Women who face domesticgun violenceare not being sufficiently protected despite legal provisions, according to a report by the Remove the Trigger campaign. In most femicide cases, the perpetrator is the woman’s intimate partner. In about 30% of these cases, there is a history of domestic violence.
Mostdomestic violencevictims killed by their partners do not hold protection orders at the time of their deaths. Where women do have protection orders and/or orders for the perpetrators’ firearms to be seized, the orders are not sufficiently enforced. There is insufficient protection for women who face domestic gun violence, according to a report by the Remove the Trigger campaign, launched in Athlone, Cape Town this week.
In most cases where women are murdered, the perpetrators are their intimate partners. In about 30% of these cases, there was a history of domestic violence, according to the report. The true figure is probably higher.
Read Full Article on Mail & Guardian
[paywall]
Guns are also responsible for about 35% of women’s deaths. Although there are legal provisions that require firearms to be removed in domestic violence cases, these are not adequately implemented. Only about 2% of women domestic violence victims killed in 2017 held protection orders.
Also, where protection orders are held, they are not properly enforced and firearms are seldom permanently removed from abusive partners. “There are a couple of reasons for this: women not knowing that they can ask for a firearm to be removed, magistrates not ordering the removal of a firearm when criminal charges are laid and police not seizing firearms [when they are ordered to],” said gender violence researcher Lisa Vetten, who authored the report, during the launch. A history of domestic violence or protection orders should be used to deny people firearm competence certificates, but aren’t, said Vetten.
Jessica Shah, speaking at the event, told how her daughter, Sasha Lee, was fatally shot at the age of 25 by her abusive former partner, Kyle Inderlall, in 2022 in KwaZulu-Natal. Inderlall was a security guard and in possession of a work-issued firearm. He also owned a rifle and another firearm, which he would frequently use to threaten her.
This was despite Shah having taken out a protection order against Inderlall, and a court order for Inderlall’s firearms to be removed. Another partner of Inderlall also had a protection order against him.
[/paywall]
