The Introduction of Femicide into the Croatian Criminal Code

Introduction

Violence against women is one of the most serious violations of human rights and a social problem affecting nearly every country[1], regardless of its economic or democratic development. Violence never begins with a physical assault. Rather, it is preceded by phenomena such as the normalization of gender stereotypes and discrimination, everyday microaggressions directed at women, the objectification of women, and sexist jokes.[2] [1] Together, these form the foundation of the so-called ´pyramid of violence´ and create fertile ground for the development of other forms of abuse.[2]  At the top of this pyramid lies femicide. It is important to emphasize that not every act of violence ends in femicide.^[3] However, numerous studies show that, in a large number of cases, femicide is preceded by the perpetrator's controlling behaviour and persistent patterns of abusive conduct.

Femicide is the result of prolonged violence against women rooted in deeply entrenched gender inequality. As a social phenomenon, it has existed for centuries. It has taken various forms throughout history, including the burning of women accused of witchcraft, so-called honour killings, matricide, and female infanticide.^[3] [4]

From a Word to a Legal Concept: What is Femicide?

The term ´femicide´ derives from the Latin word femina, meaning woman, and the Latin verb caedere, meaning to kill or to cut.^[5] It was introduced into public and legal discourse by feminist scholar Diana E. H. Russell^[6] during the 1970s. Russell defines femicide as ´the killing of females by males because they are female.[4] [SF5] ´[7] In its broader sense, she describes femicide as ´the killing of women by men motivated by hatred, contempt, pleasure, or a sense of ownership over women,´ or, more broadly, as ´misogynist killings of women by men.´^[8] For this reason, femicide represents the most extreme form of violence against women.

Femicide is rarely a spontaneous act. As noted earlier, it is most often preceded by a prolonged pattern of abusive behaviour. At the same time, there are early risk indicators that the police, the judiciary, and other competent institutions can identify, allowing them to intervene before the violence escalates.

British criminologist Jane Monckton Smith^[9][6] [7]  developed the Eight Stages of Homicide model,[8] [SF9]  which explains the progression of intimate partner homicide.[10] Based on the analysis of intimate partner homicide cases, the model demonstrates that femicide is usually the culmination of a recognisable pattern of escalating violence rather than an isolated incident. For this reason, it has become an important tool for identifying high-risk cases and supporting timely intervention by the police, the judiciary, and other relevant institutions. The first stage is characterised by controlling behaviour, in which the perpetrator establishes dominance over the victim through jealousy, surveillance, isolation, or physical violence.^[10] [11] When the victim attempts to leave the relationship, the process moves into the second and subsequently the third stage, during which the perpetrator realises that he is losing control over his partner. This is followed by an escalation of threats, stalking, harassment, and other forms of coercive control.

In the fourth stage, the perpetrator becomes convinced that violence is the only solution and begins to view the victim as an object that must be punished or eliminated.[12] [11] The next stage involves planning the killing by gathering information about the victim and obtaining the means to commit the crime. The sixth stage, known as the ´trigger event´, refers to the incident that the perpetrator perceives as the final justification for committing femicide.^[12] [13] This may include the end of the relationship, a report to the police, or a court decision. The perpetrator then carries out the planned killing. In the final stage, he attempts to conceal evidence of the crime or dies by suicide.^[14]

Based on the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator, Russell distinguishes four types of femicide: intimate partner femicide, in which the perpetrator is a current or former intimate partner; family femicide, committed by male family members; femicide committed by someone known to the victim, such as a neighbour or colleague; and femicide committed by a person previously unknown to the victim.^[15]

Although femicide most commonly refers to the gender-based killing of women by men, the literature also documents rare cases in which women have participated in the commission of such killings. One example can be found in parts of India, where mothers-in-law have participated in the burning of their daughters-in-law after considering the dowry provided by the bride's family to be insufficient.^[16]

Although the terms ‘killing of a woman[13] ´ and ´femicide´ are sometimes used interchangeably, there is an important distinction between them.      The killing of a woman refers to any unlawful deprivation of a woman's life, regardless of the perpetrator's motive, which may include personal conflict, financial gain, jealousy, or other reasons.^[14] [17] By contrast, femicide is the killing of a woman because of her gender or in the context of gender-based violence.^[15] [18] In other words, not every killing of a woman constitutes femicide, whereas every femicide is, by definition, the killing of a woman. What distinguishes femicide from other forms of homicide is its gendered dimension: the victim is killed as a result of unequal power relations, coercive control, domination, or other forms of violence directed against women precisely because they are women.

