Gender-based violence (GBV) courts were developed in Pakistan to offer safer, quicker and more sensitive judicial procedures to the female victims of rape and sexual harassment, as well as the crimes connected with it.
However, the judicial framework enacted for gender based violence has serious lacunas. One of these is that dealing with this judicial system is traumatising to many survivors. The legal process turns into a long and agonising ordeal instead of taking the weight off their shoulders, as the victim/survivor, in most cases, suffers a lot alone.
Rising against gender-based violence in Pakistan is a tremendous challenge in its own right. Countless women are already discouraged by social stigma, pressure from the family, fear of retaliation and economically vulnerable conditions. To those who do, the legal system often causes additional trauma, instead of relief.
One of the biggest issues is the way in which evidence is documented. In most instances, the survivor must testify orally, on several occasions, before the police officials, investigators, prosecutors and finally in court. The repetition of a highly traumatic event is emotionally draining and psychologically devastating, especially for actual victims.
Although such testimony is extremely sensitive, it is commonly recorded in open courtrooms where the general public is present and listens to the specifics of the assault. Cross-examination is even more of a concern in the process. These trials are normally held in open courts. For a woman who already experienced violence and extreme trauma, an aggressive inquiry before the alleged culprit and general public is highly embarrassing, frightening and retraumatising. This atmosphere does not encourage honest testimony and undercuts the very meaning of justice.
The other structural problem is the socio-economic background of the majority of GBV survivors. Most of them have poor or disadvantaged families and are unable to meet the expenses of long litigation. Though the prosecution system is designed to aid such victims, there is an apparent deficiency in specialised understanding and sensitivity to deal with the gender based violence cases.
Prosecutors are overworked; they have not always been adequately trained in trauma-informed models and they often seem to lack connection to the realities of the experience of survivors. Lacking empathy and specialisation makes the cases weak and leaves the victims unheard.
The government is in urgent need of developing a specialised legal cell that is dedicated to dealing with gender based violence, with trained lawyers who handle the cases exclusively. These professionals must also be prepared with not just legal knowledge but regarding issues of trauma, victim psychology, as well as gender sensitivity.
The dilemma of the victims/survivors does not stop here, because at every other turn, they face a new hurdle. One of those is how documentary evidence is handled in such cases. In many cases, explicit pictures or sensitive content are recorded as evidence, which technically becomes public record. Despite the fact that this material is highly sensitive, there is a major procedural lapse in our GBV procedural legislation: there exists no kind of legislation which may protect this highly sensitive information from the access of the general public.
There are several informal means such as obtaining ‘kachi copies’ through bribery from court personnel, where someone from the general public can access this record without disclosing his name. Consequently, one is able to distribute highly sensitive material without the permission of the court and knowledge of the victim. This way the victim/survivor becomes unable to undo the damage or harm done to her reputation and dignity.
Though some judges do go the extra mile and order the sealing of such records, it is not a homogeneous or uniform practice. In other circumstances, the guilt might not be proven at all, but even the accused suffers reputational damage.
It is necessary to have meaningful legal frameworks that are clear and enforceable in ensuring that sensitive evidence in the cases of gender-based violence is protected from being accessed by the general public. Such legislative changes are necessary to ensure that the victim and the accused do not misuse and abuse the court records.
Last but not the least, though convictions are a thing in the case, there has been an apparent deficiency in compensation for survivors. The survivors tend to live years of emotional, social and economic losses but are given little or no financial support and rehabilitation. In such a case, justice is still wanting. Heavy compensation and damages would be of significance as it will aid the victims to restructure their lives after experiencing the trauma of an act that they were victims of.
The suffering is not over with the decision, as many women see it. Survivors still languish without being supported financially, psychologically and socially – even after the courtroom doors have been closed.
To make gender-based violence courts really count, the system needs to be reshaped in a way where the dignity, safety and well-being of the victim is at the centre of the court process – not by exposing them to another ordeal in the name of justice.
The writer is a lawyer.
