When Anieta Ferreira hired two men to kill her abusive partner four years ago, she saw it as the only way out of an intolerable situation that had lasted 10 years. She paid dearly for it after being sentenced to life in prison, which in South Africa means 25 years behind bars.
On Friday April 2, however, she was released from the Johannesburg prison, virtually a free woman. Her sentence had been commuted to six years, of which she has already served three. The other three were suspended.
The decision by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein last Thursday to commute Ferreira’s life sentence has been hailed a victory for abused women.
But could this precedent not provide an excuse for murder?
Criminologist Irma Labuschagne says a strong message has to be sent out that not all women who murder their husbands or partners will get lenient sentences.
”A strong message will have to be sent out that courts will still exercise their discretion in sentencing a woman found guilty of murdering her husband or partner.”
She says a woman who claims to have been abused will have to be able to prove it in court.
”A woman can’t just walk into court and claim she was beaten up for years and that is the reason she killed her partner. She must be able to present evidence and call witnesses who can corroborate her claims.”
Labuschagne says it is true that abused women develop such feelings of helplessness and hopelessness that they believe they have no other option but to kill their abuser. Society also does not offer enough structures to support abused and battered women and their children.
She says a court order against an abusive partner, which can be obtained under the new Family Violence Act, does not deter abuse.
”A court order is neither bullet-proof nor fist-proof. In many cases the partner becomes even more abusive when the woman obtains such a court order. So an abused woman may feel that it is of no use to her and that murder still remains the only option out of an intolerable situation.”
But she cautions against women who kill their partners for other reasons, like money, but pretend to have been abused.
”It can happen that women will abuse the notion of being abused and use it as an excuse to justify killing her partner.”
The whole issue is a difficult one, Labuschagne says.
Women who are genuinely abused to the point where they turn to murder deserve sympathy.
But also, can we really condone murder?
Labuschagne says the crux of the matter is that the court has to listen carefully to the evidence presented in such a case and exercise its discretion carefully.
Professor Stephan Terblanche of Unisa says the fact that Ferreira’s sentence was commuted to six years with three years suspended should not pose a problem. He says it is not the first time a woman has received a lenient sentence after killing an abusive partner.
”This has not created a precedent and every case will anyway be judged on merit,” he says.
He says people do not think in such a calculating manner about the consequences of their actions when they are about to commit a crime.
”Other abused women will not think that they might only get a suspended sentence so it will be okay for them to murder their partners,” he said.
”Humans focus on the moment, on instant gratification. You only have to look at the way many motorists drive to see that.”
The Family and Marriage Association of South Africa (Famsa) says it is a delicate issue.
Famsa director Dukie Mothiba says every case in which a women murders a husband or partner is unique.
”There are many circumstances which should be kept in mind when cases like these are assessed,” she says.
Mothiba says her organisation is happy that the Ferreira case has been reviewed, but is at the same time worried that it could cause a problem.
”Women may think that they can get away with killing their partners.
”That is not the solution. There are other avenues they can use if they are being abused and we urge them to rather use those before the situation reaches a stage where they can no longer think straight and where they commit murder.”
Four of the five appeal judges agreed on the revision of Ferreira’s sentence.
But the president of the Supreme Court of Appeal, Craig Howie, warned that the court’s decision did not ”aim to set a sentencing norm” in cases where abused women murdered their partners.
”Murder remains murder,” he said in his judgement.
”It [abuse] is something which has to be judicially evaluated by the court placing itself as far as it can in the position of the woman concerned.”
Judge Robin Marais, in his dissenting judgement, said Ferreira’s partner was tried, convicted, sentenced to death and executed in a ”brutal and callous way”.
He added that the revision of her sentence could undermine the public’s confidence in courts and create the impression that ”lynch mobs” are acceptable. — Sapa