Ongoing Gender-Based Violence in South Africa: Analysing the Effectiveness of the Legal Progressive Framework in Addressing a National Crisis.

Introduction

Gender-based violence has been a perennial legal and social crisis in South Africa. Recent statistics indicate that South Africa has high rates of gender-based violence: between April and September 2025, over 19 387 rape cases were reported, and it is likely that many more cases go unreported. This equates to over 105 reported cases per day.¹ These statistics demonstrate how alarming gender-based violence is. Gender-based violence refers to acts perpetrated on the basis of gender, such as sexual assault, harassment, femicide, and many other harmful acts. More recently, this alarming reality led to many joining hands in a “Women for Change” anti-GBV movement. Through this movement, approximately 1 149 889 signatures have been submitted to date in a petition calling for gender-based violence to be declared a National Disaster.²

There have been progressive constitutional protections specifically addressing gender-based violence, including the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998. However, the continuous increase in the rates of gender-based violence raises concerning questions about whether the legal system is effective. Given that South Africa maintains one of the most progressive legislative frameworks and constitutional protections in the world, a critical question arises: why does gender-based violence remain so pervasive and continue to increase daily?

This article argues that the persistent crisis of gender-based violence persists despite — and not because of any absence of — progressive constitutional protections meant to eradicate it. This article analyses the legal measures in place and relevant case law, evaluating how courts have been addressing gender-based violence. It also explores recommendations for improving legal responses, the legal framework, judicial interpretation, and identified gaps. This article does not address the long-term or psychological impacts of gender-based violence on victims.

Legal Framework

A) Constitution of South Africa

The cornerstone of the legal framework tackling gender-based violence in South Africa is the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. It binds everyone in the country — including private entities, citizens, and the state — to promote, respect, and give effect to the Bill of Rights as the supreme law of the land; no other law may conflict with it. The Constitution plays a vital role in protecting individuals from violations of their dignity and from discrimination, while introducing measures aimed at reducing gender-based violence.

The constitutional provisions relevant to the eradication of gender-based violence include:

• Section 9 (Right to Equality): This section prohibits unfair discrimination on the basis of gender and promotes the right to equality. It is directly relevant since gender-based violence arises from discrimination and structural inequality based on gender.
• Section 10 (Right to Human Dignity): This section protects every person’s right to have their dignity respected and protected. Gender-based violence violates this right through acts such as harassment, emotional abuse, domestic violence, and rape.
• Section 12 (Freedom and Security of the Person): This section provides the right to be free from all forms of violence. It is relevant because it protects everyone — regardless of gender — from violence.

These constitutional protections, taken together, impose a legal obligation on the state to develop and implement a framework that responds effectively to gender-based violence.

B) Legislative Framework

An effective response to gender-based violence requires legislative measures aimed at providing legal protection to victims. The statutes introduced to address gender-based violence form an important part of the broader legal framework, both in strengthening the criminal justice response and in creating greater protection for victims.

The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007 provides a broad definition of all forms of sexual offences, introduces stricter measures to prosecute sexual offenders through improved investigations, and affords greater protection to victims of sexual violence. It significantly strengthened legal protections for all persons who may fall victim to such offences.

The Protection from Harassment Act 17 of 2011 allows victims to obtain protection orders as a remedy against bullying, stalking, and physical harm, among other forms of harassment. It is particularly helpful to victims because a warrant of arrest may be authorised where a perpetrator breaches an order against them. Any person feeling threatened may apply at a Magistrates’ Court, providing accessible relief to victims.

A key piece of legislation is the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998, enacted for the protection of persons against domestic abuse. Under this statute, courts and police have a legal duty to respond effectively to this social crisis — one that attacks the dignity, equality, freedom, and security of victims.

The legislative framework as a whole demonstrates that the state has prioritised a comprehensive approach capable of holding perpetrators liable while, most importantly, helping to prevent the gender-based violence crisis that South Africa faces.

C) Obligations

The state is obliged to promote, respect, and fulfil the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights under the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. In doing so, the state must ensure that all persons are protected from discrimination and violation — in this context, particularly those who are most vulnerable to becoming victims of gender-based violence. It is the state’s responsibility to introduce laws, policies, and other mechanisms that contribute to the decline and prevention of gender-based violence.

The protection of fundamental human rights requires the state to implement effective measures, including responses to any violation. The legislation discussed in the legislative framework subsection above is evidence of the state acting on these obligations. This legislation provides measures ensuring that victims are protected while perpetrators are appropriately prosecuted following thorough investigations. State obligations extend further: the state must also address the gender-based violence crisis publicly and ensure that all laws are implemented with the full support of law enforcement, support services, and the judiciary.

