I.7C
Inquiry into victims’ rights
Report of the Justice and Electoral
Committee
Forty-eighth Parliament
(Lynne Pillay, Chairperson)
December 2007
Contents
Executive summary 5
1 Introduction 9
Background 9
2 Summary of existing services 11
The Victims’ Rights Act 2002 11
Services for victims 12
Compensation or financial assistance for victims 13
Restorative justice processes 14
3 Issues raised by submitters 16
Financial support (including compensation) 16
Services for victims 16
Police and Court procedures 17
Courtroom layout 17
Recognition of and sensitivity towards victims 18
Organisational processes and policies 18
4 Systems and processes in the state of Victoria 19
Victim Support Agency (Department of Justice) 19
Victoria Police (Victims Advisory Unit) 22
Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal 24
Neighbourhood Justice Centre 26
Sentencing Advisory Council 27
Victoria Legal Aid, Victoria Law Reform Commission, and Victoria Equal Opportunity
and Human Rights Commission 28
5 Key conclusions and recommendations to improve the New Zealand system 30
Identifying the gaps 31
Compensation or financial assistance 31
I.7C
Information and education 37
Recognition and sensitivity 40
Police and court procedure 42
Other gaps: research, services, timing 43
6 Restorative justice 46
Restorative justice processes in New Zealand 46
7 Work under way 49
Ombudsman’s report 50
Petition 2005/114 of Manika Conning 50
Appendices
A Committee procedure 51
B Comparative analysis: compensation of victims in Victoria and New Zealand 52
INQUIRY INTO VICTIMS’ RIGHTS I.7C
Inquiry into victims’ rights
Executive summary
We are concerned about the way victims are currently treated in the New Zealand criminal justice system. We consider that the system appears to be focused heavily upon the needs of prosecutorial agencies and defence counsel, and too often victims’ rights are considered only as an afterthought. In this report we make a number of recommendations to improve the prominence and treatment of victims within the system. Key recommendations include: • the establishment of an agency to oversee all matters related to victims’ issues,
including coordinating and monitoring agencies that victims may be required to deal with
• the establishment of a compensation regime which focuses on recompensing victims for their loss
• the provision of comprehensive information to victims on the criminal justice system, their rights, and the services available to them
• the establishment of services for victims within court precincts • a review of the services available for victims, to identify gaps
• the allocation of sufficient resources to fill service gaps and to carry out the recommendations contained in this report.
Summary of recommendations
Following its inquiry, the Justice and Electoral Committee makes the following recommendations to the Government:
• that it establish and resource a programme, similar to the Victims’ Assistance and Counselling Program in Victoria, to provide counselling and other assistance to victims (p. 20).
• that it establish and resource a coordinating and monitoring agency in New Zealand, similar to the Victims Services Agency in Victoria (p. 21).
• that it establish and resource a service to act as a first point of contact for victims’ issues, receive complaints, mediate between victims and the agencies they must deal with, and as a policy advocate for the status and rights of victims in New Zealand (p. 21).
• that it investigate providing multiple support services on site in Court precincts, similar to the Neighbourhood Justice Centre in the City of Yarra (p. 27).
• that it provide resources for facilities similar to the Neighbourhood Justice Centre and include such facilities as a key element in the Courts Building Programme (p. 27). • that it direct the Ministry of Education to add civics education to the curriculum (p.
• that it direct the Ministry of Justice to start work to analyse the benefits of an inquisitorial approach, and investigate how and where the New Zealand justice system could benefit from the incorporation of inquisitorial principles (p. 30). • that it ensure victims are aware of their ability to make claims under the Prisoners’
and Victims’ Claims Act (p. 34).
• that, in the impending Review of Services available for Victims of Serious Crime, it develop a compensation regime that prioritises victims’ losses and adequately compensates them (p. 34).
• that it develop a comprehensive compensation regime which provides State funding at the outset, is accessible and simple, and demonstrates commitment to victims (p. 35).
• that it encourage a case management approach to be taken to victims in the Victim Notification System, and amend the Victims’ Rights Act 2002 to allow this approach if necessary (p. 36).
• that it establish an agency to oversee matters related to victims, and to provide guidance to and coordinate services between the other agencies involved in dealing with them (p. 37).
• that it develop and implement a charter of victims’ rights (p. 37).
• that it produce a definitive publication for victims, which provides comprehensive information to victims on their rights, clearly explains the criminal justice systems and processes, and sets out (with contact information) the services available to support victims (p. 38).
• that it ensure that informative material (see recommendation 14) is given to all victims (p. 38).
• that it ensure that all the agencies with responsibilities under the Victim Notification System are discharging their responsibilities properly and promptly in every case (p. 39).
• that it direct a new or existing agency to take responsibility for the overall
effectiveness of the Victim Notification System, and ensure that the various systems are easy for victims to access and understand (p. 39).
• that it direct a new or existing agency to ensure that the collections unit of the Ministry of Justice operates effectively for victims (p. 39).
• that it ensure the Review of Services available for Victims of Serious Crime
investigates the viability of changing the Victim Notification System from one where victims must “opt in” to one where victims are automatically included unless they “opt out” (p. 40).
• that it review the Victims’ Rights Act 2002, and amend it where necessary, to ensure that victims can be given relevant information, such as an offender’s breach of parole conditions, at the appropriate time (p. 40).
INQUIRY INTO VICTIMS’ RIGHTS I.7C
• that it formally establish victim-focused units in key agencies such as the Accident Compensation Corporation, the New Zealand Police, the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Corrections, and the New Zealand Parole Board (p. 41).
• that, in the Review of Services available for Victims of Serious Crime, it investigate the establishment of a forum for victims in New Zealand, to give a victim validation by recognising that a crime has occurred regardless of whether the offender is
apprehended, and to allow a victim the opportunity to explain the incident, the effect it had on them, and the resources they need to restore their lives (p. 41)
• that the Review of Services available for Victims of Serious Crime investigate whether some victims’ rights should be made legally enforceable (p. 41)
• that it investigate the viability of an accreditation regime for personnel taking Victim Impact Statements (p. 41).
• that separate entrances and rooms for victims be implemented in the Court Buildings Programmes (p. 42)
• that it ensure the New Zealand Police have appropriate systems and policies for interviewing victims or complainants of sexual violence (p. 42).
