[ad_1]
Governments are always more comfortable tackling definable problems than a societal malaise. So when the issue is the fear and anxiety of half of society, the instinct can be to retreat into familiar solutions.
The murder of Sarah Everard, abducted and killed while walking home in London, could force a new approach. In the way that certain murders capture a moment, this case (and the alleged killer is a police officer) has uncorked a wave of rage and anxiety among women, which spoke to the fears not only of violence and assault but also to harassment and routine feelings of dread when out alone.Â
This has unbalanced the government, especially after the heavy-handed policing of a vigil over her murder was juxtaposed with new laws to restrict disruptive protests. This exposed ministers to charges they cared more about safeguarding statues and property from protesters than protecting women, an attack made punchier by the maximum jail time under the protest laws being higher than some rape sentences.
In truth, this government hardly has qualms about locking up rapists. Nor, with the criminalisation of revenge porn and upskirting and a domestic abuse bill, is it ignoring these issues (though this is owed more to the previous prime minister Theresa May). But the problems are legion, from gaps in police data and information sharing on domestic abusers to delays in bringing cases to court. Rape prosecutions, already low, dropped from 3,043 to 2,102 in the year before the pandemic. And it is true that ministers have not shown the same zeal for this issue as they have for curbing unwelcome protests.
Yet perversely, the contrast also offers a glimpse of a way forward. The protest curbs show ministers prioritising those they see as the victims of public disorder over the rights of disruptive protesters. For all the civil liberty concerns, the public supports crackdowns on those who shut down airports, disrupt commutes or deface memorials. “Most people don’t go on protests but they do go to work,†says one Tory strategist. Having found a public order enemy, ministers have been ruthless.
Perhaps the error, then, has been not seeing the protection of women through a similarly wide lens and acting with the same ferocity. For what greater public security issue can there be than half the country routinely feeling unsafe in their everyday activities?
Too often violence and harassment of women are seen as a series of separate criminal justice issues rather than part of a bigger picture. Where an easily defined wrong is identified, laws are made. But where does catcalling fit into this? Or random abuse in the street? These fall below the criminal radar and yet are key to the dread in women’s everyday lives.
There is a model for a public order approach, albeit a failed one. Understanding that for many the greatest blight on daily life was not crime but antisocial behaviour, Tony Blair’s government introduced new civil remedies to give individuals respite from the offending activity, be it noise or intimidation. His antisocial behaviour orders have since been rethought, but they showed a new way of thinking which grasped the distress caused by what is seen as lesser disorder.
Priti Patel, the home secretary, was already working on a new strategy but the initial response of the government since the killing has been formulaic and discouraging. Boris Johnson held an emergency ministerial meeting but his promise of more money for CCTV and street lights smacked more of a need to have something to say. Even as ministers were meeting, Tory peers were voting, unsuccessfully, to block an amendment to a Domestic Abuse bill which required stalkers and domestic abusers to be added to a national register.
The need for a new approach is clear. Since the killing, more than 100,000 people have responded to the consultation for Patel’s strategy. Their stories, recognisable to all women, are of fear of taxis, empty streets and deserted stations, of walking with keys between their fingers, not knowing if some random abuse could turn violent.
There are things that can be done. Ministers can accept the Lords amendment on a national register for stalkers and abusers. They can try to speed cases through the courts, further raise sentences, force better data sharing and fund more specialist police units.Â
But it is also obvious that more than a traditional criminal justice response is needed. A cultural shift demands a more coherent approach — almost an integrated review — which takes in social services, local government and education, as well as criminal justice.
Listening to the stories of everyday abuse, it is hard not to see the case for a new offence of street harassment. This would follow the principles of the public order approach, addressing the everyday aggravation which plays such a large role in the feelings of fear. It is not an easy fix — random street harassers are hard to trace — but it would make a strong statement about the standards society demands of men.
There is no simple answer to the risks faced by women but existing approaches are not working. A different mindset, which addresses issues at both the lower and most extreme end of the spectrum, may show that the government and the country are ready to make the everyday security of half the population a genuine national priority.
[ad_2]
Source link
