Police interventions in victims’ encounters of intimate partner violence in a rural setting

Abstract

One of the most frequently experienced types of violent crime in South African rural communities is interpersonal violence, which includes intimate partner violence. Rural policing is among the vital forms of intervention required to manage such incidents. This article employs a qualitative interpretative phenomenological analysis approach, to describe and interpret police members’ experiences of policing victims’ encounters of intimate partner violence in the rural Vhembe district in Limpopo. Fifteen police members, from the two South African Police Service’s subprogrammes: Visible Policing and Detective Service were sampled through purposive sampling. Unstructured open-ended interviews, field notes, diaries, and follow-up telephone interviews were used as data-collection methods. Data were analysed in accordance with the interpretative phenomenological analysis guidelines. The findings show that intimate partner violence in matrimonial and intimate relationships is common in this district; that it manifests as physical, emotional, sexual violence, and controlling behaviour and affects women, men, children, and the victims’ next-of-kin, with men mostly being the perpetrators. Paradoxes on the home front and cultural customs shape how the incidents are handled in the district communities and also determine the implementation of policing of the incidents leading to incident-focussed and evasive intervention strategies. The findings have implications for police training, further research, collaborative community stakeholder workshops, and setting up intimate partner violence community capacity-building centres.

‘Hard-pressed on every side’: Christian women’s experiences of intimate partner violence in two provinces of South Africa

“…Police were found to not take the participants’ plight seriously. This is congruent with the study of (Yesufu 2022 :97), who identified police as lacking the capacity and sensitivity required to address IPV matters, and that makes victims feel responsible or at fault, thus contributing to secondary victimisation (Gouws 2022 :2; Gumani 2022 :380).…”

“…Church leaders were seen as lacking knowledge on the prevention of abuse and not offering any effective support as this would contradict their inherent support for patriarchy. Furthermore, police officers were viewed as being biased and often blamed IPV survivors for instigating the violence they had experienced (Gumani 2022 :380).…”