• that it investigate whether arrest warrants are being issued appropriately for
complainants who fail to appear, in the Review of Services available for Victims of Serious Crime (p. 43).
• that it undertake research immediately on the gaps in the services provided to victims (p. 44).
• that appropriate services be resourced and developed to fill any gaps that are found (p. 44)
• Government that it develop and implement a programme providing wide-ranging counselling services (including post-trial counselling) for all victims (p. 44). • that it develop and implement a Helpline service for victims, similar to the one
administered by the Victoria Victim Support Agency, to provide a first contact point for victims, and crisis management, help, and information services (p. 44).
• that any work on victims’ issues be undertaken in consultation with key agencies such as Victim Support (p. 44)
• that it allocate resources to ensure that an appropriate range of high-quality services can be provided to victims (p. 45).
• that it develop suitable restorative justice processes for vulnerable victims, such as the victims of sexual crime or family violence crime, to ensure that the victim’s interests are paramount at all times (p. 48).
• that it initiate the Review of Services available for Victims of Serious Crime immediately, and refer to it the recommendations contained in this report (p. 49). • that it expressly direct that victims’ rights be considered a priority within the criminal
justice system and that it take immediate steps to ensure that this direction is carried out where possible (p. 49).
• that it act on the recommendations contained in this report immediately (p. 49). • that appropriate resources be allocated to ensure that the recommendations
INTRODUCTION I.7C
1 Introduction
Background
The Justice and Electoral Committee of the 47th Parliament indicated an intention to undertake an inquiry into the place of victims in the criminal justice system, but Parliament was dissolved before the inquiry could begin. On 4 May 2006 the Justice and Electoral Committee of the 48th Parliament announced that it would honour the intention of the previous committee by conducting an inquiry into victims’ rights.
The terms of reference for the inquiry were to examine the place of, and outcomes for, victims of crime and their families in the criminal justice system by
• reviewing legislation affecting victims, including the Victims’ Rights Act 2002 • considering the terminology used for victims
• identifying services available to victims
• examining the concept that criminals owe a debt to individuals as well as society, including issues of compensation and reimbursement of costs
• examining the effect of the current court system on victims, including the role and status of complainants during court proceedings and the adequacy of courtroom layout and facilities
• examining the place of restorative justice programmes in the criminal justice system and their impact on victims
• considering any other relevant matters.
Over the last five years several changes have been made to New Zealand’s criminal justice system in an effort to recognise the rights and interests of victims. Initiatives such as the Victims’ Rights Act 2002, the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act 2005, and amendments to the Sentencing Act 2002, the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, and the Bail Act 2000 have been progressed in an effort to establish formal recognition of victims’ rights, and to ensure that victims’ views are heard throughout the trial process and that victims are treated appropriately in the criminal justice system.
Our motivation for this inquiry was two-fold. We support the initiatives already undertaken to recognise victims’ rights. However, we recognise that New Zealand’s criminal justice system as a whole remains largely focused on the prosecution of offenders, and we are interested in what else, if anything, can be done to improve the status and treatment of victims in the system. Our inquiry therefore sought to find any gaps in the support and recognition of victims under the current legislation. In addition, we wanted to review the implementation of these recent initiatives to ensure that appropriate systems and processes had been established to give effect to the legislation.
During the course of our inquiry, we called publicly for submissions and heard from a number of submitters. We also sought evidence and advice from the Ministry of Justice, the Accident Compensation Corporation, Audit New Zealand, the Department of
Corrections, the New Zealand Parole Board, the New Zealand Police, and the Ministry of Health. We also travelled to Melbourne to visit organisations that deal with victims’ issues, and to gather information on the Victorian systems and processes used for dealing with victims.
This report covers our considerations in full. The first chapter contains this introduction, while the second sets out the existing services, legislation, and policy relating to victims in New Zealand. It provides brief descriptions of the Victims Rights Act 2002, the
compensation available to victims (including compensation through the Accident
Compensation Corporation and the reparation regime, and claims under the Prisoner’s and Victims’ Claims Act 2002). It also provides a brief description of the key services available. The third chapter examines the key issues raised through the public submissions process. We then discuss in the fourth chapter the information we collected on our visit to
Melbourne. This section describes the systems and processes for dealing with victims in the state of Victoria, and includes information on the compensation regime, and the range of services provided for victims there. Our conclusions and recommendations for changes in the current criminal justice system are set out in the fifth chapter.
Our inquiry has focused on primarily on how the current criminal justice system could be improved to meet victims’ needs, but we have also examined restorative justice processes to see how they could be used to address victims’ rights issues. Our conclusions on restorative justice processes available in New Zealand are set out in chapter six of this report.
SUMMARY OF EXISTING SERVICES I.7C
2 Summary of existing services
The Victims’ Rights Act 2002
The most significant legislative recognition of victims’ rights is the Victims’ Rights Act 2002. This Act was intended to improve provision for the treatment and rights of the victims of offences. The Act defines “victim”, and provides principles to guide victims’ treatment, including their access to services and restorative justice. It contains provisions on the information to be given to victims, and the information victims can make available to agencies, including the court, for consideration when decisions are made about
sentencing offenders.
The Act contains specific provisions applying to the key government agencies with which a victim is likely to have contact:
• the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC)
• the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services (now part of the Ministry of Social Development)
• the Ministry of Justice
• the Department of Corrections
• the Department of Work and Income (now part of the Ministry of Social Development)
• District Health Boards • the New Zealand Police.
Depending on the agency and issues involved, the rights established in this Act are enforceable through an Ombudsman, the Privacy Commissioner, or the Independent Police Conduct Authority, or by direct approach to the agencies themselves.
There is provision for the victims’ views to be taken into account in the sentencing of the offender. Sections 17–21 of the Victims’ Rights Act require the Police Prosecutor to obtain information from the victim about the impact of the offence on him or her (a victim impact statement), and to make this information available to the sentencing judge. Section 8(f) of the Sentencing Act 2002 requires the judge to take the victim impact statement into account when sentencing.
Under the Act victims of serious offences are entitled to register on the Victims
Notification System.1 Registered victims are entitled to receive specified information and
documentation about their case, so they can participate in specified events during the
sentencing and penalty phases of the criminal justice process. The system is managed jointly by the Police, the Department of Corrections, and the Ministry of Health, with the Police having initial responsibility for providing eligible victims with information about the system.
