UXORICIDE – A National tragedy in an already fragile society

Apr 21, 2020 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,

Have we become a nation of sleepers and not our brothers’ and sisters’ keepers? Domestic violence damages the prospects for economic and social development of every country, not just the lives of the victims.
In Guyana domestic violence has been recognized as crossing all boundaries, including racial and socioeconomic lines, and also categorized as the most prevalent form of interpersonal violence. The 1993 Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and the 1994 Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention of Belem do Pará) were developed to explicitly guarantee women’s right to live free from violence. In 2003, the World Health Organization in its efforts to raise global awareness declared domestic violence as one of the world’s leading public health threats, rivalling tuberculosis and malaria as the leading cause of death and disability. Sadly, this public health threat has become a reality in politically torn, socially worn Guyana. While citizens the world over battle the pandemic, doing their utmost best to survive, women in Guyana are daily losing their lives. It is an abhorrent and discernible fact that for many women home is the least safe place. Instead it is the very same place that is being daily converted into battlegrounds and grisly crime scenes. The government has already instituted legislation and policies to deal with cases of domestic violence even to the point of providing facilities that would offer shelter to victims of abuse. There are also private organizations that provide some measure of counselling. On June 12, 2008 Priya Manickchand, the then Minister of Human Services and Social Security, launched the National Domestic Violence Policy (DVP) under the theme “Break the cycle – take control.” The launched policy sought to have the root causes of the problem (domestic violence) identified, and in addition drive home to the nation that the behaviour should be seen and treated as the violation of fundamental and collective rights. According to the Minister, the National Policy should be seen as a milestone in the long battle, and a significant achievement considering that, in the past, there has only been a lot of talk albeit that Guyana passed the Domestic Violence Bill 1996, which was acquiesced to by the then President Bharrat Jagdeo. At the crux of the Domestic Violence Policy is the transformation of attitudes that condone or normalize such violence, such as gender stereotyping and discrimination. The intent of the policy is to move away from, “just talking” and guide future intercessions as they relate to prevention and support services for victims of domestic abuse. The provision of legal aid services for victims and counselling services were also among other specific measures that were expected to fall under the acumen of the national policy.
There was also expected to be an education aspect included in the policy, in that the Ministry of Education that would be mandated to work in collaboration with the Human Services Ministry to design public awareness actions. Additionally, it was alluded to that at teachers training colleges and in the distance education programme for teachers, a standardized curriculum on domestic violence would be introduced, so that trainees would be trained and equipped to teach the prevention of domestic violence, recognizing signs of abuse in children/students, and referring such cases appropriately. There would also be the preparation of a database on domestic violence incidents, and reports with the source data coming from the hospitals and health facilities, the Guyana Police Force, the courts and the Ministry of Legal Affairs, among other bodies. In an attempt to ensure the success of the National Policy, it was learnt that there is expected to be a decentralization of responsibilities for the relevant Act. The policy would see “each of the 10 administrative regions setting up, within the regional and local government system, domestic violence committees that will be tasked with the responsibility of initiating and monitoring strategies, activities and support services. On the surface while measures such as these do some good, yet they have openly failed to stem the tide of domestic violence.
Women are being killed daily almost as if the very act in itself is a rite of passage. Now there is a call to merely find out, ‘Who dropped the ball and allowed these men to have a free for all?’
Recently 21-year-old Vanessa Benjamin, a resident of Ithaca and mother of two, was brutally stabbed by her husband, who also attacked her mother as she came to her daughter’s rescue. The suspect then unsuccessfully attempted suicide. On April 11, the battered body of 23-year-old Deveika Narinedatt, also called Vanessa was discovered in a blue plastic barrel that was submerged in a trench. She had been killed by her reputed husband, Suraj Veersammy, a 30 year old labourer. It is blatantly evident that in the face of the plethora of measures put in place over 24 years ago, the incidence of domestic violence has escalated, almost to the point of it being declared a national problem. There is a lot wrong.
A similar sentiment was articulated in the Alliance For Change (AFC) August 2006 manifesto,
“one of our goals is to restore national pride and dignity to the people of Guyana”. In pursuit of this goal we call on the government and civil society to team with us as we recognize that domestic violence has grown to be a national problem arising out of complex causes. Whilst we should implement appropriate legislation and punish offenders guilty of this crime we need to look at its causes and work in collaboration to root out these causes. As all can see we are in the 21st century, listening to the same song, still wondering what went wrong.
Domestic contentions remain a noxious problem, and the manner in which they are managed will determine its containment or future intensification as the world around us changes. There abound several factors that contribute to these upheavals than are usually mentioned, and regrettably are not usually considered in the reference pool in respect to this national problem.
The prevalence or ubiquity of domestic violence suggests that it is neither random nor isolated, nor can it be explained by abnormal characteristics of the abuser or the victim.
All out efforts have been made at governmental levels re laws, policies and facilities to counter domestic violence with some degree of satisfaction, but wherein lies the problem? Is the answer embedded in the failure of those responsible for implementation? Where can we trace the database? Have the hospitals and health facilities information shared, regarding abuse victims for whom they may have cared? Let it not be forgotten that domestic violence is also inflicted upon children, whether they are witnesses to the abusive behaviour or themselves victims of it.
So to the teachers were you also reachers? Did you know each student well, and if his/her life after school was sheer hell? Or did you wait until the parent had died to realize that you could have tried? Shame on those who saw that the male was criminal bent, and preferred instead to remain silent. Prison sentences for wife killers should be the harshest yet so that instead of prison the abuser would prefer death.
We are still left with the unanswered question, why with all the measures in place, we are not stemming the tide of domestic violence? The answer lies in the fact that the laws are punitive, not pre-emptive. Plainly put the law can only punish a domestic abuser after the fact; it cannot prevent the act from happening. Conclusively we must now think about how to effect the kind of societal change needed to eliminate domestic violence. This kind of change can only take place through renewed collaboration across sectors, government, legal, judicial, police, social, education, judicial, medical and with the sustained political will necessary to implement a long – term and coherent plan of action. If we fail to act in a corrective manner now we may be seeing more of this type of human devastation in our already frangible society.

Yvonne Sam

---

---