Naomi is one of 18 women who share their stories in a new report from Centre for Women’s Justice, exposing how victims of violence against women and girls (VAWG) are unfairly arrested, prosecuted and convicted for offences arising from their experience of abuse. 

The report, Double Standard: Ending the unjust criminalisation of victims of violence against women and girls, summarises relevant research and includes new legal analysis from Birmingham City University, as well as insights from two roundtables with frontline practitioners.  It calls for reforms in law and practice to transform the response to women and girls as victims and alleged offenders. 

Victims of VAWG can be unfairly criminalised when they use force against their abuser in self-defence, when they are coerced by their abuser into offending, or where they offend under duress of circumstance.  Allegations against victims are sometimes deliberately used as a tactic by perpetrators to extend their control.  In this way, the criminal justice system can be led to collude in the abuse. As one domestic abuse service provider told us:

This is happening to women all the time.

Current legal defences do not protect survivors of domestic abuse from prosecution or conviction when they are driven to offend, and failings in practice mean that decisions to arrest and prosecute victims do not take proper account of the context of abuse in which offending sometimes takes place. 

The law has been reformed to provide effective defences for other groups of victims facing similar circumstances, including trafficking victims and householders facing an intruder.  However, no such protections have been introduced for women and girls whose alleged offence takes place in the context of domestic abuse, creating a double standard. 

Maia (all names have been changed) is a migrant woman with two young children.  She was convicted of an assault offence against her husband after pushing him in the shoulder. This was despite third party evidence of his prolonged physical and emotional abuse of her, including use of her immigration status as a means of control. She was separated from her children due to bail conditions.  Her conviction was overturned on appeal.

Naomi’s violent partner coerced her into doing paperwork for his horse breeding business.  Naomi was prosecuted as a co-defendant with her abuser in relation to animal welfare offences he had committed, despite the local authority’s knowledge of the abuse. She concluded:

The Magistrates’ Court and the local authority have acted recklessly and without an ounce of compassion towards me, they appear to be grossly ignorant of domestic abuse.

Proper consideration of contextual abuse in criminal justice proceedings can be hampered for Black, Asian, minoritised and migrant women by many factors, including concepts of honour and shame, as one women’s service provider told us: 

Many times if they do [disclose abuse] and they take that risk, that sort of slander and social stigma can also be transferred on to their children…

 As highlighted by Hibiscus Initiatives, disaggregated data should be published on gender-based violence and its links with Black, Asian, minoritised and migrant women’s pathways into the criminal justice system; and training and awareness raising is needed on the barriers faced by these women, using a gendered analysis of race, faith and culture.

The hostile environment for migrants presents another barrier to disclosure of abuse, carrying with it the risk of destitution and deportation, as well as institutional cultures of disbelief and indifference.  Experts told us about failings by the police and other criminal justice agencies in interpreting signs of abuse of minoritised women, and the impact of poor-quality interpreting in court.  Proposals in the Nationality and Borders Bill would unfairly criminalise migrant women who are victims of trafficking, modern slavery, or domestic abuse.