It has been 28 years since 35 people were murdered in the Port Arthur massacre, a tragedy that shocked Australia and led to the implementation of strict gun control laws. Today, those laws are widely credited with saving lives, and the voices that once lamented the loss of freedoms have largely fallen silent.
However, another national tragedy is unfolding, one that has claimed the lives of hundreds of women over the past decade. Last year alone, 68 women died at the hands of men, and this year, 25 women have already been killed. This escalation of violence has distressed the community and prompted calls for stronger measures to address the scourge of male violence.
In Victoria, which has been rocked by the alleged murders of four women in regional towns, Premier Jacinta Allan acknowledged the need for action. “This has to stop,” she said. “We need to look at our programs. We need to look at our policies. And we need to look at our legal system to understand what more we can do to protect women.”
Words alone are not enough; meaningful action is required to stem the flow of deaths. The legal levers that can be pulled to achieve this are within the purview of state premiers.
A decade ago, Victoria established Australia’s first Royal Commission into Family Violence. The commission’s 2015 report made 277 recommendations, which the state government claims to have implemented in full. However, some of the commission’s ideas were later rejected, and the ongoing funding of other initiatives remains uncertain.
The commission’s inquiries highlighted the complexity of the problem, encompassing criminal law, corrections, courts, support services, health, alcohol and drug treatment, refuges, housing, education, and policing. It found that programs in these areas at the time failed to reduce violence, prevent it through early intervention, support victims, hold perpetrators accountable, or coordinate community and government services.
The Labor government acknowledged the commission’s findings and announced a “historic investment of more than $3.86 billion” to protect women, children, and families. Yet women continue to die.
One area of concern is the lack of effective monitoring and deterrence for men who pose a potential threat to women’s lives. Police and anti-violence advocates argue that these men are not adequately tracked or monitored, and they can easily circumvent protections such as intervention orders to access and harm women.
A police submission to the royal commission proposed the establishment of a register of offenders similar to that used for convicted sex offenders. This register would be accessible to the public, giving women the “right to ask” about any potential safety risks their partners might pose.
Another suggestion is to give police the ability to issue intervention orders via mail or social media, bypassing the need to go through the courts. The royal commission recommended that the government examine this possibility, but a government panel rejected it.
These ideas should be put back on the table. As Geoffrey Watson, SC, a director at the Centre for Public Integrity, wrote this week: “Stronger action must be taken against men credibly accused of stalking, threatening, or abusing women. History tells us that the ‘protection’ supposedly afforded by an apprehended violence order is often no protection at all. We need to do more; we need to do things differently.”
After the killing of five women in nine days last year, some family violence experts called for men flagged as potential killers to be GPS-tracked and monitored online. At the very least, the tightening of bail laws for men with a history of family violence must be examined.
The Albanese government also has a role to play. A national royal commission is needed to investigate the causes of this violence and the cultural conditions that allow it to thrive.
The government must not hesitate to take bold action, as John Howard did after the Port Arthur tragedy. The lives of women depend on it.
