A Great Leap Forward: Expanding The Definition Of Family Violence In Singapore

The way we understand family violence has evolved significantly over the years. Once framed almost exclusively around acts of physical harm, the law now recognises that abuse can take many forms. The recent amendments to Singapore's Women's Charter reflect this shift, marking a pivotal step in acknowledging the complex realities of abuse within families and intimate relationships.

On 2 January 2025, the amendments to the Women's Charter 1961 ("the Charter") pursuant to the Women's Charter (Family Violence and Other Matters) (Amendment) Bill ("the Bill") came into effect. Arguably, the most significant of those changes was the enactment of Section 58B of the Charter, which provides a new definition of 'family violence' for the purposes of bringing a Personal Protection Order ("PPO") application.

Previously, 'family violence' was confined to conduct which caused hurt (which relates to bodily pain, disease or infirmity), fear of hurt, wrongful confinement or restraint, or harassment. This definition had remained untouched since the provisions for the protection of the family were first introduced to the Charter in May 1997.

The expanded definition now provides that in addition to such physical abuse / threat of physical abuse and continual harassment, 'family violence' now also includes sexual abuse, and less tangible abuse such as emotional or psychological abuse. In addition, the conduct in question need not be directed at the family member in question; so long as it is capable of being perceived by the family member, those actions will constitute family violence.

Victims of family violence will also now find it easier to obtain an Expedited Order made pursuant to a PPO application. Section 61(2) of the Charter provides that the Court may grant an Expedited Order where it is satisfied that there is a danger of family violence being committed while the PPO application is pending. Previously, the Court had to be satisfied that this danger was imminent.

As these amendments were introduced early this year, there is a dearth of case law as to the Court's interpretation of the new definition and the kind of conduct which would constitute sexual abuse and emotional or psychological abuse. In this article, we shall consider the broader implications of the expanded definition of family violence, and how it has transformed the position of domestic abuse victims in Singapore.

The recognition of emotional or psychological abuse

Under Section 58B(4) of the Charter, 'emotional and psychological abuse' means conduct or behaviour which "torments, intimidates, harasses or distresses a person, or may reasonably be expected to cause mental harm to a person". In other jurisdictions, it can also be regarded as "coercive control".

At the second reading of the Bill on 4 July 2023, Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis for Sengkang GRC noted that the nature of family violence has evolved with the times, particularly with the use of technology.

For example, instant messaging has revolutionised the manner in which a person may be subjected to emotional and psychological abuse. Abusive messages or voice notes can be sent quickly to inundate a victim with upsetting content. Unlike a phone call, instant messages do not require the recipient to accept receiving the same. Mobile applications also enable perpetrators to survey the victim's online activity, to regulate the victim's contact with the outside world and even track their location. Today's landscape is very different to that in 1997 where abuse conducted otherwise than in person would typically only be possible through sending letters, faxes or making phone calls.

Recognising the harm that may be caused to a person which is not physical or visible is indeed a great and necessary leap forward. This amendment also aligns with our contemporary understanding of the importance of mental health. In this same vein, it is noteworthy that the legislature repealed Section 309 of the Penal Code, thus decriminalising suicide in Singapore since 1 January 2020.

Notably, section 58B(4) of the Charter countenances a relatively new sphere of 'family violence' – financial abuse. Illustration (c) of section 58B gives the example that "X threatens to stop giving Y a monthly allowance if Y contacts Y's family or friends or seeks help. Y suffers mental harm as a result. X has committed emotional or psychological abuse against Y".

This is another welcome expansion of the definition of 'family violence'. At the second reading of the Bill,¹ Ms. Sun Xueling, then Minister of State for Social and Family Development, explained that stakeholders had shared situations in which perpetrators had threatened to withhold monthly allowance from their spouses. Such conduct constitutes controlling behaviour, and in some jurisdictions, this falls within the definition of "coercive control".

Ms. Sun went on to explain that the Ministry of Social and Family Development had considered whether to include financial abuse in the definition of family violence. However, the Ministry's view was that 'financial abuse' remains a complex issue which is subject to different interpretations which the Ministry determined required further study.

Therefore, instead of creating a standalone ground of financial abuse within the definition of family violence, the emotional and psychological impact of a perpetrator withholding financial support or limiting the victim's access to funds falls within the ambit of emotional or psychological abuse. This would enable an applicant to mount a PPO application.

