A backbench business debate was held on Thursday 15 September 2016 on Domestic abuse victims in family law courts. This debate was scheduled by the Backbench Business Committee following a representation from Angela Smith, Maria Miller and Peter Kyle. This debate was sparked by a January 2016 Women’s Aid report highlighting the cases of nineteen children killed by perpetrators of domestic abuse. The killings were made possible through unsafe child contact arrangements, formal and informal. Over half of the child contact arrangements were ordered through the courts.

This report and campaign supports the Voice4Victims Abuse of Process campaign, which looks specifically at how perpetrators are abusing their rights to various legal platforms – family courts, civil courts, private prosecutions, false allegations – in order to continue their unwanted contact and harassment of their victims.

Sir Keir Starmer, MP has been supporting our work and said the following about our work during Thursday’s debate ‘ The second point that I want to make concerns the abuse of process, an issue that I think is rising on the agenda. Perpetrators of domestic abuse use our courts— both criminal and civil, but it is on the civil courts that the torch has not been shone—to continue the perpetration of control and harassment of victims. I pay tribute to Claire Waxman, herself a victim of harassment. She and Voice4Victims have raised this issue on numerous occasions. There are two types of abuse of process. First, there are the individuals who bring proceedings in which they have no legitimate interest: they are doing it simply to ensure that the person whom they have been stalking or harassing is forced to come to court to strike out their claim. Because these are people with no legitimate interest, the courts will strike out the claim when they get to grips with it, as a vexatious claim. However, the victim will have to go to court to argue that it is vexatious, and that is all that the perpetrator wants: for that person to come to court. That is what happened to Claire Waxman, and it has happened to other victims. This problem could be solved by Christmas. Again, I am looking straight across at the Government Front Bench. It ought to be possible for someone working for the senior judiciary to devise a way to ensure that such cases are subject to a special strike-out procedure that does not require the victim to go to court and take the initiative, and some third party does it instead. I honestly think that a month or two of hard work, and some real courage and determination, could produce a system whereby a practice direction could be issued and the problem could be put to one side. The second type of abuse of process is more difficult to deal with. In these cases, the perpetrator has an interest—a child, for instance—and it is therefore not possible to say that that individual simply should not be allowed to be in court at all. In those circumstances, it is a question of looking at special measures, support and different ways of arranging family and other courts to ensure that they are not used with ulterior motives, because there is growing evidence that is happening. These are difficult cases, but it must be possible to provide support for victims, special measures and, indeed, a more proactive role for judges. A big change in the criminal courts was that judges began to be much more proactive and to say, “This is my problem. I must deal with it. It is my duty to provide a better environment for victims on their journey through our courts.” What today’s debate throws up is that these issues are not going to go away. They need to be solved, and I think they can be solved across the House, but that will require listening, non-defensiveness and commitment to bringing about real change. Real change has already happened in the criminal sphere; it can happen in the family courts as well, and it need not take 15 years if lessons from one jurisdiction are borrowed by the other.’

Voice4Victims is hosting the Abuse of Process conference at the House of Commons on Monday 11th July 10am – 12pm. This conference will look at the problems victims are facing when perpetrators are allowed to access legal processes to further campaigns of abuse against their victims. The impact on victims is prolonged and devastating and we will be highlighting the legal loopholes and pathways that enable this abuse to continue.

Over the past few years, there has been positive work to address some of these issues but without a joined up approach, the situation remains unresolved and means that cases brought against victims in the civil and family courts have a long-lasting and highly detrimental impact on their lives. Voice4Victims, which has led the campaign on the victims’ rights legislation, is hosting this event with the view of producing a report and launching the ‘Abuse of Process’ campaign to redress the imbalance of rights through legislation and test case advocacy.