Services for victims
It is important that victims are afforded adequate support and information when dealing with the criminal justice system. The main services provided by the Government in this area are delivered by Victim Support, a non-governmental community-based organisation contracted by the Government to provide services to victims of crime, and Court Services for Victims, an optional, free, confidential service provided by the Ministry of Justice to give victims of crime information on the progress of the cases that relate to them, as required by section 12 of the Victims’ Rights Act.
The services that Victim Support is funded to provide include the following: • crisis management (for victims of serious trauma)
• support through the judicial process (including assistance with the preparation of victim impact statements)
• advocacy (volunteer support workers help victims understand their rights, and help ensure those rights are being upheld)
• support regarding Parole Board hearings (ensuring that victims are fully aware of their opportunities to participate)
• Victims Assistance Schemes (targeted services including counselling and discretionary grants for families of homicide victims, assistance with travel and accommodation costs for attending parole or court hearings, and information and security equipment for victims of repeated burglary).
Court Services for Victims are provided by Victims’ Advisers, who are employed by the Ministry of Justice and located in District Courts across the country. Briefly, Victims’ Advisers
• advise victims of their rights in the court process • explain court procedures
• advise victims of the progress of their cases (status hearings, hearings for sentence, and any appeals against conviction or sentence)
• facilitate participation by victims in court processes
• inform victims about victim impact statements and registration on the Victim Notification Register2
• may present the victim’s view at status hearings3
2 Victims’ Advisers are not responsible for taking victim impact statements, nor do they have initial responsibility for advising victims about the Victim Notification System.
SUMMARY OF EXISTING SERVICES I.7C
• provide information and advice to young witnesses.
Compensation or financial assistance for victims
For victims, crime can be very harmful emotionally, physically, and sometimes financially. Compensation is available under the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 (administered by the ACC) to victims or complainants who receive personal injuries. This legislation includes provision for rehabilitation, counselling, earnings-related compensation for time off work as a result of injury, and lump-sum compensation for significant and permanent incapacity. Where the victim has been killed, funeral benefits and earnings-related compensation are available for dependants. Since 1 April 2002 the Act has also provided victims of sexual offences, such as rape, with cover for “mental injury”.
Reparation
If victims are not entitled to compensation through the ACC scheme, they may be entitled to reparation. Reparation to victims is provided for in section 32(1) and section 32(5) of the Sentencing Act, and must be imposed unless there is a compelling reason not to do so. A court can order reparation for loss of, or damage to, property; for emotional harm; or for loss or damage that is consequential to any emotional or physical harm or loss of, or damage to, property. Changes made in 2006 to the Sentencing Act and the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 prioritise payment of reparation ahead of fines or other court-imposed penalties or fees. However, the court must not impose a sentence of reparation if it believes that the victim is entitled to compensation under the ACC regime.4
Victim’s compensation claims
Under the Prisoners’ and Victims’ Claims Act, victims of prisoners who have received certain types of compensation from the Crown may make a claim for damages or
exemplary damages against the offender from that money. The compensation is paid into a special trust account, and before any money is paid to the claimant, any court-awarded reparation or legal services agency fines are deducted, and victims of the claimant are given six months to make a claim.
Other types of compensation or financial assistance
The Criminal Justice Assistance Reimbursement Scheme provides assistance to witnesses who have been victimised, rather than to the direct victims of crime. It provides
reimbursement for any damage to a witness’s property. Otherwise victims must rely on making a civil claim for exemplary damages for personal injury, or make a civil court claim for other losses (civil proceedings for compensatory damages are not available for personal injury claims, which are covered under the ACC scheme), or rely on privately-funded insurance for compensation in the event of a loss.
4 The Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act does not provide for compensation for property-related loss or damage and generally not for mental injury not arising from physical injury. A court
Restorative justice processes
Restorative justice is a process that encourages the combined participation of offenders and victims, their families, and communities in determining the harms caused by offending, seeking ways to redress them, attending to the needs of victims, and supporting the rehabilitation of offenders. The primary goals of restorative justice are to provide opportunities for both victims and offenders to be involved in determining responses to the offending that will hold offenders accountable and, to the greatest extent possible, repair the harm done to the victim and community.
Formal statutory recognition of restorative justice processes came about with the enactment of the Sentencing Act, Parole Act, and Victims’ Rights Act in 2002, and the Corrections Act in 2004. These Acts give more recognition and legitimacy to restorative justice processes than previous legislation, and encourage the use of them wherever appropriate. The Acts also require that these processes be taken into account in the sentencing and parole of offenders.
Restorative justice processes are used at various pre-conviction, pre-sentencing, and post-sentencing stages in the criminal justice system. Restorative justice can be used successfully at any stage of the criminal justice system if the parties wish to participate and there are sufficient resources, including appropriately skilled facilitators to manage the process. Offenders must admit responsibility for the offence before entering the restorative justice process. Participation is voluntary for both victims and offenders.
Restorative justice is already used in New Zealand, but access for offenders and victims is limited. Not all regions have providers of restorative justice, and in some regions it is limited to one stage in the criminal justice process (for example, before conviction, as an option in diversion). The Ministry of Justice funds 32 community-based programmes to provide restorative justice processes before conviction (in a diversion process) and before sentencing.
In general, two models of restorative justice operate in New Zealand:
• Victim-Offender Conferences: This is used before sentencing in the court-referred
restorative justice pilot, and in a number of the community-managed programmes funded by the Crime Prevention Unit. Following a guilty plea offenders are referred to facilitators from community-based providers. The facilitators meet the victim and the offender, and convene a conference if the offender seems suitable and both victim and offender are willing to participate. A report on the conference, and any agreements reached, is provided to the court at sentencing. Agreements may include reparative and re-integrative elements, such as offers of payment to the victim or attendance by the offender at programmes to address the underlying causes of the offending. The court will take the report and any agreement into account when sentencing, as required by the Sentencing Act.
SUMMARY OF EXISTING SERVICES I.7C
• Community Panel Programmes (community group conferences): In these programmes the
offender meets a panel of community members, which may include the victim, to discuss the impact of their offending. Usually a plan will be agreed to address the effects of the offending, for example with reparation or community service. Plans frequently incorporate rehabilitative activities. These processes are sometimes used as diversion programmes, where compliance with the plan may result in withdrawal of the charges.
