Justice denied !

Victim's compensation laws in New South Wales are being reviewed and the plan under consideration denies any payment to cases that exceed a ten year time limit and reduce the maximum payment possible from $ 50,000 to just $ 15,000.

It is claimed that the present system is " unsustainable " and this review is necessary to bring outlays within the state's capacity to pay.  The problem seems to be that compensation payments are coming from the public purse and our court system seems reluctant to go after perpetrators and recover money from the person responsible for the crime.

The vast majority of these claims involve sexual assault or domestic violence and imposing a time limit suggests that the victim must share a degree of responsibility for not making the claim earlier.   In some cases, children are sexually assaulted over a long period of time by a person in authority and they are cowed into submission by the threat of further violence.   Women feature largely in compensation claims and many fear for their life if they had the temerity to go to the police with a complaint.    Imposing a time limit simply ignores reality !

As things stand, the courts seem quite happy to punish the wrong doer.   It is not unusual for that person to serve time in prison or be sentenced to many hours of community service, but such punishments do nothing to help financially clear up a crime.   It would be wrong for the courts to arbitrarily impose financial penalties because these could deliver cruel hardship to other innocent people, but each case should be subject to review to see if cost recovery is possible.   Insisting that the family home be sold to provide compensation funds might remove a roof from over the heads of other innocent family members - but ordering the confiscation of a fancy motor vehicle - or a prized water craft - would be an entirely different matter !

Justice delayed - is justice denied, but to simply close the court shutters and claim that justice must occur within a time frame - and with a strict limit on the possible payment outcome - is to deny justice entirely.

Each case needs to be judged on it's individual merit and this review seems to be applying a " one size fits all " solution.     A better option would be to allow the judiciary to delve deeper - with wider discretion to tailor solutions to individual cases !