Report - Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights

“In <strong>the</strong> Cook Islands, women hold <strong>the</strong> land rights over swampy areas, which is an important
source <strong>of</strong> food, so women are seen as <strong>the</strong> providers. I have lived in <strong>the</strong> village <strong>of</strong> Pue
on <strong>the</strong> main island for twenty years. The village is split into two, with <strong>the</strong> Pukapukans
living on one side (<strong>the</strong> swampy side) and <strong>the</strong> Rarotongans living on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r side. There
has been little to no domestic violence on <strong>the</strong> Pukapukan side, while <strong>the</strong>re is a high
level <strong>of</strong> domestic violence on <strong>the</strong> Rarotongoan side. One reason for this difference may
be that women hold rights to valuable land on <strong>the</strong> Pukapukan side (i.e. swampy land).
Therefore, security levels are high among women.” (Cook Islands)
In <strong>the</strong> Pacific, if women had <strong>the</strong> option to leave a violent situation, <strong>the</strong>y would. But many are prevented
from doing so because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir need for secure and adequate housing. Many women do not want to
have to move with <strong>the</strong>ir children and belongings, and rebuild <strong>the</strong>ir lives from scratch. The question
is not, <strong>the</strong>refore, about whe<strong>the</strong>r housing could be improved to prevent violence, but ra<strong>the</strong>r, how violence
could be stopped or prevented. If women were not experiencing violence in <strong>the</strong> first place, <strong>the</strong>y would
not need to leave <strong>the</strong>ir homes.
None <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Pacific Island nations provide secure joint ownership for married women, which impacts
<strong>the</strong>ir ability to leave situations <strong>of</strong> domestic violence. The one exception is Fiji’s proposed Family Law
Bill (2005), which automatically recognises women’s non-financial contributions to <strong>the</strong> household.
The change brought about by this new legislation will initially be limited to urban areas, mainly
in freehold lease agreements. But it will still be more difficult for women living in <strong>the</strong>ir husbands’
villages to access <strong>the</strong>ir right to housing and land because <strong>the</strong>se lands are legally inalienable, and
<strong>the</strong>refore incapable <strong>of</strong> being divided. However, if husbands could be made to compensate <strong>the</strong>ir wives,
such an arrangement could represent <strong>the</strong> beginnings <strong>of</strong> a potential solution to <strong>the</strong> problem. The
proposed Family Law Bill <strong>of</strong> Fiji also gives <strong>the</strong> court <strong>the</strong> power to make an occupation order for a
victim <strong>of</strong> violence, even if her name is not on <strong>the</strong> title. These kinds <strong>of</strong> changes could enable women
facing situations <strong>of</strong> domestic violence to escape <strong>the</strong> violence, while maintaining <strong>the</strong>ir human right
to adequate housing. There has been interest among o<strong>the</strong>r Pacific Island nations in adopting similar
family laws.
The key obstacles that women in situations <strong>of</strong> domestic violence face in realising <strong>the</strong>ir human right
to adequate housing in <strong>the</strong> Pacific include:
• Religion, culture and tradition, which place conditions and restrictions on women’s roles (e.g.
<strong>the</strong> assumption that when a woman marries a man she becomes his property);
• Family and financial constraints;
• Lack <strong>of</strong> awareness among women on <strong>the</strong>ir rights;
• Community blindness – “it is not our problem”;
• The shift to nuclear families resulting in less family support available for women escaping
domestic violence;
• The failure <strong>of</strong> Tonga to ratify CEDAW (though it has ratified ICESCR and CERD);
• Donor intervention in <strong>the</strong> area <strong>of</strong> violence against women has not always been successful
because <strong>of</strong> an insufficient sensitivity to human rights and gender issues. Similarly, <strong>the</strong> United
Nations has been criticised for being reactive (and slow in responding) ra<strong>the</strong>r than proactive.
24 WOMEN’S RIGHTS TO ADEQUATE HOUSEING AND LAND