COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document PROPOSAL FOR A DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on combating violence against women and domestic violence
Date: 2022-03-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: access to the courts, domestic violence, fight against crime, gender equality, help for victims, human rights, sexual discrimination, sexual violence, woman, women's rights

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 8.3.2022  SWD(2022) 63 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document PROPOSAL FOR A DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on combating violence against women and domestic violence {COM(2022) 105 final} - {SEC(2022) 150 final} - {SWD(2022) 60 final} - {SWD(2022) 61 final} - {SWD(2022) 62 final}  
 
 
Executive summary sheet 

Impact  assessment  for  a  proposal  for  a  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on 
combating violence against women and domestic violence 

A. Need for action 

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?  

Violence against women and domestic violence (VAW/DV) is widespread across the EU. In 2014, 1 in 3 
women  in  the  EU  reported  a  form  of  physical  and/or  sexual  violence.  Administrative  data  from  2019 
estimates the EU prevalence at 21.2%.  In addition to offline forms of VAW/DV, cyber violence against 
women and cyber violence between intimate partners is rising; in 2020 it was estimated to affect 52% of 
young women globally.  

Gender-based  violence  may  affect  both  women  and  men,  but  women  are  disproportionately  affected. 
Domestic violence also affects other family members (e.g. spouses, children and older family members).. 
VAW/DV affects millions of people in the EU, across all Member States.  

The drivers of VAW/DV are harmful social norms and stereotypes that  bring about  gender inequality; a 
failure  to  recognise  the  specificities  of  VAW/DV  crimes;  and  ineffective  countermeasures  (legal 
fragmentation, legal uncertainties and ineffective enforcement).  

Gaps  in  prevention,  protection,  victim  support,  access  to  justice,  and  policy  coordination  have  been 
identified  at  both  EU  and  national  level,  both  in  Member  States  that  have  implemented  the  Istanbul 
Convention  on  violence  against  women  and  domestic  violence  and  those  that  have  not.  Relevant  EU 
standards are spread across several instruments and have not led to effective monitoring and enforcement 
for  this  group  of  victims.  While  the  Istanbul  Convention  has  triggered  action  at  national  level,  the 
monitoring of the Convention’s implementation shows that gaps persist.  

Given the way in which the situation has evolved in the past decades, the number of victims is unlikely to 
significantly decrease without stronger, coordinated action in matters of prevention, protection, access to 
justice, victim support, and policy coordination. 

What should be achieved? 

The  initiative  aims  to  prevent  and  combat  violence  against  women  and  domestic  violence.  More 
specifically,  it  aims  to  ensure  effective  prevention  of  such  violence,  protection  from  violence,  access  to 
justice, victim support, and strengthened coordination. It also aims to ensure that sexual harassment and 
cyber violence are addressed effectively. 

What is the value added of action at EU level (subsidiarity)?  

2 

 
 
 
The EU-wide prevalence of violence against women and domestic violence and the harm these forms of 
violence cause to individuals and societies create a special need for joint action. VAW/DV may include a 
physical cross-border aspect if people are moving around; it has no borders in the online world. The policy 
objectives can only be met if minimum standards apply equally to all cases of VAW/DV. Member States 
have addressed VAW/DV in legislation and policies, but this has not led to a decrease in prevalence. To 
ensure  equal  treatment  of  victims,  the  initiative  would  bring  about  upward  convergence  by  setting 
minimum  standards  on  the  rights  of  victims  of  VAW/DV.  These  standards  would  aim  to  prevent  and 
combat  this  kind  of  violence  before,  during  or  after  criminal  proceedings.  The  initiative  would  also 
introduce  definitions  of  and  penalties  on  conduct  where  gaps  in  criminalisation  exist.  EU  action  will 
ensure that the fundamental rights of half of the EU population are protected across the EU. 

B. Solutions 

What are the various options to achieve the objectives? Is there a preferred option or not?  

The Commission has considered the following options: 

0)  the baseline, with non-legislative measures; 
1)  moderate  legislative  measures  to  prevent  VAW/DV,  protect  from  violence,  provide  access  to 

justice, provide victim support, and strengthen coordination; and 

2)  more comprehensive legislative action addressing the above matters with additional rules on sexual 
harassment and cyber violence against women and cyber violence between intimate partners.  

Option 2 has been subdivided into more proportionate measures (2A) and measures that are ideal (in terms 
of  criminalisation,  sexual  harassment  and  protection)  but  less  efficient  (2B).  Sub-option  2A  is  the 
preferred option, both qualitatively and in terms of costs and benefits. 

What are various stakeholders' views? Who supports which option?  