3 Issues raised by submitters
Many of the submissions we received from the public were from victims or complainants themselves or their family members. We would like to thank these submitters for sharing their personal, and sometimes extremely traumatic, experiences to assist us with our inquiry.
The issues raised by public submitters can be grouped into six main areas: • financial support (including compensation)
• services for victims
• police and court procedures • courtroom layout
• recognition of and sensitivity towards victims
• organisational processes and policies (including information and communication).
Financial support (including compensation)
A number of submitters advocated more compensation for victims. Some described financial hardships resulting directly from crime, and argued that current reparation was inadequate. It was argued that victims should not be financially disadvantaged by crime, and that they should, at the very least, be restored to their financial positions before the crime.
Some submitters also argued for more general financial support for victims, beyond compensation. Queries were raised about the role of the ACC in compensating victims, and its ability to provide appropriate support. Some submitters expressed a view that the Crown should accept the initial burden of reparations to victims.
Some submitters also queried the justice of the amount of legal aid support provided to offenders, which was perceived as unfair to victims.
Services for victims
Many submitters were critical of the level of service available to victims, and of the fact that it seemed to cease with the conviction of the offender. These submitters called for a more accessible, comprehensive, and sustained system of support services for victims, which should continue as long as they were needed.
Other suggestions included
• free counselling for victims of crime for as long as necessary
• a legal adviser to provide free advice or legal representation for victims • a dedicated victims’ advocate and victims’ liaison officers
ISSUES RAISED BY SUBMITTERS I.7C
• more and better information for victims, and better access to complaints procedures • faster and more comprehensive support for victims of violent or sexual crime • a system for considering victims’ feedback on their experiences.
Evidence from a number of victim support groups provided an insight into the support currently available for victims of crime. Agencies such as Victim Support rely heavily on volunteers to administer the services they provide. These agencies noted that, while their work is valuable and appreciated, the volunteer service model is not always adequate; they considered that such organisations must also be resourced to provide properly trained staff for the more technical and specialised roles.
Police and Court procedures
Many victims of crime and complainants expressed dissatisfaction about their treatment during the investigation, trial, and general aftermath of the crime. Many felt that police and court procedures had treated them callously. A number told us that they felt that the interests of the Crown had superseded their interests in the trials. They expressed anger at having been made to feel they were an inconvenience to the police and the judicial system. A recurring area of concern was the role of victim impact statements, with submitters complaining that judges had disregarded their statements, or that their content had been diluted.
Some particular areas of dissatisfaction emerged:
• lack of guidance for victims or complainants during the trial process
• a perceived disparity in support for victims of crimes compared with that afforded to defendants
• a desire for more input than victim impact statements
• a sense that courts re-victimise victims of crime or complainants by making them relive difficult events
• lack of notification to victims and complainants of important parts of court processes and parole hearings.
Courtroom layout
It was argued that the current design of courtrooms is insensitive to the needs of victims of crime and witnesses. A key concern raised was that the victims or complainants of violent or sexual crime are forced to relive traumatic events in full view of the accused. Some submitters complained that as victims and witnesses they were forced to sit next to supporters of the offenders, to use common access to the courtroom, and otherwise be in the vicinity of supporters of the offender, and at times the offender. Concern was
expressed for the well-being of witnesses who were forced to face the accused, especially in cases of sexual crime.
Submitters suggested using screens and alternative entrances for victims and witnesses, or providing specific rooms for the use of victims and their supporters.
Recognition of and sensitivity towards victims
A common theme was the need for better understanding of victims of crime and
complainants in general, throughout the judicial system. A number of submitters recounted dealings with the police, the courts, and lawyers that suggested a lack of awareness of the impact of official proceedings on victims. Some went as far as to argue that certain
provisions in the Victims Rights Act were not being properly observed. There was specific concern that the authorities were not receptive to the needs of victims of particularly traumatic crimes such as sexual offences, domestic violence, and violent crime generally.
Organisational processes and policies
Many submitters recounted their experiences of dealing with various Government
organisations, including the Police, the Police Complaints Authority,5 the ACC, and
health-sector organisations. They felt that that these organisations treated them with little sensitivity and subjected them to long periods of waiting or a lack of response. Many received uncoordinated and even directly contradictory responses to their queries from within particular organisations.
The theme was a general lack of transparency in organisational processes—including complaints processes—and a lack of information on how processes and policies are applied to victims. There was a call for better information and lines of communication between victims and the agencies dealing with them.
SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA I.7C
4 Systems and processes in the state of Victoria
The state of Victoria in Australia has recently implemented the Charter of Victims Rights Act 2006, and even before this Victoria appeared to be leading the way in its treatment of victims within the criminal justice system. In the course of our inquiry we visited
Melbourne and met various organisations to discuss victims’ rights, and to gather information on the systems and processes for victims in the state of Victoria. We visited the Victim Support Agency (Department of Justice), the Victims’ Advisory Unit of the Victoria Police, the Victims of Crimes Assistance Tribunal, the Neighbourhood Justice Centre (Yarra), the Sentencing Advisory Council, Victoria Legal Aid, the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission, representatives of the Victoria Legal Services Panel and the Law Reform Committee of the Parliament of Victoria. We are impressed with the commitment Victoria demonstrates to victims and their rights, and the way issues related to victims are addressed by agencies in the state. The range of services available to victims, the way they are coordinated, monitored, and delivered, and the focus of agencies on victims indicates an understanding of the issues involved, and a commitment to ensuring that victims are not ‘‘re-victimised” by the criminal justice process. We understand that the charter is a reformulation of existing rights, rather than an introduction of entirely new concepts. The implementation of the charter has, however, confirmed the importance the state places on victims’ rights. It provides guidance for organisations’ dealings with victims, and a benchmark against which their efforts can be measured. The implementation and monitoring of charter responsibilities has been well thought out; the governance arrangements for the charter include representatives of key agencies dealing with victims, including the heads of the Office of Public Prosecutions, the Police, the Courts, and the Director of the Victims Support Agency (Department of Justice).
Victim Support Agency (Department of Justice)
We were extremely impressed with the Victims Support Agency (VSA), and suggest that there is a gap in New Zealand’s current arrangements. The VSA is a branch of the
Victorian Department of Justice. It represents victims of crime and coordinates a whole-of-government approach to services for victims. It provides practical assistance to help victims recover from the effects of crime, and coordination with the service system so victims do not need to tell their stories repeatedly. We consider that at the very least the monitoring and coordination element of this agency might be usefully duplicated in the New Zealand context.
