The fact that a protection order has been issued does not mean that the woman is actually protected.
Saliha Özkol, just like our female friend who was stabbed in the middle of a supermarket not long ago and is still fighting for her life in intensive care, became the target of violence perpetrated by a man and was killed.
Now, many aspects of the perpetrator will be discussed. His identity, background, history and personal characteristics will be debated. A host of justifications will be put forward regarding the laws, institutional shortcomings, lack of oversight and the social cohesion that has eluded the country for years. Each of these must, of course, be examined within its own context, and the responsibility of the public authorities must be thoroughly investigated.
However, amidst all this debate, the fundamental truth that the majority will once again choose to ignore will remain unchanged: the evil of patriarchy, the desire to exert power and control over women.
The obsession with controlling a woman’s life, her decisions, her relationships and her behaviour.
The mindset that views a woman not as an equal individual with her own will and rights, but as someone over whom one can exert authority.
The helplessness of this evil, which resorts to violence when it cannot establish this dominance, or when it believes it has lost it…
Violence against women is not an uncontrolled outburst of rage that arises suddenly. More often than not, it is a relationship of power and control that grows through threats, coercion, persistent stalking, and economic, or psychological abuse. Therefore, explaining the issue solely through the personal characteristics of the perpetrator renders invisible the social order that fuels violence and the system that fails to function in the face of preventable risks.
***
In the murder of Saliha Özkol, too, two harsh realities that we have encountered time and again stand before us once more.
Firstly, protection orders often remain merely on paper. The fact that a protection order has been issued does not mean that the woman is actually protected. If compliance with the order is not effectively monitored, if the risk is not regularly assessed, and if there is no swift and deterrent intervention in the event of a breach, that order cannot erect a genuine safety barrier between the woman and the perpetrator.
Protection may begin with a court order, but it cannot end there. Seamless coordination is required between the police, social services, the health system, the judiciary and other relevant institutions. The most important tool for establishing this system is the Department for Gender Equality, which, unfortunately, has not been fully operational since 2014.
The level of danger a woman faces must be determined, reassessed and monitored in line with changing circumstances, and in high-risk situations, all necessary measures—from safe accommodation to financial support—must be put in place without delay.
Secondly, legal assistance alone is not sufficient. According to the information we have received, Saliha Özkol was benefiting from state-provided legal aid. It is important that she was able to access legal support. However, a woman’s ability to break the cycle of violence does not depend solely on her being able to bring a case to court, or obtain a protection order.
A woman subjected to violence must be provided with psychological support, her safety must be planned for, she must be economically empowered, she must be housed in a safe place if necessary, and she must be able to build a new life, together with her children if she has any. These forms of support must not be provided in isolation but as part of a single, integrated system based on the woman’s needs.
Yet today, even where legal support is provided, we see that there is no sustainable mechanism in place to empower the woman psychologically and socially, or to stand by her as she strives to break the cycle of violence.
Legal aid must not end at the door of the courtroom. When a woman seeks legal aid, this application must serve as a single point of contact capable of triggering a risk assessment, psychological support, social services intervention and a safety plan. Institutions must not wait for a woman to seek help repeatedly; they must view every application as the starting point of a holistic protection process.
In short, we do not have a system that genuinely protects women from violence and empowers them. There are fragmented interventions. There are decisions on paper. There are statements made in the wake of a tragedy. Yet, there is no comprehensive mechanism that monitors, supports, empowers and keeps a woman alive from the moment danger arises.
***
We are have become weary of recounting the same things in all their detail. Women in this country do not feel safe. Violence and evil are confining our living spaces within an ever-narrowing circle with each passing day.
However, to accept this would be the greatest injustice – first to the women who have lost their lives, and then to all the women and girls living in this country.
No one deserves a government that is so helpless, fails to take preventive action, and only speaks out after each tragedy. A government that leaves women alone in the face of violence, fails to translate protection orders into effective security, and does not provide the psychological and economic support they need to break the cycle of violence is failing to fulfil its responsibilities in this area.
Issuing a protection order is not enough. That order must be enforced in a way that keeps the woman alive.
Providing legal assistance is not enough. Women must be empowered through psychological, social and economic support so that they can build a safe and independent life, free from violence.
And it is not enough to repeat the same phrases after every new femicide. What is needed is genuine political will to protect women’s right to life, to ensure that institutions work together, and to aim to prevent violence before it occurs.
Source: THE INADEQUACY OF A SYSTEM THAT FAILS TO PROTECT THE RIGHT TO LIFE
