South Africa has spent decades studying violence against women. It knows where women are most at risk, how firearms and alcohol contribute to fatal violence and how rape cases disappear as they move through the criminal justice system.
The country also has progressive laws and a National Strategic Plan on Gender-Based Violence and Femicide. Yet intimate-partner femicide is rising again and most women who report rape never see their cases result in a conviction.
This is not a shortage of knowledge. It is a failure to implement policy, enforce the law and hold public institutions accountable.
Evidence presented at the World Conference on Injury Prevention and Safety Promotion in Cape Town this week showed how quickly hard-won progress can be reversed.
South Africa's intimate-partner femicide rate fell from 9.5 per 100 000 women in 1999 to 4.9 in 2017. By 2020-21, it had risen to 5.5 — about five times the global rate.
Stronger gun-control legislation and enforcement contributed to the earlier decline. Corruption, weakened state institutions and deteriorating law enforcement have since eroded the gains.
The Covid-19 lockdown also offered evidence of how public policy affects women's safety. During the restrictions on alcohol sales and movement, South Africa recorded an average of 82 femicides a month, compared with 218 during other periods.
The restrictions operated simultaneously, which means alcohol cannot be isolated as the sole reason for the decline. The figures strengthen the case for treating alcohol regulation as part of the country's response to violence against women.
Passing laws and adopting plans offer little protection when investigations are poor, cases fall out of the justice system and survivors encounter services that are underfunded or inaccessible. Government cannot present policy announcements, summits and plans as proof of progress. The real test is whether fewer women are killed, more perpetrators are held accountable and survivors receive competent care.
That care must also reach women with disabilities and LGBTQI+ survivors, who can be excluded when services are designed without considering their needs. An intervention may reduce violence overall while leaving those most vulnerable behind. People affected must have more than a consultative role. They should help set priorities, shape programmes and decide how success is measured. Asking for their views after the important decisions have been made changes little.
South Africa knows what needs attention: firearm enforcement, alcohol regulation, criminal investigations, survivor services and institutional accountability. The question is how many more women must die before the evidence the country has becomes action.