Background
The VSA was established as an operational unit responsible for referring victims to appropriate services, and for providing them with information and support. It was
subsequently re-established with a more strategic focus, providing policy services as well as operations. The agency now consists of four business units:
• Victims’ services, which runs the Victims of Crime Helpline and counselling system, and provides housing and financial assistance and case counselling
• Strategic projects and policy and research • Women’s policy area
• Victims’ charter area.
The budget of the agency is approximately A$7 million, with A$5 million allocated for funding the Victims Assistance Counselling Programme (discussed below).
Direct support for victims
The VSA provides direct support for victims throughout the criminal justice process. It operates a free central Victims of Crime Helpline staffed by specially trained Victim Support Officers. Approximately 5,000 to 6,000 calls are received each year (about 100 a week). Through the helpline, the agency operates as an initial point of contact for victims on various matters (including complaints, requests for advice or information, and referrals), and staff can provide various kinds of support and assistance.
The VSA also funds a network of local Victims’ Assistance and Counselling Program (VACP) workers. The programme is managed by the Department of Human Services, and provides a network of services throughout Victoria to help the victims of violent crime. The programme provides information, and crisis, practical, and court support, and
assistance with police reports and applications for reimbursement of expenses incurred as a result of crime. It also provides links to other specialist services. Short-term counselling is available for victims of violent crime and victims of domestic violence who have been granted an intervention order. People can also be helped to apply for additional counselling services through the Victims of Crimes Assistance Tribunal.
We consider that having one clear point of contact for victims would help prevent some of the frustration submitters expressed about the multiple organisational processes with which they were forced to deal. It would also help ensure that all the relevant information reached victims, that they were referred to appropriate services if necessary and had some support in dealing with organisational processes, and that other organisations carried out their responsibilities towards victims.
Recommendation
1. We recommend to the Government that it establish and resource a programme, similar to the Victims’ Assistance and Counselling Program in Victoria, to provide counselling and other assistance to victims.
Coordination and monitoring
Throughout Victoria various services for victims are provided by community agencies (such as Presbyterian Support, Court Network,6 and various organisations in the family
6 Court Network is a voluntary, non-legal court support service operating throughout Victoria. Trained volunteers provide information, support, and referral services to court users, including victims, at courts across the state.
SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA I.7C
violence sector) and government agencies (such as services managed by the Department of Human Services,7 and those provided by the Office of the Public Prosecutor). A number
of agencies also deal with victims of crime in their everyday work. The Victims Support Agency brings these agencies together to learn, exchange information, and coordinate their work. They develop partnerships and protocols to ensure prompt and appropriate
responses by police, justice, and human service agencies. Evaluations of victims’ services are currently managed through the Department of Human Services, but it is likely that the VSA will take on this role. VSA also uses this work as a basis for policy development. Again, we consider that this central monitoring and coordination of matters relating to victims is an excellent approach, and that such an approach in New Zealand would do much to address the issues raised by submitters.
Recommendation
2. We recommend to the Government that it establish and resource a coordinating and monitoring agency in New Zealand, similar to the Victims Support Agency in Victoria. The VSA also receives complaints about the implementation of the charter. It refers most of them to the appropriate organisations; but it can help victims to understand
organisational processes, and act as a mediator and an advocate of sorts. Victims again have a clear first point of contact with the system if they encounter difficulties. This service is also expected to help VSA monitor other agencies, and to help pinpoint trouble spots in the system. We consider that this type of service offers immense benefits, by simplifying the system for victims, and providing a simple mechanism for monitoring agencies. Recommendation
3. We recommend to the Government that it establish and resource a service to act as a first point of contact for victims’ issues, receive complaints, mediate between victims and the agencies they must deal with, and as a policy advocate for the status and rights of victims in New Zealand.
Research, information, and training
The Victims Support Agency has a research programme that follows national and international developments in victim support. It has canvassed victims’ views on specific matters, to underpin its policy recommendations, and the recent charter reflects this input. During our discussions with the VSA, it became very apparent that often the real issues for victims arise from their dealings with the justice system (rather than from services or their lack, or even crime itself). There is some evidence that victims recover better from crime if they are supported by their own families and social networks rather than professional helping agencies. Their dealings with the criminal justice system, however, are a separate problem. As the submissions to our inquiry suggested, the VSA has found that victims
often do not understand the criminal justice system,8 and that the process and system
re-victimises victims and sometimes hampers their recuperation. The VSA’s surveys suggest that victims who are linked to a support service tend to be better prepared and better able to cope with the criminal justice system; for example, they may be less likely to feel traumatised by cross-examination.
Because of the similarities between the VSA’s research findings and the submissions we heard, we believe their conclusions are likely to be applicable to victims in New Zealand. We are concerned that many victims do not understand the criminal justice system, and extremely concerned that in New Zealand the organisations responsible for administering the system do not appear to understand or recognise this. We consider it vital that victims be provided with adequate information about the criminal justice system and the support services available to them. We note that ensuring that victims have comprehensive information and are well supported is not just for their personal benefit; it is also likely to equip them better to act as witnesses.
The VSA is trying to address the need for information and understanding from both ends: by producing information about the system and services available for provision directly to victims through the VSA’s operational arm; and by overseeing and working with other agencies to ensure that they are aware of their responsibilities under the charter and are geared to deal with victims appropriately.
VSA staff provide information seminars about services for victims of crime, and
information kits and a guide for victims. The guide explains the criminal justice system and clearly outlines the services available to support victims. The guide is, of course, available from VSA, and is also given by the police to all victims of violent crime. The Office of Public Prosecutions has also published a guideline for victims, and the agencies have produced informative material such as stickers, posters, and fact sheets.
Victoria Police (Victims Advisory Unit)
We are concerned that police in New Zealand have not always recognised the importance of victims and their rights. We heard evidence from the New Zealand Police that efforts are being made to address this lack. We recognise that understanding victims’ issues may be difficult for police, who may become desensitised by their constant exposure to crime. We also recognise that the Police have a primary duty to society, and must operate within an adversarial system that does not accord a formal role to victims; it may be a challenge to balance their responsibilities within this system against their responsibilities to victims. We acknowledge that the police have a heavy workload, which means that matters such as victims’ rights may be given a low priority.
