Law monitoring and lobbying

Legislative Monitoring and Advocacy to Combat Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (1990–2024)
Since its establishment in 1990, Autonomous Women’s House Zagreb has systematically monitored and analysed the legislative and institutional framework for the protection of women survivors of violence, particularly domestic violence. Our advocacy efforts are grounded in direct work with women survivors as well as in our legal and professional expertise. At all stages of our work, we have advocated for aligning Croatian legislation with international women’s human rights standards, particularly the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (the Istanbul Convention), and for the consistent implementation of legal measures in practice.

Monitoring and Analysing Legislation from the 1990s Onward
Since the early 1990s, we have participated in public debates and the development of laws and strategic documents relevant to combating violence against women. In our early years, we actively contributed to the adoption of the first laws recognizing domestic violence as a social problem. Over time, we have established a recognizable role as an expert and critical civil society organization that continuously contributes to legislative and institutional reforms in this field.

Our lawyers and legal advisors conduct legal analyses, draft comments and proposals for amendments, and participate in online public consultations and working groups organized by relevant ministries. Our monitoring is based on a combination of legal expertise and the experiences of women using our shelter and counselling services, ensuring that legislative measures are assessed from the perspective of their real-life consequences for women.

When we began our work in 1990, domestic violence was not a criminal offense. Only misdemeanour provisions existed, which were often applied to the detriment of women who had experienced violence.
From the very beginning, we advocated for legislative changes, especially in the Criminal Code, so that domestic violence would be recognized as a serious social and criminal issue. Some of the key outcomes of our lobbying include:

• Introduction of Article 118 in the Family Act in 1998, which penalized domestic violence, although in a limited way.
• Introduction of the criminal offense of violent behaviour in the family (Art. 215a) in 2000.
• Adoption of the first Act on Protection Against Domestic Violence (APADV) in 2003, after we had drafted a proposal and participated in the Government’s working group. This law enabled the introduction of protective measures, which was a significant step forward.

Due to shortcomings in the APADV (e.g. appeals suspending enforcement of protection measures, limited protection for women outside formal partnerships), we continued lobbying. In 2009, the Misdemeanour Act introduced the possibility of issuing precautionary measures – as temporary protection until protective measures take effect.

Key Laws and Areas of Work
Over the years, we have analysed and influenced numerous laws and bylaws, including:

• Act on Protection Against Domestic Violence – continuously from 2003 to the present: including all amendments and related bylaws such as regulations on the implementation of protective measures and record-keeping;
• Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Act – with an emphasis on criminal offenses such as sexual violence, stalking, threats, and domestic violence, as well as the rights of victims in criminal proceedings;
• Family Act – in multiple instances, especially regarding parental custody removal, forced child handover, and protection of women in divorce and custody proceedings;
• Social Welfare Act – focusing on the availability and standards of shelters and other services for women survivors of violence;
• Free Legal Aid Act – aimed at ensuring access to justice for women in particularly vulnerable situations;
• Anti-Discrimination Act, Gender Equality Act, and draft laws relating to reproductive rights, including abortion legislation and conscientious objection.

We have also developed expert opinions and proposals for changes to various protocols – including the Protocol on Domestic Violence Intervention, the Protocol on Sexual Violence Intervention, and the Protocol on Hate Crimes – and participated in their revisions.

Advocacy for the Ratification and Implementation of the Istanbul Convention
Autonomous Women’s House Zagreb was among the key organizations actively advocating from the outset for the ratification of the Istanbul Convention in Croatia. We participated in:

• drafting and publishing expert analyses of Croatian legislation’s alignment with the Convention;
• public awareness and political advocacy campaigns highlighting the importance of ratification;
• drafting proposals for legislative amendments necessary for implementation;
• working groups of relevant ministries during the ratification process.

Following ratification in 2018, we continued monitoring implementation in practice, preparing reports and analyses for national and international mechanisms, including GREVIO. We placed special emphasis on:

• shortcomings in the implementation of protective measures and criminal procedures;
• accessibility and standards of services for women (shelters, helplines, legal aid);
• the absence of systematic prevention and education on gender-based violence;
• political and institutional attempts to undermine the aims of the Convention.

