Factors of Domestic Violence Against Women: Correlation of Women’s Rights and Vulnerability

Abstract

Many studies have looked into domestic violence but very few have considered women’s knowledge and perception about their rights. This study aims to examine the main sociocultural factors behind domestic violence against women with an emphasis on the power of the knowledge and perception of the women about their international and constitutional rights. Quantitative data collected in 2015 in the regions of East and Southwest Burkina Faso is used in this paper. Multivariate logistic regression is implemented to take into consideration the net effects of each factor when controlling the effects of other covariates. Results of this paper can be used to implement actions against domestic violence in the zone of intervention of the Program of Sexual Health and Human Rights project.

Keywords

Violence against women domestic violence vulnerability victims of violence sexual violence physical violence mental violence types of violence

Introduction

The situation of women and children is very concerning and is a challenging issue that is slowing economic growth and development in many African countries. This group (women and children) is vulnerable and their rights are not often respected due to diverse and complex sociocultural and economic barriers (Lalor et al 2010). Violence against women stops them from fulfilling their potentials, restricts economic growth, and undermines development (United Nations 2006). Burkina Faso is not exempted. In the country, numerous women and girls are still exposed to multiple violence and rights violations such as the female genital mutilations or cutting (Creel, 2002), forced marriage (Amnesty International 2016), physical and moral violence, etc. Yet, some legal instruments that protect and defend women against these different acts of violence exist.

To frame the struggle against violence that some women encounter in their household, Burkina Faso endowed itself with a legal and organizational setting with support and the signatures of international and regional legal instruments. The country accepted legal instruments such as:

Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;

Convention on the Rights of the Child;

African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child

African Charter on Human and People’s rights;

Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol);

United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women.

In addition to these texts, Burkina Faso subscribed to several international Conventions to fight against gender-based violence. The list includes the declaration and the program of action of Vienna; the Program and the Action plan of Cairo (Egypt); the Program of actions of Istanbul (Turkey) concerning human establishments and the Declaration and program of action of Stockholm (Sweden).

At the national level, in addition to the organizational structure, there is a ministerial department with a specific unit on women’s protection and a National Committee for the Advancement of Women. There are also some texts adopted locally to describe protective mechanisms of the rights of women and children. Among them are:

the fundamental law of the country (Constitution of 2 June 1991);

the code of family and people (FPFC);

texts covering agrarian issues and land reorganization (ALR);

a criminal code aimed at repressing female genital cutting, forced and precocious marriage, family’s abandonment, levirate, dowry, etc.

These legal and political measures should contribute to:

ensuring equality and fairness between man and woman;

promoting, protecting and defending the rights of the women and children within the family and the society;

fighting against any type of violence against women and girls; and

promoting by women’s citizenship rights and full involvement in the political structures of the country.

Despite the existence of these organizational tools and legal texts that constitute an important asset, the rights of women and children are not always respected; application of these texts is difficult for multiple reasons among which are:

ignorance by women of their rights;

ignorance of judicial, legal institutions and conditions of access;

ignorance of legal procedures able to allow women to get justice;

difficult access to the judicial system;

burden of some traditional and religious factors;

sociocultural burden that conditions women to a position of inferiority

To support the Government of Burkina Faso in the struggle for equality of any kinds, some development partners try to bring their contributions. In particular, the cooperation between Germany and Burkina Faso, through its Program of Sexual Health and Human Rights (PROSAD) undertook some actions in the sense of sensitization, capacity building and backing the capacities of actors, etc. The zones of intervention of this program are the regions of East and Southwest of Burkina Faso. Moreover, in 2013, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) organized a workshop in Dakar, Senegal which contributed to the eradication of gender-based violence by strengthening skills and capacities at national levels (UNESCO 2013). Moreover, Lakshmi at the ACP-EU parliamentary assembly re-iterate that much still needs to be done for justice of women and children who have suffered violence, and to end the horrible abuses and impunity that allows the continuous violation of human rights (ONU-FEMMES 2013).

This paper aims to analyze key indicators related to the phenomenon and to shed light on the situation of violence against women in the regions of the Southwest and the East. It is also envisaged to bring to bear valuable statistical, sociological, and legal information on the main factors of violence that women undergo in these two regions of Burkina Faso.