However, since the police officers are usually the first point of contact for victims, we consider it vital that they treat victims appropriately, and understand and take seriously their responsibility to ensure that victims are well informed and supported. We consider that ensuring victims are aware of the criminal justice process, their rights, and the services
8 For example, victims said that they thought that they would have their own solicitors, or that the prosecutor would assist them and provide them with information. They did not understand that justice operates for and on behalf of the State.
SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA I.7C
available to them is a key function of the New Zealand Police. We expect to see the Police discharge this function properly.
In our view, policing is not just about catching criminals. It is also about moderate and responsible use of power and meaningful engagement with communities. It is important that the Police understand that they play a key role in determining whether the public and victims have confidence in the criminal justice system. The Police need to ensure that lines of communication are kept open with victims, victims’ expectations are managed
appropriately, and victims have reason to believe that they will be treated fairly and with respect, and can trust the system. We understand that many of the complaints about the Police relate to the length of time various processes take, and suspect that much of this problem could be managed by explaining processes clearly and accurately and thus engendering more realistic expectations.
As in New Zealand, the police in Victoria carry the front-line responsibility for dealing with victims. They have established a Victims Advisory Unit (VAU) to improve their
relationship with victims. The unit advises the police on operational issues affecting victims, and is responsible for liaison between the police and organisations working with victims. A Victims’ Strategy Project Team has been established to disseminate information on the charter to all officers. The unit works closely with the Victims Support Agency of the Department of Justice and the Victims of Crimes Assistance Tribunal. Protocols have also been established between the police and other key agencies (such as the Office of Public Prosecutions).
The existence of this unit helps to emphasise the priority that the Victoria Police accord to recognising victims’ rights and dealing with them appropriately. The Victoria Police have worked with the VSA to ensure that police officers are aware of the services available for victims and their responsibilities in relation to victims, and that they understand the issues that victims face. By next year all police will have completed an online training package. Victim-focused training for recruits is being introduced, and is likely to include seminars from the Victims’ Assistance and Counselling Programme workers. We were impressed by the deference that the Police have accorded to the unit and its work. The formal position and powers of the unit demonstrate the importance the Police place on victims and victims’ rights. We were also impressed with the operations of the unit itself. In particular, we regard the systematic approach taken by the unit as good, and were impressed by its strong internal educative function. We would like to see the New Zealand Police take a similar approach and put emphasis on similar matters.
Making it simple for police and victims
The VSU has implemented a number of simple changes to ensure that police give victims accurate information about all the options open to them. These changes make it very easy for police officers to treat victims appropriately, and increase police officers’ buy-in. The VSU has been developing IT tools for officers, to simplify the system and minimise resistance to using it. Once a matter has been referred to court, there are now “trigger points” in the process where the Police are automatically required to inform victims of their rights. The VSU has also redeveloped policing forms to make it simpler for officers to take account of victims’ rights.
The form to be completed by an officer at a crime scene has been amended to ask whether victims wish to be informed of the processes that apply to them. Victims are given a printed guide, and the choice of entering victim support systems. This removes the need for a police officer to make a subjective judgement about the impact of a crime on a victim. We consider this to be a very simple and effective means of ensuring that victims are provided with appropriate information and supported where necessary, which removes the need for police to prioritise impacts on victims. We would like to see similar initiatives implemented by the New Zealand Police.
Complaints
The charter states that a victim may make a complaint about breaches of the charter. The VSU (in conjunction with the VSA) has a clear process for managing such complaints, starting with its helpline as the first contact point. Complaints are handled at a regional level in the first instance, with recourse to the VSU if necessary. This is expected to save the police time, and to reveal any systemic problems. It is also expected to reinforce the importance of victims’ rights with the Police.
In New Zealand, the Independent Police Conduct Authority carries the responsibility for receiving and investigating complaints against the Police. We consider it important that complaints against the Police be received and investigated by a body that understands the issues and rights of victims. We highlight this as a matter that the Independent Police Conduct Authority should bear in mind.
Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal
The Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal9 (VOCAT) operates at Magistrates’ Courts
throughout Victoria, and awards financial assistance to victims of crime for certain expenses to help them to recover from crime, special financial assistance in some circumstances as a symbolic expression by the State of the community’s sympathy, and awards for distress where the act of violence resulted in death. The cost of assistance from VOCAT is met by the State. The state is empowered to recover assistance and costs
awarded by VOCAT from the offenders if they are convicted. The regime is intended to be responsive to the needs of victims and maximise the potential for their recovery from the psychological and physical effects of a violent crime.
The tribunal consists of the Chief Magistrate and all other magistrates or acting magistrates of the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria. The tribunal is not a court, and as tribunal members magistrates are carrying out an administrative function, not a judicial function. This distinction allows more informality and flexibility in approach than the processes and procedures of the Magistrates’ Court.
The tribunal can award assistance to primary victims, secondary victims, related victims, or persons who have incurred funeral expenses for primary victims.10 A primary victim may
9 Established under the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996.
10 A primary victim is a person who was actually injured or suffered the loss as a result of the crime. A secondary victim is a relative or dependant of a victim who died as a result of an act of violence. A related victim is a person who witnessed the act of violence or the parent or guardian of the primary victim. Primary victims include persons injured during an arrest, or in trying to prevent the commission of an offence.
SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA I.7C
be awarded assistance of up to A$60,000, along with Special Financial Assistance (see below). This amount may include counselling, medical expenses, up to A$20,000 for loss of earnings, and loss of or damage to clothing. If exceptional circumstances can be proved, the primary victim may claim payment for other expenses to help him or her recover. Secondary victims may be compensated up to a maximum of A$50,000, and may be
awarded assistance for counselling and medical expenses. In exceptional circumstances they may then claim loss of earnings up to A$20,000, and payment for other expenses that will assist them in their recovery. A related victim may seek compensation up to a maximum of A$50,000, but the cumulative total for all related victims is A$100,000, including funeral expenses. Related victims may seek payment of funeral services, counselling services, and medical expenses. Related victims may also seek compensation for distress suffered as a result of death, and for loss of money that the related victim would have been likely to receive from the primary victim for a period of up to two years after the date of death. Special Financial Assistance may be paid to primary victims for ‘‘pain and suffering”, over and above the A$60,000 maximum, where a ‘‘significant adverse effect” can be shown.11
Victims are categorised “A” to “D”, according to offence and injury. Category A is
reserved for the most serious offences and injuries, with a maximum payable of A$10,000. Category “D” victims who have suffered minor injuries with no long-term effects, receive payments from A$130 to A$650. The application of categories depends on the extent of the injury suffered, the nature of the crime, and the vulnerability of the victim. For example, infliction of a serious injury is categorised as a category “C”, but permanent or long-term disfigurement (such as scarring) may change this to a category “A”.
