---

The International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, observed on November 25th, 2024, serves as a significant platform to raise awareness about gender-based violence. Globally, one in three women experiences physical or sexual violence, mostly by an intimate partner.

In his message for the 2024 International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated, “The epidemic of violence against women and girls shames humanity. Every day, on average, 140 women and girls are killed by someone in their own family.

Around one in three women still experience physical or sexual violence. Almost 30 years since the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action promised to prevent and eliminate violence against women and girls — it’s beyond time to deliver”.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health and human rights concern and affects millions of women worldwide, often remaining underreported and behind closed doors. IPV is particularly acute in South Asia where 35% of ever-partnered women reported experiencing IPV in their lifetime, compared to 20% in Western Europe and 21% in high-income Asia Pacific.

The reasons are complex and include a combination of socio-economic structures, patriarchal attitudes, and prevalent social norms that define gender roles. IPV remains a largely hidden and stigmatized issue, with many women suffering in silence in South Asia.

IPV in Sri Lanka is a significant and pervasive issue. An estimated 40% of women aged 15 years or older reported experiencing physical, sexual, emotional, and/or economic violence or controlling behaviors by a partner in their lifetime. Disturbingly, 21% of the population, or about 4.6 million women, are affected by IPV, given that women constitute 52% of Sri Lanka’s 23.1 million population.

These figures reflect reported cases, but IPV is significantly underreported due to fear of stigma, lack of awareness about available support services, and reluctance to involve authorities in family matters. Many women fear retaliation from their abusers or social ostracism if they speak out.

The Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA), passed in 2005, provides legal protection for victims of domestic violence in Sri Lanka, allowing them to obtain protection orders against their abusers. The PDVA defines domestic violence as “physical or emotional harm done by a spouse, ex-spouse, or cohabiting partner.” However, its effectiveness has been criticized due to issues with enforcement and limited awareness among both victims and law enforcement.

Despite high levels of educational attainment, 73.5 per cent of Sri Lankan women of working age are out of the labor force, compared to just 26.5% of men. This is mainly due to their engagement in household duties, including care work. Aggravating this situation, women on average earn 27 per cent less than men for one hour of work.

Consequently, many women economically depend on their partners, making it hard to leave abusive relationships. Especially in rural areas, they may lack financial resources or social support to escape violence. This financial vulnerability is a key barrier to addressing IPV in Sri Lanka. Empowering women economically and socially can reduce their dependency on abusive partners.

Among Sri Lankan faith-based communities such as Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus, and Christians, religious leaders are influential authorities on behavior and sources of guidance on proper conduct in relationships, including family and marriage. Therefore, they can play a crucial role in motivating men to cede power and reduce IPV.

This approach, guided more by principles of peace and social justice than by a rights agenda, cannot replace rights-based solutions to end IPV. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage and promote collaboration between faith-based and rights-based organizations to address and end violence against women and girls in Sri Lanka.

Various research shows that the ethnic dimensions of the civil war and the continuing ethnic tensions post-war have worsened the situation for Tamil and Muslim women in Sri Lanka, creating conditions that are likely to keep them entrapped in abusive relationships.

There are also strong associations between IPV and suicidal behavior in Sri Lanka, signaling the need to prioritize violence reduction both on its own and within national suicide prevention strategies.

Empowering women, educating communities, and involving men in the conversation are essential steps toward reducing IPV in Sri Lanka. NGOs like the Women’s Education and Research Centre and international organizations run awareness campaigns to educate people about IPV, its harmful effects, legal rights, and available support services.

These campaigns also engage men and boys in discussions about gender equality and the unacceptability of IPV. The goal is to change societal attitudes that contribute to IPV and make men active partners in promoting non-violent relationships.

In Sri Lanka, several support systems are in place for victims of IPV. Various community organizations and NGOs provide localized support, including shelters and legal aid. The Ministry of Women and Child Affairs operates a toll-free helpline (Dial 1938) that offers counselling and legal support to victims of violence.

