In 2026, victims have gained more rights than ever before, but the path to seeking justice has become increasingly challenging.
Having endured two decades of relentless stalking, I have experienced firsthand the frustration of being let down by the very system designed to provide protection. This personal ordeal has profoundly influenced my life and career trajectory.
Driven by the desire to amplify the voices of victims, I dedicated numerous years advocating for change, resulting in significant victories such as the enactment of the Victims and Prisoners Act. These achievements were pivotal in officially securing the rights of victims through legislation.
Transitioning into my new role as Victims’ Commissioner, I am acutely aware that mere legal provisions are insufficient. While a law may guarantee access to justice and assistance, it is only through an operational court system that these promises can materialize.
The typical expectation is straightforward: a crime is committed, you report it, and the system intervenes promptly, impartially, and supportively. However, the reality in 2026 is starkly different. Being a victim today often means entering a prolonged state of limbo upon reporting a crime – a holding pattern that intensifies anxiety and trauma.
Despite assuming that as the victim, you hold a central role in the case, the overwhelming demands on the system frequently relegate you to a passive observer in your own matter. Waiting months for updates that never materialize becomes the norm. While specialized support services offer commendable assistance in maintaining victims’ well-being, they cannot substitute the absence of a court date.
I have encountered victims facing trial dates scheduled as far out as 2030. The excruciating wait endured by victims is compounded by the perpetual uncertainty, postponed hearings, and the inability to heal from their trauma due to the protracted legal process.
With the proposed Sentencing Bill aiming to further reduce jail terms, victims enduring prolonged waits for their day in court may question whether they, rather than the offender, are serving the sentence.
The inevitable outcome is dishearteningly foreseeable: victims disengage as they find themselves physically and emotionally incapable of enduring the protracted delays. The exorbitant cost of seeking justice – years suspended in limbo – becomes insurmountable.
As the Victims’ Commissioner in London, I previously cautioned that years of inadequate funding and neglect were pushing the justice system to its breaking point. The repercussions of this neglect are now evident, with the case backlog soaring to nearly 80,000 – doubling the pre-pandemic figures. This backlog equates to 80,000 lives put on hold.
Numerous cases dating back to the previous decade still await trial, resulting in individuals transitioning from childhood to adulthood and irreversible impacts on lives while awaiting their day in court. Without immediate intervention, projections indicate a backlog of 125,000 cases by the end of this Parliament – a substantial failure of responsibility.
The sheer magnitude of the crisis necessitates a departure from business as usual. Sir Brian Leveson’s assessment of the court system reveals a broken system that cannot be remedied through superficial adjustments. Merely increasing funding without addressing fundamental flaws is no longer a viable solution; the time for temporary fixes has passed.
In response to this urgent situation, the government has proposed radical reforms, including the potential implementation of judge-only trials to circumvent the gridlock. While these suggestions challenge long-standing traditions and will undoubtedly spark vigorous debate, the hard truth remains: a justice system that forces a rape survivor to wait five or more years for their day in court is fundamentally flawed. This is justice in name alone.
The current status quo is unsustainable, and every day of inaction leads to a lengthening queue of cases and more victims abandoning the pursuit of justice, enabling offenders to act with impunity. It is imperative that we address this crisis without delay.
In the upcoming months, discussions will revolve around legal precedents and courtroom procedures. My primary objective is to ensure that amidst these critical debates on tradition and process, the voices of victims are not drowned out.
My evaluation of each proposal will be singular: does it facilitate prompt and efficient justice for those impacted by crime? The human toll of this crisis is substantial. If the journey to the courtroom fractures the victim, then the system has failed.
We must cease demanding the impossible from victims and instead establish a system in which they can place their trust – one that not only functions theoretically but also operates effectively in practice.