Literature review

Several authors have invested in the study of violence against women. But, in Burkina Faso, research studies on violence against women are relatively rare especially with regards to the question of the link with women’s rights. Existent literature ranges from descriptive analyses of survey data such as demographic and health surveys (INSD and Macro 2012), biographical analysis and specific sectorial data to analysis of intervention areas of some programs.

A consensual definition of gender-based violence is any violence against men and women, where women are usually the victim. It stems from unequal power relations between men and women. Violence affects women disproportionately and it is predominantly directed against women just because they are women. It includes, without limitation, physical, sexual and psychological abuse (United Nations (2006)). Violence against women includes physical, sexual and psychological/emotional violence within the family, sexual abuse of children, violence related to dowry, rape and sexual abuse, marital rape, sexual harassment in the workplace and in educational institutions, forced prostitution, sexual exploitation of girls and women and female genital mutilation.

Violence against women is a burning truth that affects all countries, including Burkina Faso (AFJ/BF 2014). However, one can classify countries according to two levels of violence against women. While domestic violence remains one of the most widespread forms in developing countries, sexual harassment and rape are recurrent violence in parts of the developed societies (RECIF/ONG-BF, 1995). Most of the time, perpetrators of violence are relatives (spouses, brothers, and other close family members) but also friends and colleagues at workplaces, schools, etc.

In terms of use of legal and judicial services, some studies (Erez, 2002) showed a low use of these services among women victims of violence. This is usually explained by the predominance of customary law in the societies and the resolution of conflicts within the family or by friends. In addition, the place of women in traditional society, perceptions that people have of legal institutions and modern judicial, customary practices partly explain why women in such situations rarely make use of legal and other social services. However, a number of laws that protect women from discrimination have also either inadequate, or have not been properly implemented. In India for instance, the Human Right Law Network (HRLN) was created in order to connect the movement of women. Thus, a group of lawyers and social activists (the Women’s Justice Initiative (WJI)) who uses the law to oppose all forms of gender-based discrimination and violence against women. Through this, women’s access to the justice system was also empowered (HRLN 2013).

Lelerc et al. (2016) made an interesting documentary research on the phenomenon of violence against women. This review Their study was exploratory literature research to make an initial inventory of knowledge on the links between the violence suffered by women and substance misuse among women in Europe and some non-European countries in the Mediterranean region. They find a strong relationship between violence and use of psycho-active substances that may in one way or another indicate the violence process. Those reasons are almost the same in Burkina Faso.

The response to violence against women in Burkina Faso is through legal instruments on violence perpetrated against women through the criminal code adopted by Law No. 043/96 ADP of the 13 November 1996 Penal Code – this provides for punishment of several types of abuse (physical and sexual) performed on both men and women (including blows and injuries, indecent assault and rape). Female genital mutilation is also a form of sexual violence prohibited in Burkina Faso.

Most of the historical information about violence against women is obtained from qualitative studies. However, the main finding is the lack of quantitative data on Burkina Faso. This is what this study attempts to remedy by providing both quantitative elements and factors that cause violence against women in the East and Southwest regions of Burkina Faso.

Aims

The general objective of this article is to identify sociocultural factors that cause domestic violence against women in the East and Southwest regions of Burkina Faso.

Data and methods

The PROSAD intervention area includes two administrative regions of Burkina Faso that are the regions of East and Southwest. These two regions have been created by Law No. 2001-013/AN of 2 July 2001, which created a total of 13 such regions in Burkina Faso.

The Eastern region

The Eastern region is located in the eastern part of Burkina Faso. It is large area of 46,694 km², and it is 17% of the national territory. Its average density was 26.0 people per km² in 2006. It is composed of five provinces: Gourma; Gnagna; Tapoa; Komondjoari; and Kompienga (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Representation of administrative subdivisions (communes) of the Eastern region.

It is bordered to the north by the Sahel region, to the south by the states of Togo and Benin, to the east by Niger, and to the west by the region of Central-East and Central-North.

Demographically, according to the latest general census of population and housing in 2006, the population of the region of the East was 1,212,284 individuals composed of 594,868 men (49.1%) and 617,416 women (50.9%). This population is estimated at 1,615,740 inhabitants in 2015. One of the features of the eastern population is its extreme youth. Indeed, more than half of the population is under 10 years old and the average age is 20.0 years compared to the national average of 21.7 years. The population of the eastern region represents 8.6% of the national population.

