Restraining order – added value in combatting Domestic Violence

1. Restraining order – added value in combatting Domestic Violence Finnishlegislation Statistics on RestrainingOrders2000-2015 Police role and practisies Assessment on aspects of effectiveness Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

2. Finnish legislation • Act on Restraining Orders 1998 • Inside-the-Family Restraining Order 2005 • 2011 European Protection Order (Eu-wide protection) • 2011 Section 16 - Right to bring charges (441/2011) RL 21 16§ was annulled in 2011 The public prosecutor may bring charges for petty assault if the offence was directed at the offender’s spouse or former spouse, sibling or direct ascending or descending relative or a person who lives or has lived in a joint household with the offender or otherwise is or has been in a corresponding personal relationship with the offender or is close to him or her. • 2015 Individual assessment "need for protection" Protective measures in Criminal Process Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime. Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

3. Statistics on Restraining Orders 2000-2013 • Appliedaverage 3000 annually • Cancelledorlapsed (mostlylapsed) > 30% • GivenOrders 45-50% = 1400 • ReportedBreaches 800-900 (howmanynotreported?) • Sircumstances / relationshipapproximately 80% • There is little evidence that the use of Restraining Order would have decreased the number of the reported DV cases, but it provides us an useful tool for intervention • The format and the volume of disturbance usually decreases • It is a clear message to the perpetrators Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

4. Police practises • Restraining Orderes by Police • temporary for max 7 days (used quite often) • The perpetrator is in custody – need for immediate action • if pretrial detention is not an option • parties informed accordingly – valid immediately • Court will handle urgently (within 7 days) B. Filed by Police as an authority on behalf of the victim • Usually very complex situations • Victim not able or willing to act MARAC procedure • Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Comittee Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

5. Police practises • Basic duties • Immediate help in emergency situations • Criminal Investigation actions • Crime prevention • Advise and guidance Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

6. Importance of cooperation Stakeholders • Criminal process police, prosecution, judges • Social authoroties child care, health care etc. • Parallel actors NGO´s, volunteers etc. Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

7. Assessment on aspects of effectiveness • Statistics or the victim's experience • Casesvarysignificantly • 2003 Interviewsurvey in Turku Restariningorderaftere an endedrelationship Almost 90% of the handledcaseswereapproved Lapsedcases (almost 50%) Whatlies on the background? Relationship = presentor ex partner 80% Advise and support in centralrole Positiveoverallexperienceevenif the orderwasbreached Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

8. "Globally" • Domestic violence exists everywhere. It does not pend on culture, religion, social class, education, wealth etc. • If it is not reported it is hidden. Victims suffer alone and the final consequences become visible only after years • Unfortunately the innocent suffer the most – that is often the children • It is something we have to be aware of and combat together • Coopertaion and comprehencive approach an ongoing learning process for everybody Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department

9. Thank you for your attention! • Questions? Jouko Nummela Chief Inspector South-Western Finland Police Department