Recognising femicide as a distinct criminal offence is essential to acknowledge the gender-based and misogynistic nature of these killings, strengthen the protection of victims of violence, enhance prevention efforts, and ensure appropriate accountability for perpetrators. However, legal recognition alone is not sufficient. Effective protection of women requires the consistent implementation of the law, timely risk assessment, and coordinated action by the police, the judiciary, and other relevant institutions.

The Recognition of Femicide under Croatian Criminal Law

In April 2024, Croatia amended its Criminal Code to introduce the criminal offence of the aggravated murder of a female person.^[16] [19] In doing so, it became the third Member State of the European Union, after Cyprus and Malta, to specifically recognise femicide within its criminal justice system.

This legislative reform marked an important step towards recognising the gender-specific nature of lethal violence against women. However, it also raises a broader question: has the introduction of femicide into the Croatian Criminal Code resulted in more effective protection for women, or has it primarily remained a significant symbolic and normative achievement? Answering this question requires looking beyond the legal text itself and examining how the new provisions are implemented in practice, how institutions assess and respond to risk, and whether the reform has contributed to preventing gender-based killings of women.

In April 2018, the Croatian Parliament ratified the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (the Istanbul Convention)[20],[17] [SF18]  following months of public and political debate and opposition from several conservative organisations and initiatives.[21] [19] The ratification of the Istanbul Convention marked a significant milestone in the development of Croatia's legal framework for the protection of women against violence.

Although the Convention does not explicitly require States to introduce a separate criminal offence of femicide, it obliges them to adopt measures aimed at preventing gender-based violence, protecting victims, effectively prosecuting perpetrators, and carrying out risk assessment and risk management to prevent repeated violence and fatal outcomes.[20]  [22]This emphasis on risk assessment reflects the growing recognition that lethal violence against women is rarely unpredictable. Instead, it is often preceded by identifiable patterns of coercive control, escalating abuse, and other warning signs that can be recognised through timely and effective institutional intervention. These standards provided an important normative framework for the further development of Croatian criminal law. They contributed to strengthening the criminal justice response to violence against women, including the introduction of the criminal offence of aggravated murder of a female person into the Croatian Criminal Code.

     The concept of femicide began to gain greater attention in Croatia in the late 1990s,^[21] [23] although for many years it remained primarily the subject of academic research and feminist scholarship. Within public discourse, relatively little attention was paid to the phenomenon, partly because there was no consistent understanding of its meaning or of the forms of violence it encompasses.^[24]

Amendments to the Croatian Criminal Code adopted in 2023, which entered into force in April 2024, introduced Article 111a entitled  ´Aggravated Murder of a Female Person.´ [22] [SF23] Through this provision, Croatian criminal law explicitly recognised the gender-based killing of a woman as a distinct form of aggravated murder for the first time. The provision reads:

Aggravated Murder of a Female Person

Article 111a

(1) Whoever commits the gender-based killing of a female person shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years or by long-term imprisonment.

(2) In determining whether the criminal offence referred to in paragraph (1) has been committed, particular consideration shall be given to whether the offence was committed against a close person, a person previously subjected to abuse by the perpetrator, a vulnerable person, or a person in a relationship of subordination or dependency, whether it was committed in the context of sexual violence or as a result of relationships placing women in an unequal position, or whether other circumstances indicate that the offence constitutes gender-based violence.^[25]

The Croatian Criminal Code does not use the term ´femicide´ but instead refers to the offence as the ´aggravated murder of a female person.´[26] [24] However, the wording of Article 111a makes it clear that the offence concerns a gender-based killing rather than simply the killing of a woman. In other words, the application of this provision requires the existence of a gendered dimension of violence, not merely the fact that the victim is female.

Article 111a of the Croatian Criminal Code introduces the criminal offence of the aggravated murder of a female person as a distinct form of aggravated homicide within Croatian criminal law. Unlike the offence of murder under Article 110, where the intentional deprivation of life is sufficient regardless of the perpetrator's motive or relationship with the victim, the application of Article 111a requires the existence of gender-based circumstances indicating that the killing constitutes femicide.

Although the offence carries the same penalty as aggravated murder under Article 111 of the Criminal Code—imprisonment for a term of at least ten years or long-term imprisonment—its inclusion as a separate statutory provision is primarily of symbolic and normative significance, as it expressly recognises the gendered dimension of violence against women.