Speakers and panelists will include: victims experience of this abuse, Sir Keir Starmer, MP, Jess Phillips, MP , Jane Monkton Smith, senior lecturer in criminology, DC Candler, Metropolitan Police, Mitchell Woolf, Human rights solicitor and Harry Fletcher, criminal justice expert, formerly NAPO. The conference will raise the issues of rights of access to courts, breaches of human rights, victim’s experience, the motivation and psychology of the perpetrator and the issue of courts and legal aid.

The Queens Speech yesterday highlighted this government’s commitment, or should I say, lack of commitment, to victims of crime by introducing a Bill of Rights, scrapping the Human Rights Act and failing to commit to their manifesto promise of a Victims’ Law ‘to guarantee keys entitlements to victims’. The government told us in March that a Green paper would be published by early May and yet there is no sign of it and infact, the official responsible for drawing this up has now retired!

The Human Rights Act has played an important part in my own journey as a victim of crime. When the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the prosecution against my stalker, stating that he had an absolute right to access the civil courts to continue his campaign of stalking, I was able to challenge this decision under the Human Rights Act that the CPS had failed in its duty to protect me. This landmark victory saved me a few years later when my stalker used the same tactic and thanks to the Human Rights Act , the CPS successfully prosecuted him and he was sentenced to 3.5 years. This victory has also set a precedent for other victims of stalking facing similar ordeals and is used to remind the Police and CPS of their duty to stalking victims suffering these forms of harassment.

The Human Rights Act has helped not only me but many other victims of crime. From the women raped by the ‘black cab rapist’ where under Article 3 of the Human Rights Act , Police had failed these victims in their investigation and in their treatment of them, to victims of slavery and human trafficking. Their landmark victories also establish a much needed precedent and hopefully will make the police aware of the consequences for failing to act and protect victims.

We’ve had a man sue the CPS for not taking further action against the man suspected of biting part of his ear off. The CPS felt the history of the victim’s mental illness would work against him at a trial. The CPS had wrongly discriminated this man for his mental health. The man was successful as the Human Rights Act showed that the CPS had failed in its duty to protect this man. This case, thanks to the Human Rights Act, has helped to challenge the CPS view of the model victim.

More recently, the Human Rights Act has helped, under Article 2, the families of the Hillsborough disaster, receive their long awaited justice.

The protection of victims of crime is fully entrenched in the Human Rights law and yet to abandon this and to continue to ignore the need for a Victims Law, giving victims’ legally enforceable rights, is to continually fail victims of crime and to silence their voice.

In 2014, as a knee jerk reaction to Labour’s manifesto, this government committed to a victims’ law, and they continue to assure us that ‘victims are at the heart’ of the justice system yet their actions of wanting to take away the Human Rights Act and not realising their promise of a Victims’ Law, shows us otherwise.

Our campaign team have spent the past three years meeting with countless victims of crime and we have extrapolated from their cases to formulate a Victims’ Law. These proposals have been strongly supported and strengthened by Sir Keir Starmer, this country’s lead in Human Rights . Together, we will challenge this government to make sure that we do not go backwards when it comes to Victim’s Rights and that this government leaves the Human Rights Act as it is. We will continue to push the government to spend its resources on focusing on the much needed Victims’ Law which will give Victims easy access to justice, fair treatment, the right support, up to date information, reviews and appeals and will enforce a much needed cultural shift in the way Victims are treated.

If you believe in the Victim’s voice and Victims’ Rights, then please continue to support our Victims’ Law campaign.

The Rights of Women have been campaigning against the evidence requirements for accessing Legal Aid, and thanks to their hard work and campaigning, they have had a victory today recognising that these requirements are legally ‘flawed’.

Today’s Judgment is a promising sign for Victims of Domestic Violence. Changes in legal aid funding have been placing victims of domestic violence at increased risk and harm in family courts. Victims are being forced to remain in contact with their abusers or stalkers. Some are being cross-examined by them or forced into court situations or inappropriate contact orders, all of which have a devastating impact on their lives, emotionally, financially and physically.