The tribunal may award assistance without an offender being prosecuted or convicted. It need only be satisfied (on the balance of probabilities) that an act of violence has occurred and the applicant is a victim or a person who has incurred funeral expenses as a result. Not all crime victims are eligible for assistance—the legislation requires ‘‘an act of violence”, which includes assault, burglary, false imprisonment, threats of injury, and attempts at violence. A victims’ right to bring civil proceedings is unaffected by the receipt of assistance. However, in determining the amount to be awarded, the tribunal must reduce the amount of assistance by the total amount of any compensation, assistance or payments of any other kind that the applicant has received for the matter for which assistance is sought (including damages received at common law, from the Transport Accident Commission and the Victorian WorkCover Authority, and from private insurance). Property damage cannot be claimed for from VOCAT, but a victim can apply for a compensation order from the court for property loss or damage. A compensation order is not paid by the state, but is issued against an offender. The court must take into account the financial circumstances of the offender and the burden it will impose before issuing a compensation order. However, the court is not prevented from awarding compensation if it cannot find out the offender’s financial circumstances. Legal costs are often awarded at the tribunal’s discretion,12 whether or not the application is successful.
11 ‘‘Significant adverse effect’’ includes any grief, distress, trauma, or injury experienced or suffered by the victim as a direct result of the act of violence.
Interim awards of assistance can be made pending a final determination to ensure the prompt payment of urgent expenses. The tribunal has the discretion to determine a matter without a hearing if it relates to an interim award or if the applicant’s consent has been obtained. Registrars can make interim awards up to A$1,000.
We consider that the benefits of this system include equitable access to fair compensation for all victims; predictability and consistency in decision-making; simplicity of
administration; accessibility for those seeking benefits; and timely payment of claims. In addition, it constitutes a tangible expression of the community’s sympathy and concern for the victims of violent crimes.
Neighbourhood Justice Centre
The Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) is a community justice pilot project funded by the Victorian Government Department of Justice. It is located in the City of Yarra, and houses a court; support services to help victims, defendants, witnesses, and court users; mediation and community safety programmes; and community meeting facilities.
The NJC Court
The NJC Court is multi-jurisdictional, including the Magistrates’ Court (which includes the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal and Crimes Family Violence List), the Children’s Court (Criminal Division), and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. In the NJC Court victims apply for compensation to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and to the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. Proceedings are designed for minimal formality and to be easily understood by the parties involved.
The Neighbourhood Justice Centre Act 2006 specifies that the NJC Court must apply therapeutic and restorative approaches. The NJC Court seeks to minimise negative effects and protect the well-being of people attending the court, including victims. The NJC precincts contain private rooms that victims and their supporters may use, and, although the court itself is very open, witnesses may use video conferencing facilities from a private back room when giving evidence. We would like to see similar facilities at courtrooms in New Zealand, to prevent some of the difficulties victims experience when attending court proceedings.
The NJC Court focuses on restorative justice and restitution to the local community as well as crime prevention, recognising and balancing the needs of victims, defendants, and the community in the sentencing process. For example, defendants on community-based orders may perform work that has been recognised as a priority in the local community.
Services
The NJC houses a range of support services from key agencies, whose representatives are on site to provide support and assistance to victims. The services available include financial advice, mental health clinical advice, general counselling, Aboriginal health services, health and drug advice, legal aid legal advice, disputes settlement, and mediation. Representatives from the Department of Justice and the Department of Corrections are also located on-site. Representatives provide crisis management, some ongoing support, and referral to community services. The representatives work together to determine the key issues and appropriate lead agency in complex cases where many contributing factors may be
SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA I.7C
compounding a particular problem. They share information (subject to privacy laws) where appropriate.
The NJC develops the job descriptions and pays the salaries for the representatives on site, but they are appointed by their own agencies. The NJC has recognised gaps in the services available in the community and purchases services for representation at the centre on the basis of this analysis, ensuring that services are not duplicated unnecessarily. The NJC uses other agencies in the community where appropriate.
We are extremely impressed with this on-site multi-service approach. We consider that access to a range of services for victims at court precincts, and comprehensive
co-ordination of key services and agencies dealing with victims, would be a very effective way of addressing many of the concerns that submitters raised.
We approve of the NJC’s therapeutic approach to justice. We consider that the
coordination of multiple services on site and the design and layout of the building ensure that the system is effective, and help to make justice accessible.
Recommendations
4. We recommend to the Government that it investigate providing multiple support services on site in court precincts, similar to the Neighbourhood Justice Centre in the City of Yarra.
5. We recommend to the Government that it provide resources for facilities similar to the Neighbourhood Justice Centre and include such facilities as a key element in the Courts Building Programme.
Sentencing Advisory Council
The Sentencing Advisory Council is an independent statutory body established in 2004 under amendments to the Sentencing Act 1991. Unlike New Zealand’s recently established Sentencing Council, the Victorian council is advisory only.13 Whereas the New Zealand
Council was established largely to address the consistency of sentencing, the purpose of the Victorian council was to bridge the gap between the legal profession, the community, and the Government. The composition and work of the council reflects this purpose.14 The
Victorian council has a strongly educative function and has produced numerous reports on complex sentencing issues, published statistical analyses, and held conferences on politics, public opinion, and the development of sentencing policy. The council also engages
directly with the community in this educative role, using interactive resources such as “You be the Judge”, a role-play scenario developed by the council, which helps people to
understand issues regarding sentencing. The council also emphasises understanding public opinion, by means of consultation with the community and victims, and has produced some papers on this topic.
13 In New Zealand the council has been established as an independent body responsible for producing guidelines which can be disapplied by Parliament.
