An analysis carried out by the Centre for Women’s Rights in the field of justifications of judgments passed in manslaughter cases tying in with household violence has shown that behaviour standards recognised as the foundation for sentencing are different for women and men. Comments based on discriminative beliefs concerning women are not infrequent in courtrooms or in sentence justifications. Stereotypes and prejudices concerning the respective social roles of women and men are apparent in how parties to trial address victims. Many judges bow to these stereotypes, passing blatantly moderate sentences in cases involving violence.
The project purpose was to showcase the problem of referencing gender-related stereotypes in cases of violence against women in terms of gender-assigned roles, by monitoring trials in criminal and family courts. Aid for female victims was planned as well.
The project served to increase awareness of gender-related stereotypes and their impact on the practice of law, and to provide assistance to female victims of violence.
Eighty-five female volunteers were trained to monitor 124 criminal and family cases. Direct legal and psychological aid was secured for 475 women, with another 213 offered indirect (email or telephone) support. Two women and the son of a murdered female client were represented in court. The monitoring of court trials, interviews with female victims, and selected court rulings were used to draft the “Themis Under Scrutiny” report printed in 1,500 copies. The report and selected recommendations were presented during a project summary conference.
Assistance was provided to 688 women. Eighty-five persons were trained in court trial monitoring and providing help to victims. The conference was attended by 100 persons.