Responsibility for Germany in the area of gender-based violence?

At the outset, anyone looking for major feminist goals in the newly concluded coalition agreement between the CDU, CSU and SPD will not find them. Nevertheless, we welcome the fact that the implementation of the Istanbul Convention and the EU Directive on Protection against Violence is mentioned as part of the strategy for the protection against violence and that a national action plan for the expansion of protection against violence is to be developed. However, a commitment to consistent implementation, which is missing from the coalition agreement, should be urged here. In addition, the implementation of the Violence Assistance Act (dt.: Gewalthilfegesetz) should be closely monitored, but it must be extended to all those affected by gender-based intimate partner violence and their legal entitlement must be made non-discriminatory. This means that the residence obligation and residence requirements for refugees must be abolished in order for them to be able to make use of their legal entitlement under the Violence Assistance Act.

Protecting against violence does not just mean mentioning buzzwords such as prevention, education and work with perpetrators, but also listing concrete measures, such as ensuring barrier-free and free shelters and advice centers, and anchoring these measures in the long term so that protection against violence cannot be called into question depending on changes in government. The expansion of civil society organizations and coordination offices is essential for this.

The far-reaching stricter penalties for stalking mentioned in the treaty, the mandatory request for consent from users of tracking apps and the inclusion of GPS trackers in the stalking paragraph must continue to be monitored. It remains unclear what type of trackers and tracking apps are involved.

It also remains to be seen what the creation of a uniform federal legal basis in the Protection against Violence Act for the court order of electronic ankle bracelets based on the so-called Spanish model, as mentioned in the coalition agreement, will look like. The same applies to the mandatory anti-violence training for perpetrators of violence mentioned in the same paragraph. At best, a clearer distinction should be made here between anti-violence training and long-term gender-sensitive work with perpetrators. The sensitization of the judiciary through mandatory further training, which has been called for by many sides, is completely omitted.

The consideration of domestic violence in custody and contact proceedings offers a positive outlook, in that it is to be taken into account at the expense of the person perpetrating the violence. It remains to be seen whether the coalition agreement can serve as a guideline for effectively combating violence.