The Southwest region

The Southwest region is composed of four provinces: Bougouriba; Ioba; Noumbiel; and Poni (see Figure 2). It has an area of 16,318 km² or 6% of the national territory and its population is estimated at 620,767 inhabitants in 2006 or 4.4% of the population of Burkina Faso. Its density was about 38.0 people per km² in 2006. In 2015, this population was estimated at 795,549 inhabitants with 381,847 men and 413,702 women.

Figure 2.

Representation of administrative subdivisions (communes) of the Southwest region.

As with the population of the Eastern region that of the Southwest is very young. Indeed, 56.7% of its population is under 20 years.

The Southwest region is bordered to the east by Ghana and the Central West region, to the north by the Hauts-Bassins, Boucle of Mouhoun and Central West, to the west by the regions Cascades and Hauts-Bassins, and to the south by the State of Ivory Coast.

Methods

This research paper is in line with the interventions of PROSAD through one of its three components: works for women’s rights promotion and prevention of gender-based violence. Results of this paper will contribute in the evaluation of the program interventions on the phenomenon. Currently bivariate and univariate analyses are used at program level while multivariate analysis will better allow to identify the real reasons for violence against women.

The quantitative analysis undertaken makes use of primary data collected in 2015 in the two areas of program intervention. This survey includes modules concerning the “knowledge and the approval of the women and girls rights” and the “extent of violence against women and men”.

Given the purpose and the nature of our study, a logistic regression analysis is the more appropriate technique. The use of this method follows a number of requirements. The goal is to explain violence against women with a dichotomous dependent variable: either 1 for women who have been victims of any violence during the last 12 months or 0 for those who have not been.

In the logistic regression model, independent variables can be numerical or categorical. If p is the probability that the dependent variable takes the value 1, that is to say that the studied event happens – probability for a woman to have been abused in the past 12 months, then “1 - p” is the probability that the dependent variable is not realized – probability for a woman not to have been a victim of any violence in the last 12 months.

The logistic regression model is used to pose the following equation

Z = \log (\frac{p}{1 - p})

and when p = 1 then Z є] −∞; + ∞ [;

- under the linear form, $Z = β_{0} + β_{1} X_{1} + β_{2} X_{2} + \dots + β_{p} X_{p};$

- under the multiplicative form, we have: $e^{z} = \frac{p}{1 - p}$ or $p = \frac{e^{z}}{1 - e^{z}}$

The statistic $e^{z} = \frac{p}{1 - p}$ is called “odds ratio”.

Logistic regression provides information on:

- the number of observations;

- the probability of the Chi-square associated with the model

- the R² that gives the predictive power of a variable or model;

- odds ratio;

- the significance (p> | Z |) of parameters (β coefficients or odds ratio);

- the confidence interval of the parameters of the model.

Results

This section identifies among the variables included in the model, the most significant to the explanation of violence against women. Results of this study also highlighted the mechanisms by which significant factors impact domestic violence.

Variables included in the model are grouped as follows: sociocultural factors; and factors of perception. Variables are included according to the groups created in order to appreciate the net effect of each group.

Effects of sociocultural variables on the violence against women

Findings summarized in Table 1 concern the role of sociocultural variables such as region of residence, highest level of education, religion, marital status and main occupation on violence perpetrated against women.

Table 1.

Effects of sociocultural factors on violence against women.

