Electronic monitoring, an alternative way of preventing aggression and helping social rehabilitation

Protective Orders for Male Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence: Differences Between Violators and Non-Violators

“…Additionally, in Spain, according to the article 64.3 of Organic Law 1/2004 and the articles 48.4 and 57 of Organic Law 10/1995 of the current Penal Code, the judge or court may agree to the implementation of telematic means to ensure compliance with the imposed restraining measures and thus protect the victims. Specifically, bilateral electronic monitoring (EM) has been applied in Spain since 2009 and permits, among other functions, the GPS location of the aggressor and the victim, calculating the distance between them (Arenas, 2016; Erez et al, 2004; Otero, 2009). In order for these measures to be applied, the judicial resolution is sent to the control centre, which is responsible for delivering and installing the tracking devices to the aggressor and the victim, configuring the exclusion zones indicated in the resolution, monitoring compliance with the judicial measures through a set of devices that are in operation 24 h a day, 365 days a year, and intervening in accordance with the action protocols when alerts (e.g., the aggressor has tampered with the device) or alarms (e.g., the aggressor enters a fixed exclusion zone) occur (GDGV, 2022).…”

“…is the use of EM (Belur et al, 2020). In the context of IPV, the imposition of a PO with EM is considered effective in deterring the aggressor from approaching the victim and in preventing further attacks and even attempted homicides when these measures are in force (Arenas, 2016; Erez et al, 2012; Erez & Ibarra, 2007; Hwang et al, 2023; Otero, 2009). In turn, it helps victims to have a greater sense of security during the EM program, and more autonomy and confidence to carry out their daily activities (Arenas, 2016; Erez et al, 2012; Hwang et al, 2023).…”

“…On the other hand, EM used in pretrial in IPV cases may even increase the likelihood of conviction (Erez et al, 2012). There are also victims of IPV who refuse to use the EM for different reasons (Erez et al, 2012; Hwang et al, 2023; Otero, 2009): those who are highly anxious about receiving alert calls from the control centre or those who do not want to be controlled either by third parties or by the aggressor (knowing the exclusion zones tells them where the victim is moving around).…”