However, the new legislative framework has also raised several practical and interpretative challenges. Since the circumstances listed in Article 111a are formulated in the alternative, there is potential for overlap with the offence of aggravated murder under Article 111, particularly in cases involving the killing of a close person. Additional uncertainty arises from the fact that the law uses the term ´female person´ without explicitly defining gender motivation as a constituent element of the offence. Consequently, legal scholars argue that it is not sufficient merely to establish that the victim was a woman; it must also be demonstrated that the killing was connected to gender-based violence or other circumstances indicating the gendered nature of the offence.^[25] [27]

The practical significance of this distinction will ultimately depend on judicial interpretation, particularly on how Croatian courts define and assess the existence of gender-based motives in individual cases.

The Institutional Response and Social Responsibility

Although judicial practice concerning the application of Article 111a of the Croatian Criminal Code is still evolving, making it too early to draw definitive conclusions about the scope and effectiveness of the new provision, the first cases suggest that the legal recognition of femicide has enabled its separate criminal classification and laid the foundations for a more consistent approach to prosecuting gender-based killings of women.[26]  In November 2025, the High Criminal Court of the Republic of Croatia upheld the first-instance judgment of the County Court in Osijek, resulting in the first final conviction for attempted aggravated murder of a female person under Article 111a.[28] Nevertheless, legislative reform alone is insufficient unless it is accompanied by consistent and effective implementation in practice.

Despite these legislative changes, secondary victimisation remains one of the most serious challenges in the institutional response to violence against women.^[27] [29] In some cases, victims continue to have their credibility questioned, their reports of violence are not taken sufficiently seriously, or incidents of violence are treated as isolated events rather than as part of a long-term pattern of escalating abuse. Such practices retraumatise victims, undermine their trust in public institutions, and may contribute to diminishing the accountability of perpetrators.^[30]

The need for a more effective institutional response is also highlighted in the 2023 Report of the Ombudsperson for Gender Equality, which emphasises that inadequate responses by the police and the judiciary to repeated reports of violence may have tragic consequences and constitute a serious institutional failure.^[31] Of particular concern is the fact that the police and other competent authorities do not always identify high-risk cases of gender-based violence in a timely manner.

     Another persistent challenge is the phenomenon of so-called ´dual attribution of responsibility[28] ´,[32] whereby responsibility for the violence is, directly or indirectly, assigned to both the victim and the perpetrator. Such an approach not only deepens secondary victimisation but also shifts attention away from the perpetrator's responsibility and may discourage other victims from reporting violence to the competent authorities.

Civil society organisations also play an important role in protecting and supporting victims of gender-based violence. By providing legal and psychological assistance, informing victims about their rights, advocating for legislative reforms, and raising public awareness, they constitute an essential part of the prevention and protection system and often complement the work of state institutions.

In addition to public institutions, the media play a crucial role in shaping society's understanding of femicide. The way in which the media report on these cases can contribute to a better understanding of gender-based violence, but it can also reinforce stereotypes and deepen secondary victimisation.^[29] [33] Ethical media guidelines therefore recommend avoiding sensationalist reporting, protecting the dignity and privacy of victims, and using language that neither romanticises, justifies, nor trivialises violence.[30]  Ethical media guidelines emphasise the need to contextualise violence against women as gender-based violence, clearly attribute responsibility to the perpetrator, protect the victim’s identity and dignity, avoid sensationalist or victim-blaming language, and rely on verified information and competent expert sources rather than speculation.[34] In particular, femicide should not be portrayed as the result of jealousy, passion, or a tragic love story, as such narratives obscure its true nature as the most extreme form of gender-based violence.^[35]

Conversely, effective cooperation between the police, the State Attorney's Office, the courts, and the Croatian Institute for Social Work represents an example of good institutional practice. Timely information sharing, joint risk assessments, and coordinated action by all competent authorities can significantly improve the early identification of high-risk cases and strengthen the protection of victims, thereby increasing the likelihood of preventing the most serious forms of violence, including femicide.

Conclusion

The introduction of the criminal offence of the aggravated murder of a female person into the Croatian Criminal Code represents an important normative step in recognising gender-based violence.

Femicide is neither a crime of passion nor an isolated act of violence. Rather, it most often represents the final stage of a prolonged pattern of gender-based violence, preceded by humiliation, isolation, coercive control, and the gradual escalation of abusive behaviour. This is supported by research showing that as many as 77% of the analysed femicides were committed within intimate partner relationships, with the victim's decision to end, or intention to end, the relationship being one of the most common triggers.^[36] These findings clearly demonstrate that, in many cases, femicide is not an unpredictable event but the outcome of violence whose warning signs can be identified and addressed before it results in a fatal outcome.