All of the victims’-rights-related organisations with which we met in Melbourne were impressed with the quality of the work produced by the Victorian council, and noted that its educative function and consultative approach have made an immense difference for victims. The VSA noted that the Victorian council has become a key conduit for feedback of victims, and that its community education efforts have helped improve victims’
understanding of the judicial process.
We consider that the way the council in Victoria operates—particularly their exercise of their educative function and their consultative approach—has clear advantages for the community and victims. We acknowledge that the New Zealand council was established in response to different concerns (and is composed differently). However we note that it does have an educative function and a policy advisory function. We would like to see the New Zealand council make good use of these functions, and suggest that it may wish to look to the Victorian council for examples.
Victoria Legal Aid, Victoria Law Reform Commission, and Victoria Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission
Our discussions with other interested organisations (including Victoria Legal Aid, Victoria Law Reform Commission, and the Victoria Equal Opportunity and Human Rights
Commission), and with the Law Reform Committee of the Parliament of Victoria, confirmed the importance that the state of Victoria places on recognising victims’ rights. Each organisation clearly understood the issues facing victims, and the roles of the other agencies in relation to their own work. The Law Reform Commission and the Law Reform Committee emphasised the benefit of restorative justice processes for victims, and noted New Zealand’s significant work in this area. The Law Reform Committee has recently initiated an inquiry into restorative justice, and is hoping to visit New Zealand in the course of it. We look forward to the committee’s visit, and are pleased to note that others view the work that New Zealand has done in the restorative justice area as groundbreaking.
All these agencies produce informative material for use by victims, on matters ranging from basic rights to sexual assault offences. Legal Aid also provides a community legal education programme and manages a community legal centre programme, which funds 39 ‘‘shop-front” legal service centres across the state. Some of the organisations suggested that it is useful to teach basic civics in schools. We agree that teaching people about the criminal justice system and their rights is extremely important, and suggest that giving people this information from an early age might address some of the issues concerning victims’ dealings with the criminal justice system.
Although this is largely beyond the scope of this report, we note that we are impressed by the emphasis that the state of Victoria has put on ensuring access to justice, and commend the initiatives it has established for this purpose. In particular, we consider that Victoria Legal Aid’s ability to employ legal counsel directly, and the Legal Services Panel
requirement that participating firms undertake a certain amount of pro bono work, are outstanding examples of measures to ensure that justice is accessible to all.
SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA I.7C
Recommendation
6. We recommend to the Government that it direct the Ministry of Education to add civics education to the curriculum.
5 Key conclusions and recommendations to
improve the New Zealand system
Addressing issues in the criminal justice area is always a complex endeavour. Many different rights and interests must be balanced, including those of the victim, the public, and the offender. Matters such as access to justice, and the right of an accused to a fair trial as guaranteed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, must be taken into account if public confidence in the system is to be maintained. A careful balance of these interests is needed to ensure that the system operates fairly and that the best possible outcomes for all are achieved.
At present, New Zealand’s justice system is an adversarial one where the Crown is
responsible for prosecuting offenders in the interests of the public, not of the victim. The formal role of the victim in this process, if any, is as a witness for the prosecution. The submissions we heard suggested a general misunderstanding of this formal role on the part of victims or complainants. We heard from submitters who were not aware that the victim’s or complainant’s input into the criminal justice process is limited to that of a witness for the prosecution, and that the focus of the prosecution is the public interest. They believed that the prosecutor would act as their counsel and advocate. Similarly, the calls from submitters for legal aid parity may be interpreted as demonstrating that the formal position of victims in the process is sometimes misunderstood.
A fundamental change to a more inquisitorial justice system would be necessary for the formal role of the victim to change significantly. We acknowledge that some elements of the justice system have acquired an inquisitorial aspect, and we support further
development in this area. Some submitters expressed strong support for a more inquisitorial process.
We note that calls for a change to a more inquisitorial approach have been raised
consistently over many years. We consider that these calls should be taken seriously, and that the Ministry of Justice should begin work in this area. We consider that a change of this nature requires full community participation, public consultation, and would expect that such work would be undertaken in conjunction with other key organisations such as the Law Commission.
Recommendation
7. We recommend to the Government that it direct the Ministry of Justice to start work to analyse the benefits of an inquisitorial approach, and investigate how and where the New Zealand justice system could benefit from the incorporation of inquisitorial principles.
We also acknowledge the place of restorative justice. We note that it demonstrably
increases victims’ satisfaction, and empowers them to take a role in the justice system. (See chapter 6 of this report, which considers restorative justice issues).
KEY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I.7C
We consider that the position and role of victims are extremely important, and we have heard evidence suggesting that victims are perhaps being unduly marginalised in our current system. We are pleased that some effort has been made over the last five years to ensure the rights of victims are protected, and note that that some of these measures appear to have been successful. However, we also heard from submitters who pointed out that at times the processes implemented fail—for example, some told us of occasions where prosecutors did not keep them fully informed of the progress of the trial. We note that some of the most challenging evidence we heard was of an historical nature, and that these issues may have been addressed effectively since the experiences of those particular submitters. However, we consider that a number of gaps in the current system still need to be addressed.
Identifying the gaps
Much of the evidence that we heard related to recurring issues: • lack of compensation
• lack of coordination of services and between agencies
• lack of information to victims (on rights, services, and the criminal justice system, including the processes and procedures of the various agencies)
• lack of recognition of victims in criminal justice processes • lack of sensitivity towards (and protection of) victims.
Many of these issues are similar to those the state of Victoria has faced in the past, and has addressed by various initiatives.
Compensation or financial assistance
We sought evidence and advice from the ACC and the Ministry of Justice about the availability and implementation of the various compensatory schemes (the ACC regime, reparation, Victim Compensation Claims, the Criminal Justice Reimbursement Scheme, and any other forms of reparation or compensation).
The ACC regime
Victims of crime are not automatically covered by the ACC scheme, as eligibility rests on whether a personal injury has been suffered. A personal injury is defined by the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 to include death, physical injuries, mental injuries suffered because of physical injuries, and mental injury resulting from any of a number of listed criminal offences, most of which are sexual offences.15 To benefit, a
person also has to have suffered the personal injury in one of the circumstances listed in the Act, which include an accident,16 a treatment, a work-related gradual process disease or
infection, and certain offences (mainly of a sexual nature).17
15 Since 1 April 2002 the Act has provided victims of sexual offences, such as rape, with cover for ‘‘mental injury’’.
