Mouvement pour l'Égalité entre les Femmes et les Hommes

Struggle for recognition of forced suicide

Guidance devices for frontline professionals.

Knoworient and perform psychological autopsy.

The legal bases

Belgian Law VS French Law

See as well :

Belgian Law VS French Law

In France

The Belgian legislator has provided for several provisions that can apply to cases of gender-based violence, whether committed within a marital context or not.

  • - Law of November 24, 1997: Aims to combat violence within the couple. It amended article 410, paragraph 3 of the Penal Code and provided for an aggravation of the sentence when the offenses and crimes referring to the offenses of intentional injury and intentional homicide have been committed against a spouse or a similar persone. 
  • - Law of November 28, 2000: Criminalizes mutilation of female genital organs through article 409 of the Penal Code. This reform is fundamental since it allows these practices to be recognized as constituting gender violence.. 
  • - Law of February 28, 2003: Provides that family housing is allocated to the spouse or legal cohabitant who suffers acts of physical violence from their partner.
  • -Law of May 10, 2007: Makes the fact of having committed an offense against a person because of their sex an aggravating circumstance. 
  • - Law of November 26, 2011: Recognition as an aggravating circumstance of the state of vulnerability in which the woman finds herself due to her state of pregnancy, the legislator puts in place a form of specific protection of women's rights. 
  • - Law of February 23, 2012: Authorizes persons, custodians of professional secrecy by state or by profession, to inform the King's Prosecutor also in the event of violence between partners. 
  • - Law of May 15, 2012: Provides that if an adult person at the residence represents a serious and immediate threat to the safety of one or more people who occupy the same residence, the public prosecutor may order a ban on residence at the residence. towards this person.
  • - Law of June 15, 2012: Makes non-compliance with the ban imposed on the person concerned an offense. The latter may incur a prison sentence or a fine.. 
  • - Law of January 14, 2013: Establishes a series of discriminatory motives, including that linked to the sex of the person, in aggravating circumstances of the offenses of intentional injury and homicide within the Penal Code.  

The limits of Belgian law

The majority of the laws cited above only apply in cases of physical violence. Thus, these protections and mechanisms cannot be considered in the event of moral violence and harassment. 

Magistrates have tools at their disposal to punish murders or assassinations perpetrated against women because they are women. However, certain feminist associations and authors of proposed laws advocate the need to include femicide as an independent offense within the Penal Code. It is necessary for Belgian legislation to recognize this violence as systemic, as arising from the deeply patriarchal society in which we find ourselves, in order not to make the sexist nature of the violence invisible. 

Concerning forced suicides, we find ourselves in Belgium facing an absolute legal vacuum regarding this issue. A bill was tabled by Vanessa Matz, member of the Democratic Humanist Party (cdH), in June 2021.

The author proposes to increase the penalties provided for by articles 442 bis and 442 ter of the Penal Code relating respectively to the offense of harassment and to the offense of aggravated harassment when one of the perpetrator's motives is hatred, contempt or hostility towards a person because of their own characteristics. When the harassment has led the victim to commit suicide, it will be a question of doubling the minimum of the criminal penalties provided for by these previous articles. 

In Belgium

The Belgian legislator has provided for several provisions that can apply to cases of gender-based violence, whether committed within a marital context or not. 

  • - Law of November 24, 1997: Aims to combat violence within the couple. It amended article 410, paragraph 3 of the Penal Code and provided for an aggravation of the sentence when the offenses and crimes referring to the offenses of intentional injury and intentional homicide have been committed against a spouse or a similar person. 
  • - Law of November 28, 2000: Criminalizes mutilation of female genital organs through article 409 of the Penal Code. This reform is fundamental since it allows these practices to be recognized as constituting gender violence.. 
  • - Law of February 28, 2003: Provides that family housing is allocated to the spouse or legal cohabitant who suffers acts of physical violence from their partner.
  • - Law of May 10, 2007: Makes the fact of having committed an offense against a person because of their sex an aggravating circumstance. 
  • - Law of November 26, 2011: Recognition as an aggravating circumstance of the state of vulnerability in which the woman finds herself due to her state of pregnancy, the legislator puts in place a form of specific protection of women's rights. 
  • - Law of February 23, 2012: Authorizes persons, custodians of professional secrecy by state or by profession, to inform the King's prosecutor also in the event of violence between partners. 
  • - Law of May 15, 2012: Provides that if an adult person at the residence represents a serious and immediate threat to the safety of one or more people who occupy the same residence, the public prosecutor may order a ban on residence at the residence. towards this person.
  • - Law of June 15, 2012: Makes non-compliance with the ban imposed on the person concerned an offense. The latter may incur a prison sentence or a fine. 
  • - Law of January 14, 2013: Establishes a series of discriminatory motives, including that linked to the sex of the person, in aggravating circumstances of the offenses of intentional injury and homicide within the Pena Codel.  

The limits of Belgian law

The majority of the laws cited above only apply in cases of physical violence. Thus, these protections and mechanisms cannot be considered in the event of moral violence and harassment. 

Magistrates have tools at their disposal to punish murders or assassinations perpetrated against women because they are women. However, certain feminist associations and authors of proposed laws advocate the need to include femicide as an independent offense within the Penal Code. It is necessary for Belgian legislation to recognize this violence as being systemic, as arising from the deeply patriarchal society in which we find ourselves, in order not to make the sexist nature of the violence invisible.. 

