By Aneeta Prem MBE
Parliament has now enacted a statutory definition of so-called honour-based abuse. That matters. But a definition is not the same thing as a new criminal offence, and enactment is not the same thing as commencement.
Sections 143 and 144 of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 create the framework for statutory guidance and define honour-based abuse for that purpose.
As at 21 August 2026, the Act's own commencement notes place those provisions among the parts that still require commencement regulations.
That distinction is important for journalists, professionals and anyone relying on the law in practice.
What section 144 does
Section 144 defines honour-based abuse for the statutory-guidance framework in section 143.
The definition is built around abusive behaviour motivated wholly or partly by a belief that somebody has behaved, is behaving or may behave in a way said to bring shame or dishonour and breach accepted community norms.
The legislation recognises a wide range of abuse, including physical, sexual, threatening, controlling, coercive, economic, spiritual, psychological and emotional abuse.
It also recognises that more than one person may be involved.
That matters because this form of abuse does not always fit a simple one-victim, one-perpetrator model. One person may set the rule. Another may monitor. Another may threaten. Someone else may arrange travel or pass information.
A system looking for one perpetrator can miss the network.
What the new definition does not do
The Act does not create a standalone offence called honour-based abuse.
Conduct in this context may already amount to criminal offending under existing law, depending on the facts. That can include forced marriage, FGM, controlling or coercive behaviour, violence, threats, stalking, harassment and sexual offences.
Sections 143 and 144 do something different. They create a statutory-guidance framework and a shared definition for that purpose.
That should prevent two opposite mistakes: claiming Parliament has suddenly criminalised all honour-based abuse as a new offence, or assuming the absence of a single offence means the conduct sits outside criminal law.
Enacted is not the same as in force
The Crime and Policing Act 2026 received Royal Assent on 29 April 2026.
The official commencement notes identify provisions that came into force on Royal Assent, provisions that came into force two months later, and provisions requiring later commencement regulations.
Sections 143 and 144 fall into that remaining group.
So the accurate position at 21 August 2026 is:
- Parliament has enacted the statutory definition.
- The relevant provisions still require commencement regulations.
- Statutory guidance will then need to be issued and implemented.
Those stages should not be collapsed into one.
Why language matters
The statute uses the term honour-based abuse. When discussing the legislation, I use that wording because legal precision matters.
In my wider safeguarding work, I use the term dishonour abuse.
There is no honour in forcing somebody to marry. There is no honour in controlling a girl's education, monitoring a relationship, confiscating documents or threatening somebody because they are said to have damaged family reputation.
The distinction is deliberate.
In December 2025, this argument entered the parliamentary record when Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb referred to Freedom Charity's position and said: “There is no honour in abuse.”
The law may use one term. We are still entitled to question the social language around it.
Do not replace practice with terminology
Changing language is not enough.
I do not want professionals to learn a new phrase while continuing to miss the person experiencing the abuse.
Nor should the statutory definition encourage crude assumptions about ethnicity, religion or culture. Risk is identified through behaviour, motive, coercion and control, not somebody's name, clothing or background.
Professionals can fail in two directions. They can stereotype families and communities. Or they can see warning signs and become so worried about appearing culturally insensitive that they fail to ask necessary questions.
Neither protects victims.
The right question is not, What community is this person from?
It is, What is happening to them?
Information may only make sense when it is joined together
A school records an absence. A doctor hears that a patient is frightened. Police attended the home months earlier. A friend knows that unexpected travel is being arranged.
None of those facts automatically proves honour-based abuse. Together, they may reveal a pattern no single professional can see alone.
That is why information sharing and multi-agency working matter.
But information sharing can also create danger. In forced-marriage and dishonour-abuse cases, automatically contacting a relative can be unsafe if that person is involved in the control or likely to alert somebody who is.
Professional curiosity must therefore be matched by professional caution.
The Five Freedoms
My Five Freedoms framework asks a practical question: What freedom is being denied?
The freedoms are to Choose, Refuse, Leave, Learn and Be.
They are not a substitute for legislation or safeguarding procedures. They are a way of looking at what coercion does to someone's life.
Can the person choose a relationship or future? Can they refuse a journey, marriage or demand without punishment? Can they leave? Can they continue to learn? Can they be themselves without fear?
Where those freedoms are being removed through pressure, fear or family enforcement, professionals should ask why.
Five questions professionals should ask
- What freedom is being removed?
- Who is imposing, supporting or enforcing that control?
- Is this an isolated incident or part of a wider pattern?
- Who else may hold information that changes the risk assessment?
- Could contacting another person, particularly a family member, make the situation more dangerous?
These questions do not replace specialist safeguarding advice. They help reveal the pattern that specialist systems need to respond to.
How should the reform be judged?
Not by the number of professionals who can repeat the definition.
Better questions are whether police and safeguarding agencies identify cases more consistently, whether multiple-perpetrator risk is recognised, whether unsafe family contact reduces, whether agencies join information more effectively, and whether victims are recognised earlier.
A definition is not protection.
Its value will depend on whether it changes what professionals notice and what they do next.
Legal status at 21 August 2026
The Crime and Policing Act 2026 has enacted sections 143 and 144. The official commencement notes state that remaining provisions not otherwise commenced are to be brought into force by commencement regulations made by the Secretary of State. Sections 143 and 144 are not listed among the provisions commencing on Royal Assent or automatically two months later.
This article should therefore be read as distinguishing clearly between enactment, commencement and implementation.
About the author
Aneeta Prem MBE is an author, human-rights campaigner and co-founder of Freedom Charity with Lord Toby Harris. Her safeguarding work includes forced marriage, FGM, dishonour abuse, consent and prevention. She is also a serving magistrate; this article is written in her personal capacity and does not represent the judiciary.
Primary sources
- Crime and Policing Act 2026
- Crime and Policing Act 2026, section 144
- Explanatory Notes: sections 143 and 144
- Explanatory Notes: commencement
- Hansard, 17 December 2025
First published 13 August 2026. Substantively reviewed 21 August 2026.