Health-sector responses to support women experiencing IPV in Sri Lanka are evolving and currently include two models of integration: GBV desks with facility-level integration, and Mithuru Piyasa, a modified One-Stop Crisis Centre model with some system-wide integration. Additionally, the Ministry of Health has implemented training programs for public health midwives to improve their ability to identify and assist IPV victims.

IPV remains a critical issue in Sri Lanka, influenced by socio-cultural, economic, and legal factors. An effective coordination and information sharing mechanism among the ministries of Health, Women and Child Affairs, and Public Security, at both state and local levels is essential to provide immediate support and empower women experiencing IPV.

Traditional cultural norms in Sri Lanka often view gender roles as rigid, expecting women to be submissive and take on domestic responsibilities. These norms can contribute to the normalization of IPV and limit women’s ability to seek help.

IPV is often seen as a private matter, with victims frequently facing pressure to stay silent. By tackling the economic, political, social, cultural, and other systemic factors that enable IPV, we can create a safer and more equitable environment for all women in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lankan women deserve the fundamental right to a violence-free home life. Achieving this necessitates a unified approach to challenge and transform harmful social norms, enhance the availability and accessibility of support services, and rigorously enforce existing laws.

Only through these coordinated efforts can we create a safer and more equitable society for all women in Sri Lanka.

Shihana Mohamed, a Sri Lankan national, is a founding member and Coordinator of the United Nations Asia Network for Diversity and Inclusion (UN-ANDI) and a US Public Voices Fellow with The OpEd Project and Equality Now on Advancing the Rights of Women and Girls. She is a dedicated human rights activist and a strong advocate for gender equality and the advancement of women.

The author expresses her views in this article in an entirely unofficial, private, and personal capacity. These views do not reflect those of any organization.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

---

References cite how millions of women and girls suffer physical or sexual violence all over the world; 95% of people trafficked for sexual exploitation in Europe are female; every 10 minutes, partners and family members killed a woman intentionally in 2023; one in three women experience violence in their lifetime; 1 in 4 adolescent girls is abused by their partners.

And more. The 16 Days of Activism is an opportunity to revitalize commitments, call for accountability and actions by diverse decision-makers. 2025 will be the 30th anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action in 2025, described by UN Women as a “visionary blueprint for achieving gender equality and women’s and girls’ rights everywhere”.

Apart from the pandemic scale of the violence against women we are living through – without it being properly declared as a pandemic by governmental authorities – and the horrific data which is on the increase, there are a few pieces of this VAW puzzle that bear stressing.

Lead Integrity’s founding Partner and international activist, Dr Fulata Moyo, who is credited with efforts to institutionalize the World Council of Church’s (WCC) Thursdays in Black campaign, and her successor at leading this and executing a Programme on Just Community of Women and Men, at the WCC – Reverend Nicole Ashwood – stress this centrality of unequal power relations.

Dr Moyo is a strong advocate of mentorship, and yet she reminds us that even this process can be misunderstood as a one-way benefit relationship. Instead, she constantly argues that both mentor and mentoree learn from one another. This insistence on awareness of the mutuality of benefit – and its responsibilities – is a means of righting power imbalances not only among individuals, but in families, societies and nations.

Another Lead integrity founding Partner, Grove Harris – also serving as the UN representative of the Temple of Understanding, and is a strong eco-feminist in her own right – argues cogently that the exploitative violence leveraged on our earth, is a reflection of the exploitative violence perpetuated against women. And vice versa.

In other words, we will need to face a reality that we cannot fight the violence against women and girls, without also struggling to eliminate violence against our planet. These are not separate struggles, but integrated ones.

Lead Integrity’s Senior Advisor and Gender expert, Ms. Gehan AbuZeid expounds further to note that VAW is about endemic structural violence which permeates all domains of life, including ecology, economy, politics, and of course, society.