Case Law Analysis

One notable judicial decision addressing gender-based violence is S v Baloyi (Minister of Justice and Another Intervening) 2000 (2) SA 425 (CC). In emphasising the harm caused by domestic violence, Sachs J stated that domestic violence’s “hidden, repetitive character and its immeasurable ripple effects on our society” — particularly on family life — cuts across class, race, culture, and geography, and is all the more harmful because it is so often concealed and so frequently goes unpunished.³

The case examined the constitutionality of courts granting suspended warrants of arrest simultaneously with the issuing of protection orders under the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998. The court’s decision established that the legal issue constituted a social crisis and not merely a procedural matter. The court examined its legal duty to implement measures that effectively protect victims and acknowledged that gender-based violence undermines constitutional rights — including freedom, equality, and dignity — making it a constitutional concern of the highest order.

The court’s reasoning demonstrates a recognition of the legal obligations to prioritise a framework that protects victims. This reasoning reflects progressive development in South African jurisprudence towards gender-based violence.

This article argues that protective legislation alone does not resolve systemic gaps and shortcomings, such as delays in the justice system and deficient responses from law enforcement officials. These barriers, which victims frequently encounter, continue to undermine the effectiveness of implementation, and the state still faces justifiable criticism from society. The decision in S v Baloyi validates the authenticity of protective legislation as a mechanism to combat gender-based violence. Regardless of the courts’ awareness of the magnitude of this crisis, institutional and structural shortcomings will not be eradicated through judicial pronouncements alone.

The decision supports this article’s broader argument that gender-based violence must be treated not only as a constitutional problem but as a social problem requiring urgent action from both the state and society. S v Baloyi reflects that gender-based violence infringes constitutional rights and that the courts have a legal obligation to introduce impactful legal protection for victims.

Critical Evaluation

The evidence above suggests that the state has introduced a legal framework well-suited to addressing gender-based violence in the Republic of South Africa. However, there is an undeniable gap between the legal framework in place and how it is implemented in real-life situations. The intent to fight the gender-based violence crisis and protect victims is evident from the legislative measures in place. Yet despite having one of the most progressive legal frameworks in the world, gender-based violence in South Africa remains pervasive. This article argues that the increase in gender-based violence does not reflect an absence of legal frameworks, but rather a gap between the law and its structural implementation.

The inability to implement strategies effectively is evident through documented non-compliance with the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act. The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Police, Mr Ian Cameron, stated that “despite the commitment made to the committee in a meeting held on 30 October 2024, there remains a substantial number of administrative and operational non-compliance at police station level. The direct consequence of the non-compliance is that the lives of the victims are endangered.”⁴

Legislation provides mechanisms that include criminal sanctions, victim support, and protection orders. However, without an expeditious response from law enforcement, these protections frequently fail — due to delays or the substandard training of officials required to handle gender-based violence cases. It is this failure in law enforcement that undermines the effectiveness of the legal framework. The judgment in S v Baloyi demonstrated that the courts acknowledge setbacks in implementing legal obligations. The evidence suggests that substandard training of law enforcement officials, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and insufficient resources often mean that legal obligations are not consistently met. Legal reform without resources, accountability, and commitment from law enforcement officials risks rendering even the most progressive laws ineffective in combating gender-based violence.

The drivers of gender-based violence — including unequal power dynamics between men and women, gender inequality, poverty, patriarchal norms, and social norms that privilege masculinity — explain why gender-based violence remains pervasive regardless of the progressive frameworks in place. Below is a breakdown of how these drivers sustain the crisis:

• Poverty: Financial dependency may leave victims unable to leave abusive relationships. For example, some young girls are forced into marriage for financial gain for their families, leaving them more vulnerable to sexual violence. Addressing unemployment and financial independence is essential to enabling victims to remove themselves from danger.
• Patriarchal norms: These norms — in which men are seen as providers and are often excused for being dominant, aggressive, and controlling, while women are expected to be submissive and are reduced to little more than property — directly fuel high rates of gender-based violence. Many perpetrators believe they are entitled to control and dominance within relationships.
• Gender inequality: In many contexts, gender alone creates an environment in which various forms of violence are normalised, as societies often condone harmful behaviour on the basis of gender roles.
• Normalisation of abuse and violence: Some communities accept physical violence as a legitimate means of resolving conflict or imposing discipline, normalising behaviour that is harmful and criminal.

These drivers of gender-based violence are the reason why even the most progressive legal frameworks alone are insufficient to combat gender-based violence in South Africa.

It can therefore be argued that the persistence of gender-based violence does not entirely reflect a failure of the legislative framework, but rather reflects societal challenges that require broader social transformation alongside legal mechanisms. The progressive legal system can only be effective when accompanied by proper implementation; without it, the intended objectives cannot be achieved.

Gender-based violence is more of a cultural and social problem than a purely legal one. Deeply embedded patriarchal attitudes, societal norms, and normalised abusive behaviour cannot be transformed through legal reform alone. Recognising these social factors does not diminish the state’s responsibility to shape social structures — social change is necessary, but the law plays a crucial and enabling role.

The failure to address the crisis efficiently brought about the campaign led by the Women For Change organisation, which introduced a petition to declare gender-based violence a national disaster. A counterargument to this proposal is that declaring a national disaster would focus only on criminal justice responses without addressing social problems and preventative strategies. The evidence suggests that a legal declaration alone will not be sufficient to eradicate gender-based violence if its underlying drivers are not addressed — just as progressive legislation alone cannot minimise the crisis.