Our work was crucial in maintaining a focus on protecting women during intense ideological debates surrounding so-called “gender ideology” and the Convention’s content.

Participation in National and International Mechanisms
Since the 1990s, we have participated in numerous advisory bodies and working groups of:

• the Ministry of Justice;
• the Ministry of Labour, Pension System, Family and Social Policy;
• the City of Zagreb (particularly in developing local policies to combat domestic violence);
• national gender equality bodies.

At the international level, we have collaborated with UN committees (CEDAW, CAT, CCPR), the Council of Europe, the European Network of Women’s Shelters (WAVE), the European Women’s Lobby (EWL), and many other bodies through reporting and advocacy for the implementation of international obligations.

Monitoring Implementation and Recommending Improvements
Based on our daily work with women survivors of violence, we have prepared annual reports and reform proposals, which were submitted to relevant institutions and published for advocacy purposes.
Through this ongoing work, we have identified key issues in law implementation, including:

• inconsistent and uneven practices of courts and social welfare centres;
• inefficiency of protective measures and slow institutional responses;
• insufficient access to legal and psychological assistance;
• lack of specialized training for professionals working with women survivors of violence;
• institutional resistance and failure to recognize the gendered nature of violence.

Based on these findings, we regularly develop recommendations for legislative and institutional reform.

Advocacy for Securing Funding for the Work of Autonomous Women’s Shelters

Since its very foundation, the Autonomous Women’s House Zagreb has continuously advocated for the establishment of permanent, secure, and sufficient funding for the operation of its shelter and counselling centre, as well as for all other autonomous women’s shelters in Croatia. This advocacy work runs parallel to our daily support for women survivors of violence, and is grounded in the understanding that without stable institutional support and financial sustainability, long-term protection and assistance for women is not possible.

During the first ten years of our work, we operated in a squatted space owned by the City of Zagreb, constantly under the threat of eviction. In this context, lobbying for adequate premises and institutional support was one of our first political initiatives. At the same time, we advocated for a systematic funding model for shelters and counselling centres, proposing that 30% of the annual budget be secured by the state, 30% by the city, 30% by the county, and the remaining 10% raised by the organisation itself.

We began negotiations with the Government of the Republic of Croatia using this model—known as 30-30-30-10—as early as 1994, continuing the dialogue through subsequent administrations in 2001, 2002, 2004, and again in 2012. Despite occasional progress, funding remained largely irregular and insufficient. In 2004, we began to receive somewhat larger sums from the then Ministry of Family, Veterans’ Affairs, and Intergenerational Solidarity, but even then, systematic funding was not secured.

To further substantiate our demands, in 2005 we developed a proposal for criteria and standards for shelter work, as well as amendments to the Law on Associations, which would have enabled direct funding of shelters from the state budget. Although the government at the time initially supported the proposal, it was never implemented.

In December 2008, we launched a public campaign titled SAY YES, aimed at securing permanent funding for autonomous women’s shelters and counselling centres. The campaign was successful, and the 30-30-30-10 model was applied for the first and only time in 2009. However, by 2010, the funding was again reduced, and a grant-based funding system was introduced—representing a step backwards, especially due to the introduction of inadequate criteria for shelter work.

During 2011 and 2012, in collaboration with other autonomous shelters, we initiated a new campaign advocating for the adoption of a special law that would secure permanent funding for shelters and counselling centres. Our legal representative drafted a proposed Law on Financing Autonomous Women’s Shelters, which was supported by the parliamentary opposition, but not by the ruling party. When the new government came to power in 2012, a working group was established to develop the draft law—but it was disbanded after only two meetings.

The result of nearly two decades of persistent advocacy is that today, funding for the work of autonomous shelters can at least be secured through three-year calls for proposals, which is an improvement over the previous system of annual funding. However, this model still does not ensure stability—calls for proposals do not obligate cities and counties to co-finance services, which often leaves organisations without a key part of the necessary funding.

It is therefore still essential to actively work towards securing systematic, regular, and sufficient funding for autonomous women’s shelters and counselling centres, as these are fundamental services of protection and support for women survivors of violence.