Inbuilt power relations which prioritize the needs, views, and priorities of one set of humans at the expense of ‘others’ means all our institutions are predisposed to violence against those deemed as more vulnerable by the dominant groups.

Violence against women happens not only because of gendered dynamics per se, but because all of power dynamics around us, are inherently based on exploitative relationships.

This leads to another couple of critical observations – ones which are becoming more taboo to speak of, especially in the kinds of times we live in today. Since the root of VAW are exploitative relationships based on unequal power dynamics, then everyone, every institution and every nation, every initiative, is responsible for ending the structural, the social and the personal forms of these interrelated violent dynamics.

In other words, ending VAW is not, and should not, be left for women alone to end it (even when they may work miracles with male and myriad other allies), nor is it only a matter of legislation – as important as that is. And while we are recognizing the principle and reality of collective responsibility, let us also have the courage to acknowledge that women can be violent towards other women too, and some men are fairly vicious against each other which is statistically related to rising VAW, and as the countless wars around us attest to.

As we consider the collective responsibilities, we need to strengthen our multilateral institutions – not only secular ones, but also those which deliberately seek to partner with different civil society organizations, including those who work to mobilize multi faith and multi stakeholder collaborations.

An example of such a multi-stakeholder and global effort is the first Women, Faith and Climate Change Network, launched at the COP 29 in Baku, Azerbaijan. The Network brings together faith-based and secular, women and male allies, working with governmental, non-governmental and intergovernmental partner institutions, elevating the influence of female faith leaders (including Indigenous ones) to maximize knowledge and impact, to right the power imbalances in each of these diverse institutions, as they work together to eliminate the violence perpetrated against our planet.

We need to ask ourselves this: by continuing to work – and work hard – within our respective silos (secular, religious, feminist, peacemaking, human rights, business, institutional, individual, national, regional, global, etc.), have we not, inadvertently, failed to address the interrelated forms of violence?

And if so, can the recognition of this pandemic of VAW, push us to work better together at a time when we face much polarization and fear – or are we destined to repeat some of the Covid pandemic’s mistakes? If we do, we risk our peaceful co-existence, and – heaven forbid – we may well risk losing the ability to exist on this planet.

Dr Azza Karam is President and CEO of Lead Integrity, and affiliate Professor at Notre Dame University’s Ansari Center for Religion and Global Engagement.

IPS UN Bureau

  Source

---

When talk of violence against women (VAW) was still taboo in polite and political circles, the UN’s stance was powerful. It put a spotlight on a pervasive pandemic of violence evident across continents and cultures that caused devastation in the lives of millions and replicated itself across generations.

The assumption was that raising public awareness and creating a political platform—a global one, no less—would prompt attention, concern, action, and genuine political will to address and eliminate this preventable form of harm and trauma.

Unfulfilled Promise of Global Initiatives

In the subsequent years, other high-profile, largely performative, initiatives followed. UN events became annual feel-good rituals, sidelining seasoned women’s rights advocates in favor of celebrity-driven initiatives.

UN Women’s campaigns, such as actress Nicole Kidman’s “Say No-UNiTE to End Violence Against Women,” featuring stern Wonder Woman-inspired imagery on reusable bottles, raised funds but did little to reach perpetrators of violence. Emma Watson’s HeforShe seemed to admonish women for excluding men—despite decades of efforts to engage men in tackling violence.

Iceland even hosted an all-male “barbershop” conference to address equality, with limited impact. Similarly, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague garnered attention with grand declarations about ending wartime rape through the UK-led Prevention of Sexual Violence Initiative (PSVI), backed by long-time activist and actress Angelina Jolie.

But his premise that sexual violence in war would be prevented if cases were documented and perpetrators faced the future prospect of criminal justice, missed fundamental facts – including that to stop war-time rape, more focus and resources should be put on preventing wars.

Meanwhile, the top-down international attention barely made a dent in addressing the problem where it resided worldwide: in communities and homes, and increasingly online—especially in times of crisis and conflict. In large part, the lack of impact of these high-level initiatives was their failure to reach the right audiences with the right messages through trusted messengers.

Relying on Hollywood actresses to inspire largely women’s audiences to unite against violence may be necessary for motivating women, but it is not sufficient. When the perpetrators of violence are overwhelmingly male, strategies, messaging, policies, and programs must also be directed at men.

Implicitly acknowledging that world leaders did not care about the social and human cost of violence against women, the World Bank took a different tack: following the money. In 2014, the Bank reported that violence against women cost countries up to 3.4% of their GDP.¹ In some countries, this was more than double their investments in education.

Implying that we should care about violence against women because it affects our bottom line is certainly a mercenary approach, but even this stark calculation failed to prompt a change in policies, practices, or prioritization of the elimination of violence against women (EVAW) as a socio-economic and security concern.

Countless diplomats, activists and bureaucrats have shaped new policies and resolutions at national and international levels. A transnational bureaucracy has grown around the agenda and EVAW has gone global with the “16 Days of Activism” campaign. Yet, 25 years later, the outlook remains grim.

We know that in Gaza women endure caesareans without anesthesia because of the Israeli blockade on food, water, electricity, and medication—but nothing is being done to prevent it. We know that in Sudan, women and girls face extreme sexual violence and rape, yet nothing is being done to prevent this violence or provide protection and care for survivors.

We saw how the COVID-19 pandemic prompted a spike of some 40% in domestic violence across the world—and yet, nothing is being done to acknowledge or deal with the issues systemically. Year after year, femicide persists. Between March 2023-2024, in the UK alone, 100 women were killed by men.

Multifaceted Solutions

Breaking the silence on violence against women through awareness-raising campaigns has certainly drawn attention to the issue. We now have increased reporting, with better data on the forms of violence and the victims and survivors. We have an increased trickle of funding for programming and, perhaps most importantly, we have clear evidence of what works. It is not surprising that the solutions are multifaceted.

Laws and policies matter. In France, as the Gisele Pelicot case reveals, the legal definition of rape matters. Similarly, changing institutional cultures matters, especially in male-dominated law enforcement. In the U.S., a 2020 study found that one in four women will experience sexual assault in their lifetime, but fewer than 5% of survivors report the assaults to law enforcement.

In the U.S., police code 20% of reported cases as “unfounded,” based on the reporting officers’ perceptions of the woman reporting the incident. The 2020 report notes that “dismissing sexual violence has become common practice amongst the police.”² Training and changing police practices is therefore essential to bring perpetrators to justice and increase women’s trust in the service.

Globally, grassroots initiatives prove that impactful change begins with local security personnel and community leaders. At the International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN), we have supported many of our partners in the Women’s Alliance for Security Leadership (WASL) in their efforts.

In Sri Lanka, the Association of War Affected Women (AWAW) successfully advocated for deploying female police officers to rural areas, trained male and female police officers on international laws such as UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and encouraged them to develop culturally effective approaches to addressing VAW.

In a Syrian refugee community in Turkey, our partner Kareemat has led interventions to stop child marriages that often take place because they are “one less mouth to feed.” Since fathers are making these decisions, raising awareness of the risks to their daughters and offering livelihood alternatives is essential.

To ensure the message resonates, Kareemat engaged trusted male religious leaders to emphasize that child marriage contradicts Islamic values and harms young girls. They also advocate for continued education and provide skills training, supporting girls to have their own livelihoods.

