Debate contribution: Domestic Abuse Contest Courts
Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .
- MLA
- Mrs Naomi Long
- Party at the time
- Alliance Party
- Date
- 22 October 2024
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Domestic Abuse Contest Courts
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4608420
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Since December 2023, the Belfast remote evidence centre (REC) has hosted domestic abuse contest courts. On a DACC day, several contests are listed to run consecutively, with all victims giving their evidence from the REC. There have been four DACC days to date: 12 December, 11 March, 13 May and 23 December. A total of 18 cases have been listed to date, with 14 concluded and four adjourned to a future date. Of the 14 completed cases, there have been 12 convictions — nine by guilty plea, meaning that the victim did not need to give oral evidence, and three by guilty verdict — and two acquittals. Future days are scheduled. Feedback, particularly from the judiciary and criminal justice organisations, has been extremely positive. Importantly, victims have also been extremely positive, with many of them saying that, without the REC, they would not have been able to continue with their case, they would not have given evidence and the perpetrator would therefore, in most cases, have walked free. The fact that victims are empowered to turn up makes it more likely that there will be a guilty plea or at least a trial. In the cases of people who did not receive the outcome that they hoped for, they nevertheless felt more empowered by being able to take part in the proceedings. That is incredibly important to people's ability to move on with their lives.
235 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
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: 0.02 (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 (0.76).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- 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
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.76 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.69 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.21 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.10 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:27 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.