Arguments in favour of strengthening the rights of victim-survivors in the criminal justice process have largely been made within the framework of a human rights perspective and with a view to meeting their procedural needs and minimising their experiences of secondary victimisation. In this article, however, I ask whether the prevalent legal arrangement, whereby victim-survivors are assigned the legal status of witnesses in criminal cases, with limited if any rights, is a just arrangement. In order to answer this question, the article draws on interviews with 35 victim-survivors of sexual violence in Iceland. The interviews are presented against the backdrop of Nordic legal thinking and are interpreted in the context of Nancy Fraser's democratic theory of justice. On the basis of the findings, I argue that assigning complainants the role of witnesses constitutes a case of misframing that results in misrecognition throughout the criminal justice process.

Limited attention has been paid to the potential of tort law to address the harm of sexual violence. Based on interviews with 35 victim-survivors of sexual violence in Iceland, this study asks: How do victim-survivors understand monetary compensation? How can tort law meet victim-survivors’ justice interests? The findings suggest that in addition to the financial risk involved, most participants had ambivalent views towards pursuing and receiving monetary compensation. Many thought that, given their often extensive pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses, it was only fair to receive compensation; but at the same time, they did not want to accept ‘dirty money’ they considered that pursuing monetary compensation could undermine their credibility, and monetary compensation only partially aligned with their ideas about justice. The findings are interpreted in the context of tort law theory, taboo trade-offs and survivor-centred justice. It is suggested that state intervention is needed to better meet victim-survivors’ justice interests.

Given the limitations of the criminal justice system to address cases of sexual violence, feminist scholars are increasingly exploring alternative approaches to justice. Here I ask: What is the role of space in the way victim-survivors of sexual violence can experience justice outside the criminal justice system? Can an understanding of space help us develop justice responses to sexual violence? Interviews were conducted with 35 victim-survivors of sexual violence in Iceland. In cases where offenders remained or re-entered their life space in some way, many participants described feelings of profound fear and anxiety. Participants used a variety of different socio-spatial strategies to ensure that they would not find themselves in the same space as the offenders. Based on the context as well as the networks and mechanisms available to them, these included surrendering, avoiding, negotiating, fighting for, protecting and (re)claiming spaces. Drawing on the concept of the continuum of sexual violence, I suggest that participants’ experiences can be conceptualized on a continuum of injustice. To the degree that participants were able to create what I call just spaces, they gained a sense of belonging, empowerment and freedom, which I suggest can be understood as disrupting this continuum of injustice.

No abstract

No abstract