“We have observed a positive shift among many beneficiaries, especially men…agreeing on the importance of waiting until a girl reaches the age of eighteen before marriage,” says Kareemat Founder, Najla Sheikh. “These men also advocated for preparing young women by equipping them with a profession that enables them to support themselves…The beneficiaries expressed a desire to see girls achieve financial independence and be able to protect themselves in a safe environment like Kareemat.”³

Efforts to engage men in communities has expanded over the years. But as UK-based investigative journalist Sonia Sodha wrote in 2022,⁴ when it comes to the seriously violent, awareness and education is just not enough; reflecting on the differences between and within men is also essential.

Sodha highlights the UK-based project, Drive, which “has shed once and for all the feminist attachment to the idea that the key to reducing serious violence is teaching men to be better.” The project works with high-risk domestic abusers, assigning them case managers to provide support with jobs, mental health, and housing, while also serving as early warning conduits to involve police and social services when necessary to disrupt violence.

The results are astounding with an 82% and 88% drop in physical and sexual abuse respectively. Yet, access remains severely limited, with only 1% of serious abusers receiving such intervention.⁵

Meanwhile, a consistent factor in men’s violence is their own exposure to violence as children. Childhood abuse is a leading precursor of adult violence, yet in rich and poorer countries, programs to protect children are being slashed. As the wars in Gaza and Yemen show, children are increasingly the key targets of violent conflict.

Violence Against Women Amidst War and Displacement

With 56 wars raging and over 120 million people displaced by conflict, violence against women is on the rise, in increasingly complex forms. Ukraine is a case in point. Ukrainian men have become soldiers at the frontlines fighting Russian forces to protect their families and homeland.

But too often, on leave, they mete out their own trauma against their wives and children. It is wretchedly heartbreaking, yet universal in contexts of crisis and conflict.⁶ Simultaneously, displacement and economic hardship forces more women into sex work, trafficking, and other situations that heighten their vulnerability. Political dealmaking, such as the U.S.-Taliban agreement, has fueled multi-generational violence against women and children.

Over half a century since the Mirabals’ assassination, as a global community, we are certainly more aware of the horrors of violence against women. But it is still women who are picking up the pieces.

Our support networks are critical, says South African activist Bernedette Muthein, recalling “the street groups that intervene during domestic violence” and the women-led organizations that provide advice, support, and exit plans that “include stashing identity documents, clothes and money.”

Shelters and women-only spaces also remain essential for victims. But in Liberia, says peacebuilder Cerue Garlo “such issues are still not seen as national issues. The public expects women to handle them as ‘women’s issues’,” a sentiment that resonates around the world.

Time to Break the Cycle

On November 25, 2024, as the UN commemorates the 25th anniversary of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women, perhaps it is worth stating it explicitly: violence against women is not just a women’s issue. It is a societal, economic, and security issue. Given the vast majority of perpetrators are men, it is also very clearly a men’s issue.

At a minimum, it is time to shift the shame and fear that women have harbored for so long, onto the men who perpetuate the violence. Too often, when such calls are made, social media platforms are flooded with #NotAllMen. Of course, not all men are implicated in VAW—and this is precisely the point. It is time for the good men—those who are indignant about and abhor such violence—to stand up, speak out, and join women to take on the challenge of ending this pandemic.

It is also time to dedicate more funding and channel resources directly to the women’s organizations working to tackle the roots, symptoms, causes, and effects of such violence.

The good news is that when the most serious abusers in the UK can be stopped, and destitute Syrian fathers can be convinced to protect their daughters, we know that violence against women is not inevitable. We just need to muster up the political will, social courage, and economic resources. Let’s not wait another 25 years to make the promise of ending violence against women a reality.

¹ https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2023/08/25/tackling-gender-based-violence-development-imperative
² https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9136376/
³ Personal correspondence
⁴ https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/06/male-violence-against-women-much-more-than-toxic-masculinity
⁵ Ibid
⁶ https://gppi.net/media/Kotliuk_2024_Hidden-Front-of-Russias-War_ENG.pdf

Sanam Naraghi Anderlini, MBE, is Founder/CEO, International Civil Society Action Network (ICAN)

IPS UN Bureau

  Source