Concerning forcing suicides, We find ourselves in Belgium facing an absolute legal vacuum regarding this issue. A bill was tabled by Vanessa Matz, member of the Democratic Humanist Party (cdH), in June 2021.

Murder or assassination cannot establish guilt. Certainly, in the case of spouse suicide, physical or psychological violence has led to death, but :

 

  • – It is the person themselves who, through their act of suicide, is the cause of death;
  • – Most of the time he will lack the intention to kill. By definition, the perverted spouse uses his victim, needs them. His disappearance, in principle, does not help “his affairs”.

“Provoking another to commit suicide is punishable by three years of imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros when the provocation was followed by suicide or a suicide attempt.”

Although it can indeed be considered in some cases, this offense is too restrictive :

 

  • – It is necessary to demonstrate provocations to suicide, real incitements to suicide pronounced by the accused, directly to the spouse;
  • – There must be a consummate act (a suicide or an attempt);
  • – There must be an intention on the part of the provocateur to cause the spouse to commit suicide Effectively ;
  •  

However, as we have already mentioned previously, it will be difficult to find such intentions in someone who needs the object of their perversion.

Reading the incrimination text immediately excludes any application to spousal suicide. Indeed, article 223‐1 only criminalizes exposure to an immediate risk of death “through the manifestly deliberate violation of a particular obligation of prudence or safety imposed by law or regulation”. Only technical safety and caution obligations are considered here.

Article 221‐6 refers, for the definition of recklessness, to article 121‐3 of the Penal Code, which is one of the most complex texts there is.

 

The application of this text to the suicide of a spouse presupposes that this suicide is qualified as homicide, that is to say the death of another, which implies demonstrating a causal link between “imprudence” and this death. , which others have inflicted on themselves. The reasoning imposed by article 121-3 defining imprudence is full of traps, the first difficulty to resolve being that of the certainty of causality.

It is first necessary to demonstrate that death is caused by recklessness, even partially; the causal link must exist, in a certain way. Applied to our hypothesis, it is necessary to demonstrate that the violence and degrading remarks observed caused or at least contributed to the suicide.

If the causal link exists, a distinction must then be made between two types of causal link.

 

Article 121‐3 distinguishes between direct causality, between recklessness and death, and indirect causality.

  • – The causality is direct if the imprudence was decisive in the production of the
    damage (art. 121-3 paragraph 3).
  • – Causation is indirect if recklessness created the situation which allowed the realization of the
    damage, or if the respondent has not planned measures to avoid it (art. 121-3 paragraph 4).
  •  

Applied to our situation : 

  • – Psychological or physical violence is a direct causality if this violence is a determining factor in the suicide of the spouse;
  • – Psychological or physical violence is indirect causation if this violence allowed the suicide to occur, or if the accused did not plan measures to prevent it.
  •  

These complex texts were developed for situations of material accident type, and in no case for cases of psychological violence. Using them for spousal suicides adds, to the subtlety of the situation of intra‐family violence, legal subtleties that are unsuitable for the situation. Furthermore, qualifying induced suicide as involuntary homicide would imply being able to qualify psychological, or even physical, violence as “recklessness”, State of play on the notion of forced suicide in Europe p 8 notwithstanding their irreducible voluntary nature. This qualification must therefore be rejected.

The offense of intentional violence leading to death without intention of causing it, often called “fatal blows”, is criminalized in article 222-7 of the Penal Code; the penalties are aggravated by article 222-8 when they were committed by the spouse, common-law partner or PACS partner. To criminalize the suicide of a spouse, it is therefore preferable to start from the existing situation by amending it in the simplest way possible.

The reflection was based on positive law which included a text criminalizing the harassment of a spouse which could serve as a basis for criminalizing suicide caused by a spouse: « the act of harassing one’s spouse, one’s partner bound by a civil solidarity pact or his partner by repeated comments or behavior having the object or effect of a deterioration of his living conditions resulting in an alteration of his physical or mental health. Article 222‐33‐2‐1 of the penal code.

And a giant step has been taken, 10 years after the recognition of psychological violence in the couple: forced suicide has entered the Penal Code (article 222‐33‐2 1) in the same way as control. Parliament definitively adopted (law no. 2020‐936 of July 30, 2020) the law aimed at “protecting victims of domestic violence”. When the harassment led the victim to commit suicide or attempt suicide, the perpetrator’s sentence will be increased by 10 years’ imprisonment and a fine of 150,000 euros.

Article 222‐33‐2‐1 of the Penal Code:
Harassing one’s spouse, partner bound by a civil solidarity pact or partner through repeated comments or behavior having the purpose or effect of deteriorating their living conditions resulting in an alteration of their physical or mental health is punishable by three years’ imprisonment and a fine of €45,000 when these acts caused total incapacity for work of less than or equal to eight days or did not result in any incapacity for work and five years’ imprisonment and 75 000 € fine when they caused total incapacity for work for more than eight days or were committed while a minor was present and witnessed.

 

The same penalties are incurred when this offense is committed by a former spouse or a former partner of the victim, or a former partner linked to the latter by a civil solidarity pact. The penalties are increased to ten years of imprisonment and a fine of €150,000 when the harassment has led the victim to commit suicide or attempt suicide.

This site was funded by the European Union's Rights, Equality and Citizenship program (2014-2020). The content of this site represents solely the point of view of the author and is his sole responsibility. The European Commission accepts no responsibility for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Contact Us

info@forcedsuicidedomesticviolence.eu

Je m'abonne à la newsletter

* Champs requis