You might have seen a story this week regarding a young woman talking about her experience of restorative justice. Ailbhe Griffiths gave a very powerful and moving account of her journey from rape victim to advocate of restorative justice for survivors of sexual violence.
Bravely waiving her right to anonymity, Ailbhe laid out in graphic detail her thoughts, feelings and fears about meeting her attacker nine years after he viciously attacked her at a bus stop in Dublin.
The meeting was controlled and during it, Ailbhe had the chance to ask him the questions that had haunted her since she was assaulted.
The goal, say supporters, is to help victims heal and overcome their trauma by allowing them to confront an offender and giving them a voice.
Plans are afoot to roll out a trial of restorative justice in Scotland, involving victims of sexual and domestic violence. The first participants are expected to take part by April next year.
It’s a part of the “new vision for justice” by the Scottish Government which includes a new Victim’s Commissioner for Scotland – campaigned for by the Daily Record.
Regular readers of this column will know I’m a strong supporter of victims’ rights and giving voice to those who have experienced the worst of crimes but I admit I feel conflicted by this issue.
Until now, restorative justice has only been used for low-level and some youth crimes – so it seems to me there’s a massive leap between sitting down with a youth who vandalised your car and a grown man who violated your body.
Champions of restorative justice have been at great pains to insist that meeting the offender isn’t about forgiveness or an apology but to “empower” the victim by giving them back control.
They say the offender must take responsibility for what they did and acknowledge their crime for the process to begin, and the women taking part will be volunteers.
Here’s my problem. Victims of violence are vulnerable. You could be the strongest, bravest person on the planet but if you’ve had the misfortune to be violently attacked there is still a vulnerability there.
We cannot get into a situation where vulnerable victims already at their lowest ebb are feeling pressured into meeting their attacker because it will tick boxes on a project that needs to be seen as successful.
Emotions can become very complicated very quickly and not every offender will be feeling remorseful. We know how manipulative some sex offenders are – how do we determine who is genuine and who is not?
I understand that some women will feel it’s beneficial to say things to their abuser that they wouldn’t otherwise have the chance to – but even with all the planning and counselling in the world, nobody can know until the very minute they come face-to-face what effect this will have on an already traumatised victim.
Read more: Young man jailed after trying to rape stranger as she walked home
We also cannot allow the victim to feel persuaded her attacker is also “suffering” due to a bad childhood, drugs, alcohol or whatever reason they give for their crimes.
We must never allow victims of sexual violence to feel there is a lack of understanding at what they have gone through, that we get to a situation where “perhaps if you just speak to him you will understand why he did it”. Being willing to participate in this process cannot come at the expense of a victim’s healing and mental welfare.
The objectives behind restorative justice are laudable but it is not a magic solution and it most definitely must not be considered a new form of justice for sexual offences.
Read more:
