Psychological violence: what are we talking about?

“Behaviors that can compromise the moral health of women”. It is in these terms that, on September 19th, on the set of “C à vous” (France 5), EELV MP Sandrine Rousseau described the psychological violence that her colleague Julien Bayou is said to have caused. Violence “not criminally reprehensible”, committed against the former partner.

But what are we really talking about when we talk about psychological violence? What do they cover? Since when are they criminally reprehensible? How are they punished? What about the cells, commissions and internal committees of political parties that deal with these matters? Are these surveys legal? Decryption, with Anne Bouillon, a lawyer specializing in domestic violence.

To miss. What are we talking about when we talk about psychological violence?

Anne Bouillon. In concrete terms, psychological violence is a mechanism put in place to take power, take over or dominate a person against whom such violence is perpetrated, and which cause him damage that must be characterized. As in all criminal offenses, characterizing this violence implies an imperative, that of demonstrating its intentionality. That is to say, to prove that the perpetrator of the violence intended to harm the person concerned through it.

Psychological violence is not “just” unpleasant or rude behavior […] but many behaviors that could be found morally reprehensible, with the intent to harm.

Anne Bouillon

The penal code does not distinguish between different forms of violence. Talk about interference, the consequences it can have and who the perpetrator is. It is therefore up to case law to establish a framework and define what this violence covers. In this case, the Court of Cassation, which makes jurisprudence, states that verbal violence, such as insults, or even psychological violence can be violence in the same way as physical violence. But it also says that they are defined by the existence of repeated acts that aim to damage the physical integrity of the person they are intended for. And this is where the intentional character lies.

How is this violence punished?

Similarly to physical violence, depending on the consequences in particular. Has this violence led to days of ITT (total inability to work)? They are, for example, more severely punished when they exceed 8 days of ITT. But also when they are committed by a spouse rather than a person.

Spouse violence is generally punished with five years’ imprisonment and a fine of 70,000 euros.

Anne Bouillon

Finally, psychological violence is considered to be the other forms of violence. But it is still necessary to characterize them. It is therefore necessary to demonstrate the intentional element. For this we collect writings, testimonies, we observe a state of health that worsens in relation to this violence … Some people can be prosecuted and sentenced only for psychological violence.

Internal cells, committees or commissions are sometimes set up to prevent, manage and process reports of violence, in particular psychological violence, within political parties. Could it be internal damage to the impartiality required for such investigations?

We must not forget the decades of silence and silence imposed on women victims of violence. The latter had only two options: shut up, or draw the consequences and leave, leave a company or a political party. The repercussions were even greater when those who dared to report did so by accusing a superior.

Anne Bouillon

Most of the time, it backfired. Today there is a real willingness to release this discourse, especially in a legal way. For this reason, companies and political parties have set up adequate structures to address these issues, which ultimately affect employee safety.

This desire to move towards free speech and better support for abused employees is obviously positive. There is to be congratulated. Then there is the question of the method: in my opinion we need to act with many methodological devices. That meansthe same body cannot be expected to initiate the investigation and investigate. These functions must be assigned to different people. Because the principle of equality of arms and cross-examination must be respected.

Returning more specifically to current events, I think that these investigations have everything to gain from being conducted in a discreet, even confidential manner. Because the criticism immediately arises from the fact that the disclosure of information is made for purposes other than the simple fact of having to inform … Women’s voices must be heard, must be investigated, an answer must be given. .

Do these commissions have a legal value, beyond their political value?

They have the legal value attributed to them. First, there is a disciplinary right. There are, for example, in the profession that concerns me, disciplinary decisions that are taken by the council of the bar and that have legal value, which I can also challenge. Therefore, these decisions are not arbitrary, they are enforceable. In the world of work, there can be penalties ranging from dismissal to dismissal. These decisions obey a justice other than criminal justice. It is not only criminal litigation, civil litigation, on these issues, is extremely important. Such decisions are legal and challengeable before civil or industrial courts, in the case of labor law.

Cover photo: Unsplash / Nadine Shaabana