Effectively combating femicide cannot rely solely on stricter criminal sanctions. It requires timely risk assessment, effective protection of victims, continuous training for the police, the judiciary, and the State Attorney's Office, as well as systematic education on gender equality and violence against women. At the same time, the recommendations of the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) and the Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO) emphasise the importance of a harmonised methodology for collecting data on violence against women, improved risk assessment, timely protection of victims, and stronger coordination among all competent institutions.^[37] 

Only the consistent implementation of the law, effective institutional cooperation, and the timely protection of victims will determine whether the legal recognition of femicide can evolve from an important normative achievement into genuine protection for women's lives.

[1] Atria, Guide: The Pyramid of Violence (11 April 2025), https://institute-genderequality.org/en/publicaties/handreiking-de-piramide-van-geweld, accessed 12 August 2026

[2] ibid.

^[3] ibid.

[4] Diana E H Russell, ´Femicide: Politicizing the Killing of Females´ in Strengthening Understanding of Femicide: Using Research to Galvanize Action and Accountability (PATH, InterCambios, Medical Research Council of South Africa and World Health Organization 2009)  https://media.path.org/documents/GVR_femicide_rpt.pdf, accessed 9 July 2026

^[5] Jezikoslovac, ´femina´ https://jezikoslovac.com/word/ejff accessed 9 July 2026.

^[6] Diana E. H. Russell (1938–2020) was a South African feminist, sociologist, and activist who is widely regarded as one of the most influential scholars in the development and popularisation of the concept of femicide, as well as a pioneer in the study of gender-based violence against women, reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diana_E._H._Russell, accessed 9 July 2026

[7] Diana E H Russell, ´Defining Femicide´, https://www.dianarussell.com/defining-femicide-.html accessed 12 August 2026

^[8] Canadian Femicide Observatory for Justice and Accountability, ´History of the Term Femicide´, https://femicideincanada.ca/what-is-femicide/history/, accessed 9 July 2026

^[9] Jane Monckton Smith is a British criminologist and Professor of Public Protection at the University of Gloucestershire, specialising in domestic abuse, gender-based violence, and femicide. She is best known for developing the Eight Stages of Homicide model, which demonstrates that femicide in intimate partner relationships is rarely a spontaneous act but rather a predictable process that unfolds through identifiable stages of escalating violence. 

[10] Dunja Bonacci Skenderović, ´Ili moja ili ničija! Analiza intimnog partnerskog femicida u Hrvatskoj 2016.–2023´ (Grad Zagreb, Gradski ured za socijalnu zaštitu, zdravstvo, branitelje i osobe s invaliditetom 2024), https://www.zagreb.hr/UserDocsImages/miletic/Izvjesce_Ili_moja_ili_nicija_Dunja_Bonacci_SkenderovicPDF.pdf, accessed 9 July 2026

[11] ibid.

[12] ibid.

[13] ibid.

^[14] ibid.

[15] Russell, ‘Femicide: Politicizing the Killing of Females’ (n 4)

^[16] ibid.

[17] Bonacci Skenderović (n 10)

[18] ibid.

[19] Zakon o izmjenama i dopunama Kaznenog zakona, NN 36/2024, https://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2024_03_36_570.html, accessed 12 August 2026

[20] Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (adopted 11 May 2011, entered into force 1 August 2014) CETS No 210.

[21] More about it: Silvia Fabijanić, ‘The Istanbul Convention in Croatia: Real Protection or Just a Law on Paper?’ (1 June 2026) https://www.feministlaw.org/post/the-istanbul-convention-in-croatia-real-protection-or-just-a-law-on-paper, accessed 12 August 2026 

[22] Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention) (opened for signature 11 May 2011, entered into force 1 August 2014) CETS 210, arts 12–16, 18, 30, 33–36, 49, 51–53

[23] Nevena Aljinović, ‘Femicid: od neologizma do posebnog kaznenog djela’ (2024) 31(2) Hrvatski ljetopis za kaznene znanosti i praksu 307, 310 https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/474651, accessed 12 August 2026

^[24] The academic debate surrounding this concept was initiated by Professors Rittossa and Škorić through their systematic research on the killings of women by intimate partners who had previously subjected them to abuse.

