top of page
Search

The Istanbul Convention in Croatia: Real Protection or Just a Law on Paper?

Introduction


The Istanbul Convention, i.e. the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (hereinafter: the Convention), was ratified in the Republic of Croatia on 13th of April 2018. It entered into force on 1st of October of the same year, thereby making Croatia the 31st State Party to the Istanbul Convention.

The Convention applies, at both international and national levels, to all forms of violence against women, including domestic violence, which disproportionately affects women. The incorporation of the Istanbul Convention into the Croatian legal system marked a significant shift in the approach to violence against women. However, its introduction into the Croatian public and political sphere was not without controversy. Various, often inaccurate interpretations of its content emerged in public discourse, while part of the debate was marked by ideological conflicts and a lack of understanding of the Convention’s very purpose. Instead of focusing on the protection of victims of violence, public discourse frequently shifted towards political and ideological disputes.

Despite the ratification of the Convention and amendments to the legislative framework, violence against women in Croatia continues to represent a serious social problem. Given the frequency of femicide and domestic violence cases, a key question arises: to what extent does the State (which is constitutionally and legally obliged to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens) effectively implement, in practice, the provisions of the Istanbul Convention, or does its application remain predominantly at the level of a normative framework?


Why is the Istanbul Convention Important?


The Istanbul Convention is an international treaty that sets out, in a specific and comprehensive manner, legally binding standards for the prevention of violence, the protection of victims, and the prosecution of perpetrators of gender-based violence. It is of a criminal law nature – it defines, criminalises, and sanctions criminal offences that disproportionately affect women. The Convention is guided by the principle of non-discrimination; therefore, it may also be applied to men, but by affirming the gendered dimension of violence, it emphasises women as the primary group requiring protection.

The Convention consists of 81 articles, divided into 12 chapters, and is structurally based on four primary pillars of action for States Parties: prevention, protection, prosecution, and co-ordinated policies.[1] It thus obliges States to integrate policies, collect data on all forms of violence, prioritise prevention, and provide protection and support to women. Particularly important is the fact that the Convention does not view violence against women solely as isolated acts of individual behaviour, but rather as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination arising from historically unequal power relations between men and women.

Under the Convention, violence against women encompasses 'as a violation of human rights and a form of discrimination against women and shall mean all acts of gender-based violence that result in, or are likely to result in, physical, sexual, psychological or economic harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.'[2] Domestic violence is also broadly defined, covering acts committed, which 'shall mean all acts of physical, sexual, psychological, or economic violence that occur within the family or domestic unit or between former or current spouses or partners, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the victim.'[3] A particularly significant contribution of the Convention lies in its understanding of gender as a socially constructed category shaped by roles, behaviours, and expectations assigned to women and men by society. In this way, violence against women is explicitly linked to structural gender inequality, thereby shifting the issue from the sphere of a “private family matter” into the domain of human rights protection and genuine gender equality.

Croatia has a long tradition of women’s organisations and initiatives aimed at protecting women’s rights, dating back to the 1970s. It is particularly noteworthy that in Zagreb, the capital city, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the first initiatives in Eastern Europe were established that set up a helpline and a shelter for women victims of violence. Some of these organisations are still continuously active today.[4] Such organisations have for years warned about deficiencies in institutional protection, the problem of underreporting of violence, and the need for a more systematic approach to the protection of women. Croatia has long been among the countries with a high rate of femicide relative to its population. In this context, the ratification of the Istanbul Convention represented an important step towards concrete safety, protection, and effective legal assistance for women victims of violence.

Although there were criticisms related to the financial costs of implementing the Convention and concerns that monitoring of its implementation was partly entrusted to non-state actors, the greatest attention was nevertheless drawn to other issues.


Between the Altar, Politics, and Law: Croatian Controversies Surrounding the Istanbul Convention


The ratification of the Istanbul Convention in Croatia was not merely a legal issue, but one of the most intense social and political debates in recent years. Instead of a discussion focused on protecting women from violence, the public sphere quickly became a site of ideological conflict in which different views on gender, family, tradition, human rights, and the so-called “gender ideology” were confronted.

