Domestic violence has been under public scrutiny for some time both internationally and in Estonia. A highly negative social phenomenon, it causes considerable harm to individuals` basic rights and thereby poses an acute legal problem. Accordingly, the objective with the article is to address the attitudes of Estonia’s practising legal experts towards domestic violence from the perspective of recognising it and to support the idea of exploring options for further systematising the relevant legislation. World judicial practice uses two fundamental types of regulation to address domestic violence: reconciling and punitive. According to a survey carried out among Estonia’s practising lawyers in 2014, legal professionals may favour either kind of regulation. The authors of the article hold the view that Estonia needs fairly separate regulation for preventing and combating domestic violence yet regulation that is integrated well into the system at large. Obviously, laws cannot solve all problems related to domestic violence on their own; however, the potential of laws should not be underestimated.

An appropriate ‘solution pattern’ for social problems in a state based on the rule of law entails the existence of corresponding legislative regulations. The solution should be approved at the level of a law as a legislative act of supreme juridical power. A solution created at that level would fully correspond to the principle of rule of law and also minimise the possibility of socalled departmental special interests prevailing, in recognition that this danger accompanies efforts toward the solution of every multifaceted problem. The authors find that, since Estonia already possesses relatively extensive experience in legislative consolidation for various aspects of the society’s reality, with most of this experience being of a positive nature, it would be a most welcome development if the issue of DV were to be included in the current process of consolidation under the auspices of the project Towards the Development of Better Legislation. Legislative drafting is stimulated by the perception of acute social problems and of a need to regulate them by legislative means. Results from 2014 and 2017 surveys show that Estonia’s legal practitioners perceive DV as a problem the causes of which demand research and whose victims require help. Most legal practitioners surveyed encountered DV in their day-to-day work, with prosecutors and police detectives bearing the heaviest burden: it consumed nearly one third of their work hours. A serious problem was identified in prejudice and stereotypes, which yield an oversimplified and distorted image of the actual causes of DV, in which the victim frequently is considered responsible. Both the general population and legal practitioners widely share the erroneous impression that the victims could avoid violence through ‘appropriate conduct’. Such stereotypic attitudes wherein victims are considered partially to blame for violence can obstruct the work of law-enforcement agencies. While the idea of a special law on DV found support and scepticism in roughly equal measure, support for it increased significantly when respondents judged the concrete opportunities and solutions offered by such a law. These legal practitioners perceived numerous bottlenecks and unsolved problems in relation to the existing legislative regulation and legal practice, which one would expect to be overcome through a special law on DV. The authors conclude from the survey-based findings that Estonia’s legal practitioners demonstrate considerable anticipation for a law on DV. The participants in the surveys also perceived an increasing need for co-operation with law-enforcement agencies in this regard – i.e., for concentrating on collaboration within this domain. However, the authors consider it undoubtedly important also to increase the involvement of specialists in the DV field: victim support services, staff of women’s shelters, and municipal social workers.

Law is valid in many, quite different senses and forms, and the content of validity is far from uniform. Because, above all, it is important to emphasise the distinction between the legal and the social validity of law, the paper spotlights the elements of social validity encompassed by the concept of legal validity. Discourse on the object and meaning of the sociology of law remains relevant in its own right today, and the problematic nature of the interface between the sociology of law and the scientific world is evident far beyond European jurisdictions. To illustrate the sociology of law’s capacity to make a relatively independent jurisprudential contribution to solving the problems facing the law in society, the paper examines the case of Estonia. So as to support the drafting of laws that are in tune with social realities, Estonia has established rules for law-making, set out in the relevant normative documents. The authors examine those foundations: to create a socially valid law that corresponds to the idea of law, it is necessary to start by mapping out the requirements of the ‘pre-project phase’, then legitimise them and adhere to them in practice. The key message is that impact assessment has a meaning that covers more than simply drafting one or another piece of legislation; this is a process of gathering evidence of the merits and drawbacks of decision-makers’ (policy) choices, to inform assessing the potential consequences. Clearly articulating and enforcing policy directions is important for stakeholders and society at large, for ensuring the visibility and openness of legislative policy.

4 Covering letter to the Riigikogu draft resolution "Guidelines for development of legislative policy until 2030".https://www.just.ee/sites/www.just.ee/files/oiguspoliitika_pohialused_aastani_2030_sk_luhike_versioon.

4 Covering letter to the Riigikogu draft resolution "Guidelines for development of legislative policy until 2030".https://www.just.ee/sites/www.just.ee/files/oiguspoliitika_pohialused_aastani_2030_sk_luhike_versioon.