Academic slams domestic violence counting system

The disparity in figures for domestic violence cases in Macau recorded by different entities is confusing and a waste of resources, according to Cecilia Ho, local academic who speaks out against the crime.
The Judiciary Police (PJ) released the crime figures for last year this week, highlighting a general fall in the number of criminal investigations. Amongst them, 116 cases involved family members, equating to an 8.4% increase compared with 2019.
However, only 11 cases were classified as domestic violence, amounting to a one-third drop compared with the previous year. Meanwhile, 70 cases were categorized as physical assault. The authority does not rule out the possibility of increased time at home due to the Covid-19 pandemic as causing intensified “domestic conflicts.”
In the meantime, the Women and Children Affairs Committee has previously attributed a fall in domestic violence records to the government’s effort to provide timely support and preventative services.
However, in an interview with local online media Macau Concealers, Ho, who is also part of a group monitoring the implementation of the domestic violence law, hinted that it is a numbers game.
She explained that different government entities have differing figures on the same type of assault. For example, according to the data from the Social Welfare Bureau’s (IAS) Domestic Violence Central Counting System, 18 out of 1,380 reported cases were categorized as domestic violence cases in the first half of 2020.
The bureau is the chief authority to handle such assaults.
However, the IAS figures did not match those from the PJ.
Ho pointed out that the discrepancy is because each public entity – including the police, the IAS and the court – has its own interpretation on the definition of domestic violence.
She accused the government of trying to create an illusion that the scenario in Macau is less severe than in reality by presenting lower figures.
She added that the effectiveness of a law is measured by the achievement of the legislation’s goal, rather than in the number of prosecutions.
Pointing out a loophole in the law, she revealed that many domestic violence cases have been miscategorized as domestic conflicts, because the law-enforcement entities naturally focus on the violence reported within each incident, omitting possible previous occurrences that were not reported and the overall context of the incident.
Indeed, a criterion for domestic violence is physical, mental or sexual abuse happening between family members. While cross-referencing the Penal Code, abuse is defined as repeated harm, or, should one single instance of harm be concerned, a severe and violent incident.
The domestic violence legislation has gone through a long process of debate as certain family welfare groups wanted to categorize it as “semi-public crime” late last year, in which as lawsuit can only be initiated by the victim, meaning the public authorities cannot prosecute in such an instance.
The justification of such groups was that lawsuits would harm “domestic harmony”, while Ho and her supporters opposed this by pointing out that it is the occurrence of violence itself that harms domestic harmony.