^[25] Kazneni zakon, Narodne novine, 125/11, 144/12, 56/15, 61/15, 101/17, 118/18, 126/19, 84/21, 114/22, 114/23 and 36/24 (Criminal Code)

[26] Zakon o izmjenama i dopunama Kaznenog zakona /2024, art 15., (n 19)

[27] Bonacci Skenderović (n 10)

[28] Visoki kazneni sud Republike Hrvatske, ‘Visoki kazneni sud potvrdio osudu za jedno kazneno djelo pokušaj teškog ubojstva ženske osobe (tzv. femicid) i jedno kazneno djelo povrede djetetovih prava’ (28 November 2025), I Kžzd-28/2025 https://sudovi.hr/hr/vksrh/priopcenja/visoki-kazneni-sud-potvrdio-osudu-za-jedno-kazneno-djelo-pokusaj-teskog-ubojstva, accessed 12 August 2026

[29] Bonacci Skenderović (n 10)

^[30] ibid.

^[31] Pravobraniteljica za ravnopravnost spolova, Izvješće o radu Pravobraniteljice za ravnopravnost spolova za 2024 godinu (2025), https://www.prs.hr/application/uploads/Izvjes%CC%8Cc%CC%81e_2024_CJELOVITO_FINAL.pdf, accessed 9 July 2026

[32] ibid.

[33] Pravobraniteljica za ravnopravnost spolova Republike Hrvatske, Medijski kodeks: vodič za profesionalno i senzibilizirano izvještavanje o nasilju prema ženama i femicidu (2019) https://www.zeneimediji.hr/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/MEDIJSKI-KODEKS-vodic-za-profesionalno-i-senzibilizirano-izvjestavanje-o-nasilju-prema-zenama-i-femicidu_PRS_VAWA-800a.pdf, accessed 12 August 2026

[34] ibid.

^[35] ibid.

^[36] Bonacci Skenderović (n 10)

^[37] Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO), Izvješće o provedbi Konvencije Vijeća Europe o sprječavanju i borbi protiv nasilja nad ženama i nasilja u obitelji za Republiku Hrvatsku (Council of Europe 2023) https://mrosp.gov.hr/UserDocsImages/dokumenti/Socijalna%20politika/Obitelj%20i%20djeca/GREVIO/GREVIO%20IZVJE%C5%A0%C4%86E%20O%20PROVEDBI%20KONVENCIJE%20VE%20O%20SPRE%C4%8CAVANJU%20I%20BORBI%20PROTIV%20NASILJA%20NAD%20%C5%BDENAMA%20I%20NASILJA%20U%20OBITELJI%20ZA%20REPUBLIKU%20HRVATSKU.pdf, accessed 9 July 2026

 [1]Citation needed

 [2]Citation needed

 [3]Citations needed

 [4]Is this emphasis yours? Or is it in the original? Quotes don't need to be italicized unless you, or the original author, did so for emphasis, in which case your footnote should say either 'emphasis added' or 'emphasis in original'

 [SF5]Removed the emphasis and added the source.

 [6]Footnotes should generally go at the end of a sentence after punctuation.

 [7]However, in this case, this footnote is fine because you are explaining who Smith is. However, you do need a footnote at the end of the sentence with a full OSCOLA citation to this work.

 [8]Does this need to be italicized?

 [SF9]No, it does not. I have removed the italics.

 [10]This should have a footnote reference, and if it is referring to the immediately preceding footnote, 'ibid' is fine.

 [11]Again, citation needed.

 [12]Citation needed

 [13]use single quotation marks instead of italics.

 [14]Citation needed

 [15]Citation needed

 [16]Could add a reference here to the specific provision of the Criminal Code.

 [17]Provide full citation of the Convention in a footnote

 [SF18]I hope this is correct now, but please let me know if any further changes are needed.

 [19]Please use a footnote reference instead of in-text link, and use OSCOLA citation style

 [20]Reference the provisions that require this in footnotes

 [21]Citation

 [22]Again, you don't need italics for every quote unless there's an emphasis. Also please use single quotation marks. Please go through and amend all quotes to remove italics except where there is emphasis.

 [SF23]I have removed the italics where they were not necessary and used single quotation marks throughout the text and footnotes. I have kept italics where I wanted to emphasise particular words or definitions.

 [24]Single quotes please and provide footnote reference to the provision in the Criminal Code.

 [25]Citation needed.

 [26]PRovide some example cases in a footnote

 [27]Citation

 [28]Citation needed

 [29]Citation

 [30]Cite example ethical media guidelines