A month ago, Justice Minister Liisa Pakosta (Eesti 200) unveiled a plan to fundamentally revise the Family Law Act. One part of the proposal would require adoptive parents to inform children that they were adopted. Another key objective is to reduce courts' workload related to divorce proceedings.

For example, spouses would be required to make every effort to reach a mutual agreement on divorce and avoid going to court. To simplify divorce proceedings, courts would also no longer be required to hear both parties or attempt reconciliation.

The proposal would also allow divorce proceedings to be initiated based on an application from just one spouse, including through a notary or vital statistics official.

The ministry wants the changes to encourage couples to dissolve their marriages outside the court system whenever possible, either through vital statistics offices or notaries.

A secondary goal is to distribute legal costs in divorce cases more fairly. Whereas previously each party was responsible for their own legal expenses, under the proposed rules those costs would be borne by the party who most obstructed an out-of-court divorce process.

New system could make it harder to leave abusive relationship

In its response to Pakosta's proposal, the Ministry of Social Affairs, led by Minister Karmen Joller (Reform Party), said the Ministry of Justice had failed to consider how changes to divorce procedures could affect victims of domestic violence.

Joller noted that while the draft legislation aims to simplify the process, it could do so at the expense of both victims of violence and children. She highlighted several concerns, adding that some of the proposed changes may also conflict with the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women.

Kristiina Luht, head of the Ministry of Social Affairs' victim support policy area, said the ministry is particularly concerned about the proposal requiring spouses to make every effort to reach a mutual divorce agreement before turning to the courts.

"The assumption is that both spouses negotiate and reach an agreement. If you have been a victim of violence, possibly for years, reaching an agreement with your abuser is extremely difficult," Luht said.

In the ministry's feedback, Joller noted that such a system could hinder a victim's ability to leave a relationship safely, while the perpetrator could use the situation for coercion, including by making threats in an effort to gain custody rights.

Attorney: Ministry fetishizing cooperation in custody disputes

The Ministry of Social Affairs has also criticized the Ministry of Justice's plan to strengthen joint custody, saying the draft legislation gives the impression that joint custody would become the default solution.

"That is problematic because, in cases involving violence, it could lead to a continued risk of control and abuse. The proposal does not set out clear exceptions for situations involving violence and assessing the child's best interests could become a mere formality," Social Affairs Minister Karmen Joller wrote in the ministry's feedback.

The ministry also considers it problematic that custody disputes would place greater emphasis on which parent is more willing to cooperate with the other. Joller argued that the wording of the provision is harmful to victims of violence and risks re-victimizing them.

Attorney-at-law Tambet Laasik was similarly critical of the proposed changes to custody principles, saying the Ministry of Justice is trying to solve a problem that does not actually exist.

According to Laasik, reforming custody disputes should instead begin by explicitly requiring courts to consider whether a parent has committed violence.

"This is something we still have not managed to write into our laws. Court practice varies enormously on this issue. Some judges are able to take it into account, understand the problem and consider it. For some judges, it is not important in the slightest and all related evidence and arguments are dismissed as irrelevant. That is the problem we should be addressing, not this fetishization of cooperation," Laasik said.

Ministry of the Interior: Proposals not in line with previous agreements

The Ministry of the Interior, led by Minister Igor Taro, has also criticized the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs' proposals concerning divorce proceedings.

Taro said the proposed amendments had not been properly discussed with other stakeholders and were not in line with previously agreed directions for divorce procedures. He also argued that the changes and their necessity have not been sufficiently analyzed or justified and that their impact has not been adequately assessed in the explanatory memorandum.

"The Ministry of the Interior is of the view that if the draft legislation were adopted in its current form, it could create problems in the future, particularly for the weaker party who would face greater obligations and find divorce even more difficult and time-consuming than it is now. This is because they would be unable to go directly to court if they cannot reach their spouse or if the spouse refuses to agree to the divorce and submit a divorce application," Taro wrote.

Justice minister: Aim of the bill precisely to protect victims of violence

In fact, the words "violence" and "victim" do not appear anywhere in the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs' draft legislation. Justice Minister Liisa Pakosta, however, said the proposal was designed specifically to protect victims of violence.

"I have also spoken with the Ministry of Social Affairs and there may be some misunderstandings there. We will supplement the explanatory memorandum to make it clearer. We have also met with the Ministry of the Interior. Before the draft is finalized, we will adjust the sections that raised questions, but these are not matters of principle," Pakosta said.

Pakosta said she is actually in complete agreement with the Ministry of Social Affairs that victims should not be directed or pressured into negotiations with their abusers and that situations increasing contact between victims and perpetrators should be avoided.

"We are actually on exactly the same page. In practice, however, if people cannot reach an agreement, they currently have to go to court. Under the existing rules, the court is required to attempt reconciliation between them and not merely by having them in the same room. The court has a duty to reconcile the parties and determine whether the grounds for ending the marriage actually exist. The law also requires at least two years of separation before a divorce can be granted and judges are obligated to hear both parties. We are removing all of that," Pakosta said.

The justice minister also rejected the Ministry of Social Affairs' criticism that some provisions of the draft conflict with the Istanbul Convention, the international treaty aimed at preventing violence against women.

"No, I do not agree with that and we can explain that more clearly in the explanatory memorandum as well," the minister said.

Expensive lawyers hired in place of chatbot

Margo Orupõld, head of the Pärnu Women's Support Center, said access to legal aid services has actually worsened over the past year for women who have experienced violence. ERR has previously reported on the issue.

In Estonia, state-funded legal aid is provided by attorneys and can be requested by low-income and vulnerable individuals for representation in court or other proceedings, or for assistance with drafting legal documents.

"There is a form [when applying for state-funded legal aid — ed.] where you have to describe whether you own any assets. If you have any property, even a small patch of forest that is essentially worthless, you immediately do not qualify. If you are employed and take home around €500 a month and have several children, you may start to qualify. But if you own assets, there is often a condition that you can receive legal aid only if you sell the property after the proceedings and use the proceeds to cover the legal costs, as if it were a loan. Because we see these cases ourselves, we generally do not recommend that women apply if they have any significant assets," Orupõld said.

This year, the Pärnu Women's Support Center has been able to refer women to free state-funded legal aid only three times.

Until last year, lawyers at Hugo Legal also provided free initial legal consultations to low-income individuals. The Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs discontinued the service at the start of this year and replaced it with a chatbot.

Orupõld said that instead of using the ministry's recommended chatbot, people often end up hiring expensive attorneys to get answers to their questions.

"We recently had a case on Saaremaa where we accompanied a client ourselves to answer her questions. We gave her all the answers, but she did not believe us. She still wanted to go to a lawyer and hear it from an attorney. We went with her and the lawyer gave exactly the same answers she had already received," Orupõld said.

The shelter director explained that some people are reluctant to use a chatbot because they fear it could leave a digital trace online.

According to crime statistics compiled by the Ministry of Justice and Digital Affairs last year, 48 percent of violent crimes committed in Estonia are cases of domestic violence and 38 percent of domestic violence incidents involve a child. The vast majority of domestic violence cases involve physical abuse, though authorities have also recorded threats, sexual offenses and other forms of violence. Victims are typically women, while perpetrators are usually their male partners.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!