The former Director of Public Prosecutions (2009-2022), who now chairs the NHRC, comments for “l’express” the adopted Domestic Abuse Bill as a momentous legislation that clarifies domestic violence as a serious human rights violation. However, awareness-raising, professional training and a mindset shift in the population are needed to produce visible effects.

■ Is the new law enough to treat domestic abuse as a human rights violation?

Domestic abuse violates fundamental rights to equality, security, liberty, bodily integrity and human dignity, principles protected under international human rights instruments such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Convention against Torture.

The Bill broadens the definition of domestic abuse to include not only physical violence, but also sexual, emotional, psychological and economic abuse. It strengthens protection by expanding the scope of protection orders, allowing courts to remove perpetrators from the shared home, where appropriate, requiring courts to deal with applications expeditiously, and facilitating access to justice through remote hearings, proceedings in camera and reduced financial barriers to appeals.

Legislation alone, however, is not enough. While the law establishes an important legal framework, its success will ultimately depend on effective implementation, public awareness, institutional capacity and shifting societal attitudes toward domestic violence. It might take months before the victim sees any impact of the change in law.

A shift in people’s mindsets is necessary – cultural hurdles may hinder law’s implementation. As is often said, ‘where the letter of law leads, society may one day follow’.

■ How will police stations be monitored to ensure officers follow their duties?

The NHRC is not responsible for supervising the day-to-day operational duties of police officers. That responsibility lies with the relevant law-enforcement authorities. For too long, there has been a policy of ‘go home and relax’. It is time to re-create trust in the legal system so that victims feel safe coming forward. Early intervention, counselling and support services should also play an important role, with court proceedings remaining available where legal protection is required.

Our role is to promote and protect human rights through education and awareness. The Commission will educate the public about the new legislation so that victims understand their rights and the protections available to them. An informed public is better equipped to seek assistance and to hold institutions accountable.

■ What steps will the NHRC take to ensure the follow-up of protection orders?

The enforcement and monitoring of protection orders are responsibilities of the courts and relevant law-enforcement agencies. The Commission’s contribution lies in public education and advocacy. We will continue raising awareness about the purpose of protection orders, how they can be obtained, and the legal consequences of breaching them. Victims should understand that protection orders are important legal safeguards designed to prevent further harm.

■ How can the justice system protect victims pressured to withdraw their complaints?

Every victim has the right to decide whether to make or withdraw a complaint, freely and without intimidation. The justice system can help by ensuring victims get information, counselling and legal support to understand their rights and available options. Victims facing threats, coercion or intimidation should be encouraged to report those incidents immediately.

Withdrawing a complaint does not necessarily prevent authorities from continuing an investigation, where there is independent evidence or third-party witnesses. The justice system must always act in the best interests of victims while respecting due process. Where domestic abuse is linked to issues like substance dependency, rehabilitation programmes may play a valuable role in reducing repeat offending alongside appropriate legal sanctions. A magistrate can now prescribe rehabilitation.

■ Will criminalising economic abuse protect elderly citizens from financial exploitation by relatives?

Recognising economic abuse as a form of domestic abuse is an important and welcome development. Financial exploitation can have devastating consequences, particularly for older persons depending on family members for care or assistance. Whether the law achieves its protective purpose will depend on effective enforcement, public awareness and the willingness of victims and acquaintances to report abuse. Strong implementation and education will be essential in creating a meaningful deterrent.

■ Will new digital protection tools meet legal challenges to evidence in court?

Like any form of evidence, digital evidence will remain subject to the ordinary rules governing admissibility and reliability. Potential objections will be determined by the court. Their admissibility and weight have always been matters for judicial determination. Judicial guidance or practice directions may assist in promoting consistent treatment of digital evidence in domestic abuse proceedings.

■ How will the courts balance bail restrictions for abusers with their constitutional right to bail?

Mauritian courts routinely balance individual liberty with the need to protect victims; they will continue to assess each case on its merits – seriousness of allegations, victim’s safety, risk of further offending, and the accused’s rights – while preserving the presumption of innocence. Judicial discretion remains an essential safeguard in ensuring that justice is done in each case, especially in cases of false declarations or unclear motives for filing a domestic abuse case.

■ Will mandatory counselling for perpetrators reduce repeat offences compared to prison time?

It is difficult to say with certainty, as no single intervention is effective in every case. The success of counselling depends on several factors, including the offender’s willingness to change, the quality of counselling programmes, the availability of trained psychologists and counsellors, and appropriate followup. Counselling should not be viewed as an alternative to accountability. Rehabilitation and behavioural change programmes may complement the criminal justice process and contribute to reducing repeat offending.

■ Since trials can now be held in private, how will judicial transparency be ensured?

The general principle is that justice should be administered in open court. However, there are well-recognised exceptions where privacy is necessary to protect vulnerable victims and witnesses. Domestic abuse cases often involve highly personal and sensitive matters. Proceedings held in camera help preserve victims’ dignity, encourage them to come forward, and reduce the fear, shame and intimidation that can accompany public hearings in a courtroom full of strangers.

Judicial transparency is not compromised because proceedings are held in private. Courts remain subject to the rule of law, provide reasoned decisions, where appropriate, and continue to exercise their functions independently while balancing transparency with the legitimate need to protect vulnerable individuals. The private lives of victims should never become a source of public spectacle or sensational reporting; and protecting their rights to privacy and dignity is most important to ensure that justice is delivered.

■ What major institutional changes are needed to truly protect victims?

Legislation is only one part of the solution. Effective protection requires adequately resourced institutions – greater investment in counselling and psychological support services, additional probation officers and social workers, and specialised training for police officers, prosecutors, magistrates, and other frontline professionals on trauma-informed approaches to domestic abuse. The justice system would also benefit from sufficient judicial resources to ensure that applications are heard promptly and receive due attention. Timely and meaningful intervention can make a significant difference in protecting victims and preventing further abuse.

The gravest forms of sexual violence should be recognised as among the most serious violations of human rights and included in the definition of torture. International law acknowledges that, in certain circumstances, sexual violence may constitute torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, warranting the highest level of protection for victims and accountability for perpetrators. Ultimately, protecting victims requires a coordinated, whole-of-government approach involving the justice system, law enforcement, health professionals, social services, civil society and the wider community.