Variables and categories	Gross effectsM0	Relative risks associated with the model
		Net effects
		M1	M2	M3	M4	M5	M6
Region of residence	***
East
Southwest	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
R²= 7.7%	3.227***	3.218***	4.495***	4.479***	4.549***	4.629***	4.435***
Currently schooling	ns
Yes	Ref		Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
No	0.993 ns		0.741 (ns)	0.756 ns	0.730 ns	0.643 ns	0.409 ns
R²=0.0%
Level of education	ns
Primary
Secondary 1	Ref			Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
Secondary 2	0.935 ns			0.972 ns	0.908 ns	0.917 ns	0.949 ns
Higher	0.923 ns			0.831 ns	0.743 ns	0.733 ns	0.731 ns
R²=0.0%	0.990 ns			1.059 ns	0.936 ns	0.965 ns	1.237 ns
Religion	ns
Catholic	Ref				Ref	Ref	Ref
Protestant	0.678**				0.735 ns	0.712 ns	0.638 ns
Muslim	0.987 ns				1.034 ns	1.017 ns	1.008 ns
Traditional	0.820 ns				0.425*	0.93*	0.403*
Other religion	1.455 ns				1.096 ns	0.504 ns	0.496 ns
R²=0.7%
Marital status	ns
Single
In union	Ref					Ref1.192 ns	Ref0.842 ns
Widowed	1.006 ns					1.306 ns	0.910 ns
Divorced	0.711 ns					2.870 ns	1.803 ns
R²=0.2%	1422 ns
Main occupation	***
Without occupation	Ref						Ref
Pupils/students	1.872*						1.806 ns
Working	2.499***						4.034**
Housewive	1.294 ns						5.027***
R²=2.0%
Significance		***	***	***	***	***	***
Chi-square		79.837	49.811	48.175	52.823	55.144	64.202
R ²		7.7%	11.4%	11.3%	12.5%	13.1%	15.1%

Significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%; ns: not significant; Ref: reference category.

Taking into account, in one model, all sociocultural variables of this study, we realize that the model is strongly correlated with violence against women and it explains 15.1% of the studied phenomenon. Results (M6) show that the region of residence, women’s religion and main occupation are the significant sociocultural factors contributing to domestic violence. Considered individually, these factors explain 7.7% and 2.0% respectively of the variance of violence against women. Details given in Table 1 show that in the Southwest region women are 4.4 times more likely to be victims of domestic violence than their counterparts in the East region.

Concerning religions, women belonging to the traditional religion are 60% less likely to suffer from domestic violence than women of the Catholic faith. At gross level (M0) when religion is analysed domestic violence as a single covariate, Protestant women were less likely to suffer domestic violence than Catholic women. The significant difference that existed between Protestant and Catholic women regarding domestic violence is no longer significant at the global socio-cultural model (M6). Referring to the occupation status, results show that working women and housewives are respectively 4 and 5 times more likely to suffer from violence than women without any occupation.

Perceptions of women about domestic violence

How can variables of perceptions have an influence on violence against women? This is the question that this section tries to provide an answer to. The results are noted in Table 2.

Table 2.

Effects of perceptions on violence against women.

Variables and modalities	Gross effectsModel 0	Relating risks associated with the model
Variables and modalities	Gross effectsModel 0	Model 1	Model 2
Woman has right	***
Yes	Ref	Ref	Ref
No	0.771 ns	3.102***	3.168***
Don’t know	3.835***
R²=3.5%
Woman deserves to have the same rights like man	***
Yes	Ref	Ref	Ref
No	0.746**	0.686***	0.681***
Don’t know	2.919***	1.316 ns	1.388 ns
R²=2.7%
Position about violence against women	***
Approved	Ref		Ref
Disapproved	0.952*		0.958 ns
No opinion	1.375 ns		0.491 ns
It depends	0.727***
R²=1.5%
Probability ofChi-square		***	***
Chi-square		41.690	50.193
R ²		4.5%	5.5%

Significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%; ns: not significant;Ref: Reference category.

Variables of perceptions include the perception about women’s rights, the perception that women deserve to have the same rights as men and the perception about violence against women. At gross level, it appears that all the three perception variables selected in this study are strongly correlated with violence against women. In the first model (M0) or gross level model, women who do not know if women have rights are 3.8 times more likely to suffer any violence than women who think they have rights. Women who think that women do not deserve the same rights as men have 25% less risk of being victims of domestic violence than those who believe that women have the same rights as men. Women who do not know if they have the same rights as men were about three times more likely to suffer violence than those who believe that women have the same rights as men.

At the net level (Model 2, Table 2), all the perception factors are put together and results show that the perception about the approval of domestic violence was the only non-meaningful perception factor. In fact, there was a significant relationship for the two other variables, namely: the perception that women have rights; and the perception that women deserve the same rights as men. After controlling the effect of other perception factors, results indicate that women who think that women have no rights are 3.2 more likely to experience domestic violence than those who think that women have rights. For those who think that women do not deserve to have the same rights as men, they are about 32% less at risk of being victims of violence than their peers who think that women deserve the same rights as men.