Proposed Solutions

• Address root causes: The root causes of gender-based violence must be addressed, including through job creation to reduce unemployment and alleviate poverty. Financial independence is crucial to enabling victims to leave dangerous situations. Achieving gender equality in the workplace will further dismantle structural inequalities that perpetuate gender-based violence.
• Break generational cycles through education: Deeply embedded social systems passed down through generations must be challenged and dismantled. This can be achieved by educating the younger generation on gender equality, consent, gender role stereotypes, and empathy. Young boys in particular can be encouraged to reject controlling and violent expressions of masculinity. Education systems are the most effective vehicle for this change. Additionally, initiatives targeting adults can improve awareness of the law and the basic human rights that every person holds. Digital and social media platforms — now widely accessible — can be used to promote equality and to inform victims about available legal protections.
• Strengthen law enforcement capacity: Adequate resources and improved training must be provided to law enforcement officials to handle gender-based violence cases with competence and sensitivity. The legal frameworks in place can only be effective where there is coordinated implementation of legal obligations at all levels of the criminal justice system.
• Ensure swift and accessible justice: There should be swift responses in gender-based violence cases, with reduced delays, simplified procedures, and sufficient legal assistance for victims to navigate the system effectively.

Conclusion

This article has examined both the societal and legal dimensions of the persistent increase in gender-based violence in South Africa. It has provided substantive analysis of the progressive legal framework — including the Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998 — and explored relevant case law as evidence that courts recognise gender-based violence as a crisis demanding serious legal intervention. This article identified the reasons why gender-based violence continues to rise despite the laws in place: the gaps in implementation, deeply embedded social structures, and slow institutional responses. This article also briefly examined why declaring gender-based violence a national disaster would not, on its own, minimise the crisis — though the Women For Change movement illustrates that society is demanding decisive interventions to reduce and ultimately end gender-based violence.

The analysis confirms that South Africa does possess one of the most progressive frameworks to combat gender-based violence. The persistence of the crisis, therefore, does not reflect an absence of law but rather reflects limited resources, insufficient public awareness, entrenched social crises, and a lack of consistent legislative enforcement. Society has long normalised violence rooted in gender inequality and patriarchal norms. The high unemployment rate reinforces dependency, leaving many victims powerless while perpetrators feel entitled. Legislation alone cannot combat gender-based violence while these socio-economic factors remain unaddressed.

When gender-based violence goes unaddressed, the rights to equality, freedom, and dignity are denied in practice. Perpetrators must be held accountable, and victims must receive proper protection and support. This is achievable only where law enforcement officials and the judiciary work together in the coordinated and effective implementation of the law.

The progressive legal framework is an indispensable foundation for combating gender-based violence — it is the starting point for eradication. Progress, however, depends on an efficient and coordinated response from both society and the state. The implementation of laws requires proper coordination, matched by genuine societal change. These two forces, working in concert, hold the greatest promise for lasting transformation.

Reference(S):

Cases

S v Baloyi (Minister of Justice and Another Intervening) 2000 (2) SA 425 (CC).

Legislation

Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.

Domestic Violence Act 116 of 1998.

Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act 32 of 2007.

Protection from Harassment Act 17 of 2011.

Secondary Sources

Moosa F, ‘Understanding “Emergency Monetary Relief” in the Domestic Violence Act’ (2020) De Rebus.

Vetten L, ‘Addressing Domestic Violence in South Africa: Reflections on Strategy and Practice’ (2005) 15 South African Crime Quarterly.

Parliament of South Africa, ‘Media Statement: More Action Plans Yet There is No Action to Combat Gender-Based Violence Cases’ (2025).

Hassim S, ‘Violence, Gender and the South African Constitution’ (2018) 34 South African Journal on Human Rights 225.

Internet Sources

Women For Change, ‘Petition: Declare GBVF a National Disaster’ (Women For Change) https://www.change.org/p/declare-gbvf-a-national-disater-in-south-africa.

Amnesty International South Africa, ‘Gender-Based Violence and Femicide Needs to be Treated as a True National Crisis’ (Amnesty International, 2025) https://amnesty.org.za/gender-based-violence-and-femicide-needs-to-be-treated-as-a-true-national-crises/.

Footnote(S):

¹ Amnesty International South Africa, ‘Gender-Based Violence and Femicide Needs to be Treated as a True National Crisis’ (Amnesty International, 2025) https://amnesty.org.za/gender-based-violence-and-femicide-needs-to-be-treated-as-a-true-national-crises/.

² Women For Change, ‘Petition: Declare GBVF a National Disaster’ (Women For Change) https://www.change.org/p/declare-gbvf-a-national-disater-in-south-africa.

³ S v Baloyi (Minister of Justice and Another Intervening) 2000 (2) SA 425 (CC) para 11.

⁴ Parliament of South Africa, ‘Media Statement: More Action Plans Yet There is No Action to Combat Gender-Based Violence Cases’ (Parliament of South Africa, 11 June 2025) (Chairperson’s statement on compliance issues at police stations).