Particular resistance was triggered by Article 3 of the Convention, according to which “gender” 'shall mean the socially constructed roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men.'[5] This definition was presented by part of the public as an attempt to impose ideological change and to relativise biological sex.

As a result, two main currents emerged in the Croatian public discourse: conservative associations and religious groups that perceived the Convention as a threat to traditional family values and national identity, on the other hand, the liberal side presented the Convention as a civilisational instrument for combating violence against women and sought to depoliticise the issue of gender-based violence.

The Croatian Bishops’ Conference publicly opposed the ratification of the Convention on several occasions, warning that by “reducing it merely to a social construct” there was a risk that the concepts of gender and sex would be left to “interpretative relativism and discretion”.[6] At the same time, the bishops emphasised that any form of violence against women, children, or men is contrary to Christian doctrine, and that domestic violence is not a private matter but a serious social problem that must be actively addressed.

This contradiction clearly illustrates the paradox of the Croatian debate on the Istanbul Convention: a formal acceptance of the need to protect women from violence, combined with a simultaneous rejection of the key conceptual framework upon which the Convention is based.

The public debate soon took on the characteristics of moral panic, while parts of the media and political space were flooded with manipulations, disinformation, and extremely simplified interpretations of the Convention. The term “gender ideology” became a central tool of political mobilisation against ratification.

In public discourse, statements such as the following appeared: “The Convention should not be ratified because people are leaving Croatia because of it.”; “The IC should not be ratified because it is the work of Satan.”; “The IC should not be ratified because it corrupts youth.”; “The IC should not be ratified because punishing violence against women is a step backwards.”; “The IC should not be ratified because women in PMS are dangerous.”; “The IC should not be ratified because women should not report their husbands.”[7]

It is particularly concerning that some of these claims did not originate solely from the margins of society, but also from certain university professors, columnists, public commentators, and individuals who hold a degree of authority and social influence in the public sphere. As a result, the debate on the Convention further lost focus on the real issue—violence against women—and instead transformed into a broader ideological conflict concerning gender, identity, and social values. For this reason, the Istanbul Convention in the Croatian context became not only a legal instrument for protection, but also a symbol of deep social divisions, within which the issue of women’s safety was often pushed into the background.

On the side advocating ratification were civil society organisations, particularly 12 non-governmental organisations whose fields of activity include LGBT and human rights, as well as issues related to and problems concerning the feminist movement. The insufficient activity of the then government regarding the ratification of the Convention led to the organisation of protests in one of the main squares in the capital city, Zagreb.

At a protest titled “The Handmaid’s Rise for the Ratification of the Istanbul Convention,” activists were symbolically dressed in handmaid costumes inspired by Margaret Atwood’s novel The Handmaid’s Tale. Their main message was that “the situation in Croatia regarding women’s rights and violence against women is not good, that the number of femicides is increasing every year, and that every 15 minutes in Croatia a woman is abused.”[8]

The existence of a definition of gender is necessary in order to define gender-based violence as a key aspect of the Convention’s approach to violence against women, emphasising that such violence is not the result of biological differences, but rather distorted social attitudes that prescribe what a woman is and what she is expected to be within society.

This situation rightly raises the question: what is the level of awareness among the majority of citizens, and to what extent do citizens support the Convention? A survey was conducted[9] according to which, only 12.2% of respondents stated that they had extensive knowledge of the Convention and had informed themselves about it in detail. A further 48.6% reported having basic knowledge and following the topic through the media, while 35.8% had merely heard of the Convention without knowing the details. In addition, 3.3% of respondents had never heard of the Convention.