The  Commission  conducted  comprehensive  stakeholder  consultations  jointly  for  the  impact  assessment 
and the fitness check. The open public consultation attracted over 700 responses. Consistently with earlier 
surveys, the large majority of respondents called for further EU measures on VAW/DV. The Commission 
consulted the Member States in writing and at a workshop. The Member States expressed their openness 
on EU action and found the envisaged measures relevant. Targeted consultations of non-governmental and 
international organisations showed large support for the most ambitious measures (i.e. sub-options 2A and 
2B). Trade unions and employers supported the objective of combating sexual harassment and welcomed 
additional  measures.  Employers,  however,  were  wary  of  obligations  that  would  be  imposed  on  them. 
Trade unions and employers insisted on the role of social partners.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)? 

The  assessment  of  the  preferred  option  reveals  positive  economic  impacts.  The  reduced  prevalence  of 
VAW/DV,  in  particular,  could  have economic benefits  of  around  EUR 53.1 billion,  potentially reaching 
around  EUR 82.7  billion  in  the  long  term.  The  greatest  potential  for  economic  benefits  is  due  to  the 
reduction  of  the  cost  of  physical  and  emotional  harm  to  victims  (an  estimated  reduction  of  EUR 32.2 
billion to EUR 64.5 billion). Social impacts would affect various stakeholders, namely victims, witnesses, 
offenders,  companies,  national  authorities  and  the  wider  society.  The  preferred  option  would  improve 
victims’  health,  safety  and  quality  of  life  (especially  due  to  the  measures  on  protection  and  support).  It 
would  also  increase  victims  and  witnesses’  awareness  of  and  access  to  information  on  the  available 

3 

 
 
protection and support services. Measures on intervention programmes for offenders are expected to have 
a  positive  impact  on  offenders’  attitudes  and  behaviour.  For  employers,  awareness  and  better 
understanding  of  and  support  for  workers  who  are  victims  of  harassment  at  work  would  enable  the 
development  of  a  safe  work  environment.  This  would  also  have  a  positive  impact  on  productivity. 
National  authorities  would  benefit  from  measures  addressing  legal  fragmentation  and  uncertainties. 
Increased  recognition  of  harmful  gender  stereotypes,  norms,  and  abusive  behaviour  among  the  general 
public  would  have  a  positive  impact  on  society  as  a  whole.  Finally  but  importantly,  the  impacts  of  the 
preferred option on fundamental rights are considerable. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)? 

The total compliance costs of the preferred option range between EUR 5 billion and EUR 6.6 billion. Most 
of the compliance costs would fall on Member States with a few exceptions concerning sexual harassment, 
which could give rise to compliance costs for employers. The compliance costs stem from measures in the 
problem  areas  of  prevention,  protection,  access  to  justice,  victim  support  and  coordination.  No  negative 
impacts have been noted. 

What are the impacts on small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and competitiveness?  

Most  costs  would  fall  on  Member  States.  Potential  costs  to  employers  are  EUR 1.9  billion  due  to  the 
mandatory participation of managers in training on sexual harassment at work and the effects of domestic 
violence on the workplace. Costs would be limited to the participation of managers in a two-hour online 
training, and thus, would not pose significant costs to SMEs. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?  

Most  of  the  compliance  costs,  which  range  between  EUR 5  billion  and  EUR 6.6  billion  for  the  EU-27, 
would fall on Member States. The impact on national budgets and administrations is expected to remain 
limited, and be mitigated by the benefits of the preferred option. 

Will there be other significant impacts?  

The  preferred  option  simplifies  the  EU  framework  by  concentrating  the  VAW/DV  measures  in  one 
legislative instrument. This instrument better ensures that measures are more equally available at regional 
and local level and victims are therefore more equally protected. 

Proportionality?  

The  proportionality  principle  is  fully  respected,  as  the  measures  have  been  designed  on  the  basis  of  a 
careful gap analysis carried out at both EU and national level. The measures: 

  do not exceed what is necessary by avoiding overlap with national criminalisation rules; 
  abstain from requiring public authorities to take measures that are overly complex to operate; and 
  avoid disproportionate costs for the Member States and employers. 

In  addition,  the  measures  of  the  preferred  option  can  be  considered  necessary  to  achieve  the  objectives 
effectively and in a manner that strengthens the implementation of fundamental rights. 

D. Follow-up 

4 

 
 
When will the policy be reviewed?  

The  need  for  a  policy  review  will  be  assessed  after  the  first  round  of  Member  State  reporting  on  the 
Directive’s  implementation.  This  reporting  is  expected  to  take  place  under  a  reporting  obligation,  e.g. 
5 years after the entry into force of the Directive. Reporting would be carried out at regular intervals in the 
form  of  a  questionnaire  to  the  Member  States.  In  addition  to  information  provided  under  the  reporting 
obligation,  the  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the  initiative  will  primarily  be  based  on  the  current 
harmonised  indicators,  and  supplemented  by  additional  harmonisation  measures  on  data  collection.  The 
details will be described in a monitoring and enforcement plan that the Commission will draw up. 

5