Key factors of violence against women

What is the contribution of all the variables in the analysis of violence against women?

To answer this question, all the variables, whether sociocultural or perception were introduced in a common model (Table 3). Findings indicate that, this overall model explains 20.7% of the occurrence of violence against women. From the findings of this model, four situations of the independent variables can be separated. The first situation is the case of the variables that are not significant at the gross level and at the net level remained as such. These are variables such as the achieved level of education and marital status. The second situation concerns variables which initially were not significant (gross level) and become significant afterwards (net level). The third case concerns variables that were correlated to violence against women at initial stage and at the net level become not significant. This group includes religion, perception that women have rights and position of the respondent about violence against women. The last category is when the independent variable remains correlated with violence against women from the gross level to the final model. It includes the place of residence, the main occupation and the perception that women deserve to have the same rights as men.

Table 3.

Effects of sociocultural factors on violence against women.

Variables and modalities	Gross effects	Relating risks associated with the model
		Net effects
		Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5	Model 6	General Model
Region of residence	Ref
East	3.227***	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
Southwest		3.218***	4.495***	4.479***	4.549***	4.629***	4.435***	5.837***
Currently schooling
Yes	Ref		Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
No	0.993 ns		0.741 ns	0.756 ns	0.730 ns	0.643 ns	0.409 ns	0.343**
Level of education
Primary	Ref			Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
Secondary 1	0.935 ns			0.972 ns	0.908 ns	0.917 ns	0.949 ns	0.866 ns
Secondary 2	0.923 ns			0.831 ns	0.743 ns	0.733 ns	0.731 ns	0.619 ns
Higher	0.990 ns			1.059 ns	0.936 ns	0.965 ns	1.237 ns	1.129 ns
Religion
Catholic	Ref				Ref	Ref	Ref	Ref
Protestant	0.678**				0.735 ns	0.712 ns	0.638 ns	0.780 ns
Muslim	0.987 ns				1.034 ns	1.017 ns	1.008 ns	1.178 ns
Traditional	0.820 ns				0.425*	0.93*	0.403*	0.580 ns
Other religion	1.455 ns				1.096 ns	0.504 ns	0.496 ns	0.387 ns
Marital status
Single	Ref					Ref	Ref	Ref
In union	1.006 ns					1.192 ns	0.842 ns	0.894 ns
Widowed	0.711 ns					1.306 ns	0.910 ns	1.330 ns
Divorced	1.422 ns					2.870 ns	1.803 ns	1.558 ns
Main occupation	***
Without occupation	Ref						Ref	Ref
Pupils/students	1.872*						1.806 ns	2.070 ns
Occupied	2.499***						4.034**	5.863***
Housewife	1.294 ns						5.027***	9.811***
Woman has right	***
Yes	Ref	Réf	Réf					Ref
No	0.771 ns	3.102***	3.168***					1.785 ns
Don’t know	3.835***
Woman deserves to have the same rights like man	***
Yes	Ref	Ref	Ref					Ref
No	0.746**	0.686***	0.681***					0.343***
Don’t know	2.919***	1.316ns	1.388ns					0.513 ns
Position about violence against women	***
Approved	Ref		Ref					Ref
Disapproved	0.952*		0.958ns					0.589 ns
No opinion	1.375 ns		0.491ns
It depends	0.727							0.438 ns
Probability of Chi-square²		***	***					***
Chi-square		41.690	50.193					85.947
R ²								20.7%

Significant at 10%; ** significant at 5%; *** significant at 1%; ns: not significant; Ref: reference category.

In the interpretation of the final model we will be focused on the second and fourth cases. Thus, considering the regions, we realize that women in the Southwest region are about six times more likely to be victims of any violence than women in the Eastern region. As far as women who do not currently attend are concerned, they are about 66% less likely to be victims of violence than those who are currently attending. Concerning the status of occupation, working women and housewives were respectively 5.8 and 9.8 times more likely to be victims of violence than women without occupation, and women who think that women do not deserve to have the same rights as men are 66% less likely to be victims of domestic violence than women who do not.

