The Tribune

By LEANDRA ROLLE

Tribune Staff Reporter

lrolle@tribunemedia.net

SENATOR Michela Barnett-Ellis claimed the Davis administration’s Protection Against Violence Bill is less comprehensive than a previously drafted Gender-Based Violence Bill.

She did not say what had been removed from the bill.

“For reasons unexplained, this administration has shelved the Gender-Based Violence Bill and tabled a new bill to address the issue of domestic violence,” she said during her contribution to the 2023/24 budget debate yesterday.

“It’s apparent just by the size alone of the new bill versus the former Gender-Based Violence Bill, that the new bill is less comprehensive than its predecessor. It’s 42 sections long as opposed to 55 sections.

“It’s 24 pages long as opposed to the 68-page Gender Based Violence Bill. What have they removed from the former vetted and approved bill and why has it been taken out?”

The Protection Against Violence Bill was tabled last month. It seeks to establish mechanisms to protect victims and help them get justice.

Among other things, the bill would establish a Protection Against Violence Commission to support victims and liaise with police officers when victims feel they lack full cooperation from the police.

“By its actions, the government proposes to waste nearly ten years of effort and advocacy to begin a consultation process anew at a time that we are currently facing a crisis of escalating violence against women and children,” Senator Ellis said.

She noted the spike in reported rapes in New Providence this year and said, given calls for the Gender-Based Violence Bill, “the introduction of a new bill at this time does not appear to be a prudent course of action”.

“Madame president, through you,” she said, “I am asking the executive to engage stakeholders and explain why they have walked away from the existing draft legislation and explain the thoughts behind this draft so that stakeholders can have the opportunity to intelligently consider and intelligently respond to the bill.”

“It would seem that the most expeditious course would be the passing of the existing Gender-Based Violence Bill. This would allow the government to check the necessary treaty obligation boxes, and it would deliver what the NGOs and other stakeholders have been clamouring for without further delay, which would result from a new round of consultation.”

“Therefore, madame president, I am asking the executive not to discard almost ten years of work. Be humble enough to recognise that they do not have the monopoly on intelligence and wanting the best for the Bahamian people, especially the most vulnerable. I’m asking that they table and pass the existing Gender-Based Violence Bill.”