Separately, the authors highlight that a victim of financial abuse should also consider bringing an application for maintenance. This is because while the PPO will censure the abusive behaviour and prohibit the perpetrator from persisting with such conduct, a maintenance order is still necessary in order to ensure that the victim is adequately provided for.

The inclusion of sexual abuse within the definition of family violence

The recognition of sexual abuse within the definition of family violence follows the repeal of marital rape immunity in 2020. On 1 January 2020, the Criminal Law Reform Act 2019 came into effect. Section 375(4) of the Penal Code was amended to repeal what was commonly known as "marital rape immunity".

Prior to the Criminal Law Reform Act 2019, that section provided that men were not guilty of rape against their wives unless it fell within certain exceptional cases, including inter alia parties living separate and apart, and divorce or PPO proceedings having been commenced. With the repeal of the marital rape immunity, it was necessary to include the recognition of sexual abuse within the definition of family violence.

Sexual abuse is defined in Section 58B(3) of the Charter as "conduct or behaviour that coerces, or attempts to coerce, a person to engage in sexual activity". This is a much lower bar than that of rape, which requires that the victim did not consent. While there is no case law as to the Court's interpretation of 'coercion' in this context, a simple reading suggests that while the victim may have ultimately consented to sexual intimacy, they did so under pressure or threat.

Sadly, it is not unusual for a party to an unhappy marriage in which they are subjected to emotional or psychological abuse to continue being intimate with their spouse. There are a multitude of reasons for this, including the fear of being subject to verbal or physical abuse and harassment if they do not consent and/or a desire to appease their spouse. In such a case, it is unlikely that the victim would be able to substantiate an allegation of rape because they had ultimately consented. This new addition to the definition of family violence provides for a more nuanced understanding of the intricacies of intimacy between spouses whose relationship is strained.

Moreover, while the decision to press criminal charges for marital rape may seem an obvious choice to a bystander, the arena of family law is delicate. Relationships are complex and there will be various competing concerns at the forefront of a victim's mind. In many instances, if the husband is the family's sole breadwinner, wives who are subjected to sexual abuse may not always be willing to come forward and press criminal charges for marital rape. If the husband is found guilty of rape and faces imprisonment for a term of up to 20 years, that would have a profound impact on the family's future. Doing so would have a serious bearing on the family's financial means, as the husband will be unable to earn a living while he is incarcerated and may face challenges returning to the workforce with a criminal record. As with many victims of abuse, the wife may also carry the guilt of having taken a course of action which impacts the children's emotional wellbeing and their relationship with their father.

The expanded definition provides an alternate avenue for a victim of coercive sexual abuse to hold their spouse to account, without taking such drastic action. Obtaining a PPO instead of pursuing criminal charges will enable the family unit to stay intact, albeit within the framework of co-parenting from two separate households, and with safeguards in place to protect the wife from further instances of family violence. This amendment also serves to reemphasize our societal expectations of a marital relationship, and the foundation of mutual trust and respect which should exist between spouses.

Finally, it is worth noting that in a criminal case, the Court must be satisfied that the perpetrator is guilty of the crime in question beyond reasonable doubt. Whereas, in order to be granted a PPO, the victim need only satisfy the Court that the order should be granted on a balance of probabilities. A PPO may even be granted by consent if parties agree. The lower threshold may be useful in cases involving marital couples where the sexual act that takes place was a result of coercive behaviour.

For the avoidance of doubt, the authors are not expressing the view that wives shouldelect one course over the other. The view is that the expanded definition provides a different solution that a victim may consider. Criminal prosecution is undertaken by the state at the discretion of the Public Prosecutor depending on the evidence in the matter, whereas PPO applications are made by complainants and ordered by the Family Court upon the complainant proving his/her case.

The road forward for family protection

The expanded definition of family violence is a welcome change in the family law landscape. It gives voice to a contemporary understanding of the nuances of abuse, which is far more wide ranging than physical violence and continual harassment.

This is a welcome and necessary step forward in our society, especially since coercive and controlling behaviour are oftentimes more insidious and harder to identify in family units. The new definition in section 58B of the Charter will enable victims to hold perpetrators to account for their actions. While there is a possibility that it could lead to more litigation, we are of the view that ultimately it is of upmost importance that these issues are given weight and that victims are not left feeling silenced or overlooked.

As the law continues to evolve to better protect vulnerable individuals, those navigating difficult family circumstances will benefit from understanding how these changes apply to their specific situation. Our team of family law experts remains ready to guide you with care and discretion.

Footnote

1 https://sprs.parl.gov.sg/search/#/sprs3topic?reportid=bill-644

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.