Regarding levels of support, 31.9% of respondents fully supported the Convention, whereas 12.4% of respondents did not support it at all. The remaining respondents expressed positions between full agreement and full disagreement.[10]

In order to mitigate political and social tensions and to ensure the ratification of the Convention, the Government of the Republic of Croatia attached an interpretative declaration to the Istanbul Convention, emphasising that the Convention does not oblige Croatia to introduce the so-called “gender ideology.”

At the same time, the Ministry for Demography, Family, Youth and Social Policy issued an informational leaflet providing basic explanations of the content and objectives of the Convention.


Between Law and Reality: How Croatia Implements the Convention and Where the System Fails?


The first baseline report[11] of GREVIO[12] on Croatia from 2023 provides insight into the actual implementation of the Istanbul Convention.

Among the most important legislative changes, the introduction of a definition of rape based on the absence of consent, rather than exclusively on the use of force, stands out in particular. Furthermore, sexual violence, stalking, and sexual harassment are now prosecuted ex officio, while the misuse of sexually explicit content, the so-called “revenge pornography,” is also criminalised. An important step forward is also the expansion of the definition of domestic violence to include intimate partners who do not share a common household.

Such amendments demonstrate that the Croatian legislative framework has been formally significantly aligned with the obligations arising from the Convention.

However, in practice, there are difficulties in the implementation of the normative framework. It is often overlooked that women are disproportionately more frequently victims of gender-based violence. As a result, violence against women is frequently wrongly reduced to a “family conflict” between equal parties, rather than being recognised within its broader social and structural context.

The reason for this lies in serious shortcomings in the work of the police, the judiciary, and the social welfare system. In police practice, so-called “dual arrests” represent one of the issues that must be most strongly criticised. In certain cases, the police simultaneously arrest both the victim and the perpetrator, equating the perpetrator’s violence with the victim’s verbal reaction or act of self-defence. Such practice further discourages women from reporting violence, as they risk being criminalised despite being victims.

In judicial practice, violence is often treated as a misdemeanour against public order and peace, rather than as a serious criminal offence. The consequence is lenient or suspended sentences, which create a perception of impunity. An additional problem is the length of proceedings, during which victims are repeatedly subjected to questioning, institutional distrust, and secondary victimisation.

Furthermore, courts and social welfare centres often do not consider violence by one parent against the other as an obstacle to exercising visitation rights, even when the child has witnessed the violence. Although mediation is a relatively recent institute in the Croatian legal system aimed at the peaceful resolution of disputes, GREVIO notes that mediation and joint custody are often promoted even in cases of domestic violence, along with the use of the concept of “parental alienation,” through which mothers who report violence are sometimes portrayed as manipulative individuals turning children against fathers.

The report also highlights a lack of systematic training for professionals. Training for police officers, healthcare workers, and social workers is generally not mandatory and is often limited exclusively to domestic violence. More complex forms of gender-based violence, such as stalking, forced marriages, or digital violence, remain insufficiently recognised. GREVIO further warns that among some professionals, patriarchal stereotypes and prejudices still influence the treatment of victims.

A particular problem is the lack of stable funding for shelters and civil society organisations providing specialised support to women victims of violence. The support system often depends on project-based funding and the work of non-governmental organisations, which results in unequal access to assistance across different parts of Croatia. Regional disparities are particularly evident in rural areas, where women often have no access to shelters, psychological assistance, or legal support.

An important contribution to assessing the implementation of the Istanbul Convention was also made by the association B.a.B.e., an organisation dedicated to the protection of human rights, with a particular focus on women’s rights and the fight against gender-based violence. In its 2022 report,[13] the association highlighted the imposition of overly lenient sentences on perpetrators of violence against women and domestic violence, particularly in misdemeanour proceedings, where unconditional custodial sentences are imposed in a very small number of cases. The organisation also criticised the gender-neutral approach of criminal and misdemeanour legislation, emphasising that violence against women cannot be viewed solely as a general form of violence, but rather as a form of discrimination arising from the structural inequality of women in society.

