EU member countries have agreed on a law to criminalise various forms of violence against women, including child marriage, gendered cyberviolence, female genital mutilation and non-consensual sharing of intimate images.
On Tuesday, the European Parliament and officials announced that the bloc had reached an agreement on the law that aims to protect women in the 27-nation European Union from gender-based violence.
The legislation will also criminalise cyberstalking, cyberharassment and cyber incitement to hatred or violence across the European Union.
The agreement comes almost two years after The European Commission, the EU’s executive arm, first proposed the law to mark International Women’s Day 2022.
EU lawmaker Frances Fitzgerald told reporters in Strasbourg after the announcement that the agreement sends “a clear message across the union that we take violence against women seriously.”
Posting images from her meetings in the northeastern city of France, the former Irish senator wrote on Instagram: “It takes a great team, hours of hard work and determination to get any deal over the line.”
“Thank you to all those who played their part in securing agreement on a new landmark Directive to combat Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence. This is a good day for the women and men of Europe.”
Swedish socialist MEP and fellow EU lawmaker, Evin Incir said the agreement is “a directive that the women and girls all across the European Union have asked for for over 30 years.”
Fitzgerald and Incir have been the key players in leading the process to introduce EU-wide laws to tackle violence against women. Last October, Fitzgerald expressed her dismay at the lack of urgency from governments to tackle gendered violence across Europe.
“The seriousness of the crime is still internationally not being matched by the intensity of the approaches needed, and this is a symptom of that,” she said at the time.
“A city the size of Marseilles, Amsterdam or Zagreb disappears every 10 years as 858,000 women are murdered globally. So I can’t help but think it is part of misogyny, and it’s part of a patriarchal society that we live in, that we’ve had such a job getting (crimes against women) to the top of the agenda.”
Earlier this morning, the Vice-President for Values and Transparency at the European Commission, Vera Jourova, wrote on X, “For the first time ever, we criminalise widespread forms of cyberviolence, such as non-consensual sharing of intimate images.”
“Way too many #women still suffer domestic violence or violence online in the EU.”
She also posted a video, saying “Today is a very important day because just a few minutes ago we finalised the trilogue on the violence against women directive.”
“Why we needed a legally binding rules against violence against women. Because simply, as I sometimes say, Europe is a good address for women, but not for all.”
“Many women are suffering from violence and we need to stop this horrible practise and the perpetrators have to be punished and the society also have to take a stronger stance against the violence.”
“So that’s why this directive, which is historically the first one which covers and which seeks to combat violence against women, should cause the big difference we have for the first time addressing addressed cyber violence, we have addressed also the non consensual distribution of in images, all these horrible things which see lately, together with the technological development. So now we have the directive, we will have to finalise the process and after some time when the directive will be implemented into the national laws, we will, I hope, see the difference.”
“The European women and girls need and deserve much stronger and better protection.”
Under the agreement made this week, the commission will report every five years on any potential changes to the rule that need to be made.
Defining ‘rape’ disagreement
EU member states and lawmakers have not included a common definition of rape in the law, as countries remain divided on how to define the crime.
In a statement, the parliament said member states will seek to improve awareness that non-consensual sex is considered a criminal offence.
Countries including Belgium, Greece, Italy, Spain and Sweden sought to include a definition of rape in the law, but faced knock back from countries including France, Germany and Hungary — who argued that the EU was not equip to do so and that rape lacks the cross-border dimension for it to be assessed as a crime with common penalties in the bloc.
This argument was strongly refuted by the parliament and the commission who challenged that rape could fall within the definition of “sexual exploitation of women” for which a joint set of penalties already exists.
“We could not get consent-based definition of rape into this directive. So that is a very big disappointment,” Fitzgerald said on Tuesday.
Last month, various international rights organisations criticised the countries who refused to define rape in the law.
“It is utterly unacceptable that some member states are stubbornly unresponsive to the need to combat rape across the EU,” an open letter from eleven organisations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Center for Reproductive Rights expressed.
“Consent-based definitions have proven to guarantee greater protection and access to justice for women and other victims of rape, including increased reporting and prosecution rates.”
“We urge governments to act in accordance with their international and regional human rights obligations, particularly under the Istanbul Convention, and agree on the most robust Directive possible to prevent, prosecute and redress violence against women.”
Last October, Fitzgerald said the hesitation towards introducing an EU-wide consent-based definition of rape was “not acceptable”.
“There isn’t enough political motivation at the moment from some member states to include rape,” Fitzgerald said at the time.
“You can get somebody moved from Ireland to Germany for murder, but when it comes to rape, they’re saying ‘No, let the member states deal with that’. They don’t say ‘it’s because we don’t like the definition’.”
“They don’t say ‘it’s because what are you talking about with consent?’ which is the belief of certain member states, they really find it hard to get their heads around the idea of consent.”