Conclusion

Analyses undertaken in this study lead to the conclusion that sociocultural variables such as place of residence, the current attendance, achieved level of education, religion, marital status, or the main occupation, as well as perception variables such as the perception that women have rights or if they deserve to have the same rights as men or what they think about violence against women, would be strongly correlated with violence against women. At first, some variables were significantly associated with the dependent variable but in the presence of the other factors, their behavior changed to explain the studied phenomenon. However, variables such as religion and the fact that the woman has rights that were significant at the gross level are no longer in the presence of other variables in the study.

In sum, women who are more at risk of domestic violence at global level of the model are women of the Southwest region, women who are employed and housewives. On the other hand, women who do not currently attend, and women who believe that they do not deserve the same rights as men are less exposed to violence. This survey indicates that interventions for amelioration should be focused on these women.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author biographies

Bonkoungou Zakaliyat is the Monitoring and Evaluation manager at the Program of implementation of child rights at Germany Cooperation (GIZ)/ Ouaga.

A Sathiya Susuman is an Associate Professor, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Department of Statistics and Population Studies, University of the Western Cape, Bellville 7535, Cape Town, South Africa. He has been engaged in teaching and research in India and Africa since 2001. Prior to taking up the present position, he was assistant professor, Institute of Population Studies, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia. His research interests include technical demography, fertility, mortality, gender, reproductive health, HIV/AIDS, health policies and public health. He has published several international accredited journal articles in BMC Reproductive Health, BMC Research Note, International Journal of Equity in Health, Journal of Public Health, SAHARA J: Journal of Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS Research Alliance, Journal of Social Science Research, Journal of Asian and African Studies, Plos One, Global Health Action, Clinical Case Report, Iranian Journal of Public Health and in other journals and edited volumes. He has served on advisory committees of the Statistics South Africa, various international universities, research institutes, government departments and international non-governmental organizations and on the editorial boards of journals in the field of demography / population studies, gender and reproductive health.

References

AFJ/BF (2014) The Association of Women Jurists Burkina Faso, Convention on Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDEF), Ouagadougou, 17pp. Available at: http://afjbf.bf/en/ (accessed 2014).

Creel

(2002) Abandoning Female Genital Mutilation: Prevalence, Attitudes and Efforts to End the Practice. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau. Available at: http://www.prb.org/pdf/AbandoningFGC_Eng.pdf (accessed 2014).

Edna

( 2002) Domestic violence and the criminal justice system: An overview. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing. Vol. 7 No. 1, Available: www.nursingworld.org/ojin/MainMenuCategories/ANAMarketplace/ANAPeriodicals/OJIN/TableofContents/Volume72002/No1Jan2002/DomesticViolenceandCriminalJustice.aspx

INSD and Macro Inc (2012) Burkina Faso Demographic and Health Survey 2010. Ouagadougou, Burkina: Faso. Available at: http://dhsprogram.com/what-we-do/survey/survey-display-329.cfm (accessed 2014).

Leclerc

Chiu

Cale

et al . (2016) Sexual violence against women through the lens of environmental criminology: Toward the accumulation of evidence-based knowledge and crime prevention. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 1–25.

UNESCO (2013) Violence against Women in West Africa: Last Workshop in the Gambia. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/new/en/member-states/single-view/news/violence_against_women_in_west_africa_last_workshop_in_gambia/#.WBIktNJ961s (accessed 2015).

Human Right Law Network (HRLN 2013) Women’s Justice. Available at: www.hrln.org/hrln/womens-justice-.pdf (accessed July 2014).

Amnesty International (2016) Forced Marriages in Burkina Faso: The Facts. Available at https://www.amnesty.org/en/press-releases/2016/04/burkina-faso-forced-early-marriage-facts/ (accessed 2016).

Lalor

McElvaney

(2010) Child sexual abuse, links to later sexual exploitation/high-risk sexual behavior, and prevention/treatment programs. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse.

10.

United Nations (2006) Ending Violence Against Women from Words to Action. Available at: http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/public/VAW_Study/VAWstudyE.pdf (accessed 2016).

11.

ONU - FEMMES (2013) It is Time for Action to End Violence Against Women: A Speech by Lakshmi Puri at the ACP-EU Parliamentary Assembly. Available at: http://www.unwomen.org/fr/news/stories/2013/6/it-is-time-for-action-to-end-violence-against-women-a-speech-by-lakshmi-puri (accessed 2016).