The report further draws attention to the need for greater education and sensitisation of institutions, particularly police officers, who are often the first point of contact for victims within the protection system. According to the association’s findings, insufficient protection and a lack of trust in the justice system lead many women to refrain from reporting violence or to seek help only when the violence has already escalated. At the same time, the report acknowledges certain progress in legislative amendments, noting that these are largely the result of continuous pressure from civil society organisations and feminist initiatives.

All of the above confirms a fundamental conclusion: Croatia today has a relatively robust legislative framework, but its effectiveness in practice often depends on individuals within the system. In other words, a victim’s safety frequently depends on which police officer, social worker, or judge they encounter. The problem is therefore not technical, but deeply systemic in nature. Although laws formally exist, everyday institutional practice has not yet fully adopted the principles of the Istanbul Convention nor developed a consistent system for protecting women from violence.

This issue is further underscored by the fact that in 2025 Croatia recorded an extremely high number of femicides, with the majority of murdered women being killed by their intimate partners. Such cases have once again raised questions about the effectiveness of the existing protection system and demonstrated that the formal existence of laws does not, in itself, guarantee real safety for women.


Conclusion


The ratification of the Istanbul Convention represented an important step forward in Croatia’s legal and social approach to violence against women. By ratifying the Convention, Croatia formally assumed the obligation to establish a system that must ensure effective protection for women, prevention of violence, and accessible institutional support. Subsequent amendments to criminal and misdemeanour legislation, the redefinition of the criminal offence of rape, and the introduction of new mechanisms for victim protection have demonstrated that the Croatian legal framework is largely aligned with the standards set by the Convention.

At the same time, the Croatian debate on the Istanbul Convention revealed the extent to which the issue of protecting women from violence can become the subject of broader political and ideological conflict. Instead of maintaining a focus on victims of violence and the shortcomings of the protection system, a significant part of the debate shifted towards issues of so-called “gender ideology,” tradition, identity, and the role of the family. Resistance from certain political actors, conservative associations, and the Catholic Church, particularly regarding the definition of gender in Article 3 of the Convention, highlighted deep societal divisions concerning gender and women’s rights. In such an atmosphere, the very purpose of the Convention—protecting women from violence—was often pushed into the background.

For all these reasons, it can be concluded that the Istanbul Convention in Croatia represents both a genuine legal advancement and a document whose implementation has not yet been fully realised in practice. As long as victims’ safety depends on chance and on individual actors within the system, rather than consistent institutional action, protection for women will remain partly limited to “just a law on paper.” The effective implementation of the Convention requires more than the mere existence of sound legislation—it requires continuous institutional training, stable support for victims, political accountability, and a societal readiness to recognise violence against women as a serious violation of human rights, rather than a private matter within a family.

 

 


[2] Istanbul Convention, art 3.

[3] Ibid., art 3

[4] https://azkz.hr/o-nama/povijest/ , accessed 10 May 2026

[5] Istanbul Convention, art 3.

[9] The Government of the Republic of Croatia commissioned a survey on the Istanbul Convention, conducted by the Ipsos agency via telephone on a representative sample of 604 adult citizens in the period from 19 to 20 March 2018..

[11] Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence (GREVIO), GREVIO Baseline Evaluation Report on Croatia (Council of Europe 2023) https://www.coe.int/en/web/istanbul-convention/grevio , accessed 15 May 2026.

[12] GREVIO (Group of Experts on Action against Violence against Women and Domestic Violence) is an independent expert monitoring body responsible for action against violence against women and domestic violence, composed of 10 to 15 members elected by the States Parties, depending on the number of States Parties to the Convention.

[13] In 2022, the association submitted a shadow report to GREVIO on the implementation of the Istanbul Convention in the Republic of Croatia, available at: https://rm.coe.int/2022-grevio-b-a-b-e-report-shadow-report-croatia/1680a595a3  

Comments

  • LinkedIn

© 2023 by Feminist Law.

NEVER MISS A POST.

Thank you for subscribing!

bottom of page