The cuts in legal aid have been denying victims of Domestic Violence access to justice and allowing abusers to use the court process to continue their abuse of their victims. Victims, through lack of legal aid support, are not able to access the support, advice and justice that they need to protect themselves from their abusers. Often gathering evidence or getting medical reports done in order to access the gateway to legal aid is timely and costly and is a great stumbling block to many victims.
Today’s judgement will hopefully put pressure on the government to rethink their legal aid strategy and ensure it is now accessible to those that need it most.

We continue to campaign for victims rights and we will be working closely over the coming months with the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, Citizen Advice Bureau, Veritas Justice and other organisations, to ensure the legal loopholes that are allowing abusers to stalk and harass their victims are identified and closed down.

‘CRIME victims are £35million out of pocket because crooks are refusing to pay compensation ‘ was yesterday’s headline, spearheaded by Andy Slaughter, MP

Unsurprisingly, it seems that the victims’ surcharges remain unpaid by offenders. Hardly breaking news to those that work with victims of crime. I say unsurprisingly, as having been a victim of stalking for over a decade, I know too well how slow and ineffective Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service are, in chasing money from the offender.

After 10 years, I am still owed the compensation awarded to me in 2005. This was the compensation that the Crown Prosecution Service insisted I needed and as result, the stalker avoided any other form of punishment. Whilst I have very little interest in receiving the money from the stalker (as this creates a tie and connection that is empowering for the stalker), it was still the only form of punishment that he received for the first time he stalked me. So to me, on a matter of principle, it is important that the money is paid otherwise my stalker received impunity for the crime that had a devastating effect on my life. I need that crime recognised and therefore, need that compensation paid as that was the justice I was afforded.

For the courts, there is very little incentive to chase this money and ten years down the line, I receive regular letters from them asking for my views on whether this compensation order can now be ‘discharged’ or ‘reduced’ so they can ‘close the case’. In other words, they cannot be bothered to have this case on their system anymore and so I should accept it being written off.

Is this shocking that an offender can wilfully refuse to pay for their crimes? No, I am not unique. When Voice4Victims undertook a victims’ rights survey in 2014, the figures showed that 42% of victims who conducted the survey ticked the ‘extremely poor’ category when dealing with the HMCTS, with 77% of victims still chasing for their court awarded compensation. So there really is no surprise that the figures released yesterday show that half of the £61.1 million in court imposed surcharges are still unpaid. It’s clear that offenders are savvy and know that our ineffective , overstretched system is incapable of getting money from them and that if they refuse for long enough, the debt, will be ‘written off’. This ‘writing off’ makes the victim feel worthless. That charge is recognition of the crime and the impact it has had on the victim. Writing it off, whitewashes the whole thing and leaves the victim feeling re-victimised and that justice has failed them.

In 2013, I had a meeting with Theresa May regarding support services for stalking victims , as there was nothing on offer in the way of therapy and peer support for stalking victims. As a point, there is still nothing! That’s for a different blog…..Anyway, she assured me of the following and below are Ms May’s words:

..’ there will be an increase in revenue of victim support services which will be raised through financial impositions on offenders to ensure they make reparation for the harm they have caused to the victim. The reform to victim surcharge is to ensure that those given the most serious sentences will make the greatest contribution to support services. These imposed orders will add an additional £50 million, from the current £10 million, from offenders directly to victims services.’

After yesterdays news, it doesn’t look like Theresa May has kept to her word and commitment to victims.
If these surcharges are not upheld and offenders flagrant refusal to pay these charges and the courts continue their ineffective approach in chasing this money, then victims are failed twice. Failed by the lack of funds in victims services to help them recover from the crime and failed by the courts for not recognising the impact of the crime and ensuring offenders are made to pay for it. It undermines the justice process completely.

As part of our victims’ rights law we campaign for, we want to ensure that victims will have a legal right to access compensation and support services and that every agency, will be held accountable if they do not provide the service victims of crime are entitled to.

If you believe that victims have a right to their compensation and access to support services, then please ask your local MP to support Keir Starmer’s Victims Bill. Together we can make things better for victims of crime.