violence and the Protection of Victims was partially
enacted. The part that was enacted ahead of others was the one that
concerns Protection Order. Yukita Jyuri of the women’s law
firm Josei Kyodo in Osaka, on behalf of a female victim and as an
attorney at law, was in charge of the first case ever in Japan to
apply for the Order.
On
April 1st, 2002, full-dress enactment of the law took
place; Spousal Violence Counseling and Support Centers were set up by
prefecture. The center deals with counseling, and temporary
sheltering of DV victims. In the law, revision in 3 years is
stipulated as an additional clause, and amendment proposals are being
discussed by lawmakers at present.
The
process how this law was born was extremely unique. In Japan,
generally speaking, almost all legislation bills are brought up by
high-power career bureaucrats; however, in the case of the DV law, a
group of female Diet members joined hands, drafted and crafted and
then passed it in the Diet. It is almost unprecedented for a law to
be born like this. It was an example of how much women would be
able to achieve through cooperation with one another.
2.
The law defines DV as a “crime’ and obliges the Police
to take necessary actions
to
prevent DV. The Civil Support and Security Department (生活安全課)
of each Police Station is the designated unit to protect DV victims;
the laissez-faire attitude of the Police, that always allowed them to
leave DV as “mere matrimonial quarrels,” is gradually
improving.
Yet,
the manner of the Police or Prosecution is far too lenient to the
assailants.
The
biggest characteristic of the Japanese law is the introduction of
Protection Order and the installment of Spousal Violence Counseling
and Support Centers.
First
of all, Yukita Jyuri san proposes the ideal legislation from her
point of view, based on her professional experience.
(Slide
1, Protection Order)
Thanks
to Protection Order, the victims are now protected from stalking by
the assailants, and the victims’ physical safety is reasonably
assured. Should there be any violation of the Order, the punishments
would be either imprisonment of less than a year or a fine of less
than 1 million yen.
(Slide 2, How
long a non-approach order effective?)
The
Order is effective only for 6 month, that is too short to be
satisfactory, and many are voicing their opinions that the effective
period of the Order should be at least 1 year. In most cases of DV,
after Protection Order is granted, the victims, battered wives then
move to file for divorce. Time required to close a divorce case is
about a year; almost no divorce case closes in 6 month.
(Slide
3, Who is subject to Protection Order?)
In
addition, at present, the system of Protection Order applies only to
married couples including de facto spouses who live together. It is
not rare, however, to see divorced husbands stalk their ex-wives. We
need a framework to address such cases appropriately.
Further,
the scope of application of the law should be extended to violence
between boyfriend and girlfriend. There was a female university
student who lived in the same dome as her battering boyfriend; she
was beaten in their dorm rooms and did not have anywhere to escape
to.
Accompanied
children and relatives with the victims must also be included in the
application. In one case I dealt with, the wife, victim of DV, fled
with their child, an elementary school pupil. Soon after, she
applied for Protection Order and was granted Non-Approach Order
against her husband. Unfortunately, Non-Approach Order does not
cover any children; the husband went to the school where their child
went and tried to abduct the child. She expected the move and,
everyday, walked the child back and forth between their residence and
school; she thus met her husband trying to kidnap the child and
immediately reported to the Police. The Police, however, could not
do anything against the husband since he did not violate any part of
Protection Order.
(Slide
4-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4 and 4-5)
We
have observed some tragic cases in which the relatives or
acquaintances who cooperated with DV victims were killed by the
victims’ battering husbands who could not come close to their
wives because of Protection Order. You could probably see based on
the past cases how often it might happen.
(Slide
5, What is prohibited by Protection Order?)
I
also would like to point out the fact that the range of actions
prohibited by the law is limited to stalking. This is a problem. DV
victims must be protected from any approach regardless of the manner
of communication; nonetheless, under the present law, faxing,
e-mailing, calling are not prohibited. Thus in many cases the
assailants keep calling the victims at work, e-mailing repetitively
demanding to see their children based on parental rights, wandering
around and threatening the victims even after Protection Order is
granted.
(Slide 6,
Exclusion Order)
As
for Exclusion Order, the assailants, the battering husbands, have to
vacate the dwelling house for only 2 weeks; afterwards, they can
come back.
Because
of insufficient time, DV victims who fled from their battering
husbands use the system to move out safely or fetch their bare
necessities.
Just
imagine it: DV victims and their children have to start out a new
life in an unfamiliar and remote place. The victims often have to
abandon their long-lasted jobs and positions and their children have
to go to different schools and daycare centers. They have to leave
everything behind: home they are used to and beloved friends. On the
other hand, the battering husbands, the assailants lead their
ordinary life just as they have. Is this fair?
There
must be a reversal of concept: it must be the assailants who move
out of their dwelling houses for a long period of time.
(Slide
7, What is defined to be ‘violence’?)
The
reach of the Japanese DV law is limited to physical violence.
Protection Order likewise can be used only when physical violence is
involved. This is an enormous restriction in terms of the
protection of DV victims.
We
thus have no legal means to protect a victim who is, for example,
scorched and lectured about her mistake for several hours just
because she misplaced shampoo and rinse in the bathroom, a victim who
is threatened of violence when she does not obey to her husband
completely, a victim who is forced to have sex with her husband even
when she is not well or tired, a victim who becomes depressed after
continued psychological and sexual abuse, and a victim who hurts
herself or commit suicide since she has been cornered by her
husband’s abuse.
Such
victims of psychological violence cannot be protected by Non-Approach
Order when they finally decide to escape from their husbands.
(Slide
8, How long does it take to have the Order granted?)
By
the way, average time necessary to have Protection Order granted in
court is 11 days, it is reported. That is way too late. The
article merely reads “the court should make the judgment
without delay.” In my opinion, the timeframe must be clearly
given in the law. Given the urgency of the matter, I believe, it
should be granted, for example, in 72 hours.
(Slide
9, Flowchart)
As
one of the conditions to apply for Protection Order, DV victims must
have past records of counseling at the Police or at Spousal Violence
Counseling and Support Centers. Such complexity of the procedure is
posing additional problems to us.
In
order to be responsive to emergency cases, Protection Order system
must be simple and easy to use.
Next,
let us briefly touch upon Spousal Violence Counseling and Support
Centers.
For
the moment, the installation of the Center by prefecture is obligated
by the law. The number of counseling talks is skyrocketing; however,
the attitude of prefectural government differs from prefecture to
prefecture. In Osaka Prefecture where I work, the prefectural
government is very active in this domain and already 9 such Centers
are set up. (The number of Protection Orders granted in Osaka is the
largest among all prefectures in Japan; it is more than in Tokyo.)
On the other hand, there are some 32 prefectures where the residents
have an access to only one such Center. In order to secure an easy
access for any victim, the Center must be set up by city, town and
village.
(Slide
10, Responsibilities of Counseling and Support Centers)
The
scope of the Centers’ responsibilities are: counseling,
temporary sheltering that is generally between 2 weeks and 1 month,
and supplying information regarding shelters and Protection Order.
Present Japanese DV law does not include assistances for victims to
recover psychologically and physically, and to reestablish
themselves and achieve independence. These women, without financial
means and jobless, after a short while of temporary sheltering, are
thrown out into the society.
Social
work activities to assist DV victims to realize their long-term
independence must be included in the functions of the Centers.
The
victims’ children have to bear considerable psychological
damages; the establishment of a system to provide cares for such
children is an extremely pressing issue to be urgently addressed as
well.
