Member's statement: Violence Against Women and Girls

Member's statement by Mr Matthew O'Toole on .

MLA
Mr Matthew O'Toole
Party at the time
Social Democratic and Labour Party
Date
21 October 2024
Type
Member's statement
Business
Members' Statements
Heading
Violence Against Women and Girls
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4603409

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I want to raise, as Emma Sheerin did, the epidemic of violence against women and femicide in this society. On the front of the 'Belfast Telegraph' today, we see listed the 42 women who have lost their lives in recent years. They did not just lose their lives; they had their lives violently and brutally taken from them. It is extremely important that the cancer of violence against women and femicide is dealt with. That will require a multi-level approach, led by the Executive. I welcome the fact that the First Minister and deputy First Minister and the Executive writ large have set that as a priority, and I say that sincerely. It is extremely important. In my constituency in recent weeks, we have seen murders, including that of Mary Ward, who was taken violently. What is happening and has happened to women is almost beyond comprehension and words. It shames us all. It calls on us to do everything that we can, as legislators but also as human beings, to stand for both a serious criminal justice response and a more fulsome policy response that tackles the root causes of misogyny. I raise specifically a connected issue that touches on the work of the Justice Minister and the Justice Department. It is one that, I hope, the Executive and the Minister will take forward. The Justice (Sexual Offences and Trafficking Victims) Act (Northern Ireland) 2022, which was passed in the previous mandate, included a provision, which has now been in part disapplied after a court ruling, relating to anonymity of suspects after their death. A court rightly ruled that that was not just a violation of press freedom but was wholly counter-productive. Section 8 of that Act includes a provision for post-death anonymity for victims, which, in many ways, is understandable. Lifetime anonymity for victims of rape is, of course, something that we all support, but there is a concern that has been brought to me by members of the media in Northern Ireland that we face a serious situation: in a case where a woman has been raped and murdered, the media is now, legally, not able to report the fact that she was raped. It is a grim subject to have to discuss, but it is important. A high proportion of women who are murdered by men are also raped by them. As we deal with issues surrounding sexual violence and violence against women, we must understand the full scope of it. We must understand how serious it is. The law makes it illegal for media organisations to report that a murder victim has also been raped. I would like the Justice Minister to address that legislation urgently —

— and see what can be done to either repeal or amend it.

465 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.94).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.95).
  • Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.07No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.04No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.94Yes
Overall judgement0.05At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.95
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.05
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups0.69
Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues0.31
No identity-related subject0.00
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:23 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification