top of page
logo_web.png

When Justice is powerless: surviving violence that goes unpunished




In Switzerland, many victims of violence are confronted with a painful reality: despite their suffering and the impact of what they have endured, some forms of violence receive no judicial response. Harassment, psychological abuse, sexual assaults without sufficient material evidence… so many situations where recognition and redress are often out of reach.


While the justice system is based on the presumption of innocence and the requirement for concrete proof, these fundamental principles can sometimes leave victims in deep distress. When a report is dismissed or a trial does not lead to a conviction, the victim may feel forgotten, disbelieved, or that their pain has not been acknowledged. And yet, the absence of a conviction does not mean the violence did not happen.


This article explores the limits of the legal framework, the frustration and sense of injustice experienced by those who have endured violence that remains unpunished, and the solutions available for rebuilding in other ways. Through the voices of victims, as well as the professionals who support them, we will explore how it is possible to heal – even without judicial recognition.



Violence that doesn’t fit in any box


Some forms of violence still escape institutional recognition – not because they are less serious or less damaging, but because they do not meet the strict criteria defined by criminal law. Psychological harassment, street harassment, surveillance behaviours, emotional manipulation in intimate relationships, economic abuse… These types of violence are often endured in silence, sometimes for months or years, without being clearly identifiable as a criminal offence.


The issue is twofold: on the one hand, the law requires concrete elements – facts that can be objectively classified – while on the other, violent behaviours are often diluted within complex, ambiguous, or insidious interactions. They rarely leave visible marks. As a result, much of what victims experience does not “fit into any legal category.” This does not mean society condones these behaviours, but rather that it has not yet found a satisfactory legal way to define them.


These situations can cause deep suffering for victims, especially when they try to seek help or assert their rights. It is not uncommon for institutional responses to be powerless – limited to acknowledging the situation without being able to act.



“It’s essential that a victim seeking help and advice from the police feels heard, understood, and reassured. In my view, it’s not acceptable to tell a victim that nothing can be done. (…) Our goal is to ensure that the victim has all the information they need to understand what can or cannot be done. Beyond listening, it’s also essential to identify, from the very beginning, what the victim wants.”


Excerpt from the interview with Albane Bruigom, Chief Inspector at the Lausanne Criminal Investigation Department and Head of the Special Unit for Victim Support (USPV), available below.




The burden of proof: between fundamental guarantees and lived dead ends


The Swiss justice system is founded on essential principles: the presumption of innocence, the requirement for evidence, and the prohibition of conviction without objective grounds. These pillars protect all individuals subject to the law and are a cornerstone of a democratic society.


But for victims of violence, these guarantees can often feel like obstacles. This is especially true in cases of sexual assault or domestic violence, where the victim’s account is often isolated, denied, with no witnesses and no physical evidence. A complaint may then be dismissed for “lack of sufficient evidence”, without even reaching the stage of trial.


This dismissal is often misunderstood. It does not mean the complaint is false or unfounded. It simply means that the current legal framework does not allow, at this stage, to prove the offence beyond reasonable doubt. But for the victim, the result is the same: the case is closed, without official recognition of what was experienced.


In such situations, many people feel a sense of injustice or erasure. They may ask themselves: “Why speak out, if it changes nothing?”, “Why face the system, only to be told there’s not enough evidence?” The pain lies not only in the violence suffered, but also in the absence of response. And this absence can become a new wound.



“Recognising the rapes I suffered was a long and painful journey. But the hardest part was getting them recognised by the justice system. Because it happened behind closed doors, with no witnesses or material evidence, everything rested on my word. And on his. I knew that doubt would benefit the accused. But deep down, I was afraid that a dismissal would be seen as a rejection – as if justice didn’t believe me. That would have been a form of secondary violence.


In the end, there was no conviction. And yet, I felt that the prosecutor believed me. Almost as if he was sorry he couldn’t go any further. That helped me. I realised there’s a difference between judicial truth — or the absence of a judicial conclusion – and THE truth. It was mainly through therapy that I was able to make peace with what I’d experienced. And with myself.


Today, I’m considering starting a restorative justice process. Because even if I didn’t get a verdict, I still need meaning. And healing.”


– Testimony of a survivor of violence




A shifting legal landscape


Swiss law is not static. It evolves in response to growing social awareness, civic mobilisation, insights from professionals in the field, and gaps exposed by real-life cases. It strives to adapt to the complexity of today’s forms of violence.


In this spirit, the Federal Council has recently proposed introducing a new offence in the Criminal Code: that of obsessive harassment, more commonly known as stalking. The aim is to fill an important legal gap: until now, repeated acts of intrusion, surveillance, or unwanted contact were only punishable if they met the threshold of an existing offence (such as threats, coercion, or insults).


The adopted text* now recognises that the repetition of such acts, even if seemingly minor when taken individually, can amount to a serious form of violence. The goal is to intervene earlier, before the situation escalates, and to offer a legal response better suited to these forms of harassment that victims have often endured in near-total impunity.


This draft law reflects a clear institutional intention to strengthen protection for individuals, even if such changes require time and political will.


In the meantime, it is essential to approach these situations with tact and clarity: to acknowledge suffering, to explain the system’s limitations without blaming the victim, and to guide them toward alternative forms of recognition.


* 1 Anyone who persistently stalks, harasses, or threatens a person in a way that significantly restricts their freedom to determine how they live shall, on complaint, be liable to a custodial sentence not exceeding three years or to a monetary penalty.



Supporting differently


Professionals in the field know this well: a victim can emerge deeply wounded from a legal process — even when everything was done “by the book.” Because what they were truly hoping for wasn’t necessarily a conviction, but recognition. A simple “Yes, this happened.” A look, a listening ear, a form of validation.


In such cases, the role of support services is essential. The LAVI (Federal Act on Assistance to Victims of Offences) provides psychological, social, and legal support — even when no complaint is filed or when proceedings do not lead to prosecution. The link between criminal proceedings and victim support is not automatic. Being recognised as a victim under LAVI does not depend on a court ruling, but rather on an assessment carried out by the LAVI Centre, whose criteria are more favourable to the victim. In particular, if the reported facts are deemed credible, the person becomes eligible for concrete and immediate support.



“Even before filing a complaint, I was received by someone from the LAVI centre. It was the first time I spoke about it ‘officially.’ I was still too afraid to take that step, but I needed to be heard. This person welcomed me with kindness and without judgment. She recognised me as a victim simply on the basis of my testimony and the elements I was able to show her. That alone did me a world of good. I felt that what I had experienced was taken seriously, that my voice mattered, that I was believed. Her support was invaluable moving forward. Thanks to her, I was able to move at my own pace, feeling supported throughout.”


– Testimony of a survivor of violence



“It’s important to emphasise the symbolic weight of criminal law and its proper application for citizens, in terms of their sense of justice, safety, and respect for public order. For this reason, the feeling of not having been acknowledged – or worse, not having been treated with respect – during the criminal process can lead to deep anger, frustration, and a significant loss of trust in the authorities. Conversely, simply being listened to and treated with respect by those authorities already has a very positive impact on a victim’s sense of recognition. (...) As far as our work at the LAVI Centre is concerned, unlike the criminal authorities, our role is not to investigate or assess guilt. This allows us to listen to and validate the victim’s experience, which helps to meet their need to be believed and heard – and naturally strengthens the trust they place in us.”


Excerpt from the interview with Muriel Golay, Director of the LAVI Centre Geneva, available below.



The Police are often the first point of contact. Officers are faced with a difficult tension: listening to a victim’s account while knowing that a judicial response may be out of reach. Their room for manoeuvre is limited, but their relational role—their ability to guide and reassure—can make a crucial difference.



The essential role of therapeutic support


When the justice system cannot acknowledge or punish the violence experienced, a void emerges. For the victim, this void is not only legal—it is emotional, identity-related, and relational. The suffering doesn’t end with the conclusion of a case; in fact, it can deepen, fed by the feeling of being abandoned or silenced.


In this context, therapeutic support becomes a vital resource. It offers a space where the victim can share their experience without having to "prove" anything, "convince" anyone, or engage in a legal process. It is a space where one can be believed unconditionally. A place to finally talk about what it feels like inside.


Therapeutic support can help to:


  • identify and name the violence experienced, even when it is not recognised by the justice system;

  • understand the mechanisms of control, shame, or guilt;

  • restore self-esteem, often damaged by the lack of external recognition;

  • regain agency over one’s story, body, and emotions;

  • and sometimes, simply learn to live with what will never be “repaired” by the justice system.


Some people find support through individual psychological counselling, others through peer support groups, body-based or creative approaches, or trauma-focused therapeutic methods such as EMDR or psychotraumatology.



“I filed my complaint in September 2020, having found the courage and support I needed about a year and a half after the assault. Today, in April 2025, the legal proceedings are still ongoing. The pace of justice is measured in six-month intervals on average – the time between each stage. A single appeal is enough to drag the process out again and again. If I want to fight for recognition as a victim, I also have to learn to be patient.


In the meantime, I’m making progress in my recovery through therapy, and – fortunately or not – my healing is moving faster than the justice system. Fortunately, because I’m slowly reclaiming a normal life without having to wait for a verdict. But it’s not all good, because with every step in the legal process, I’m forced to relive that dark time in my life that pulls me downward.


If the justice system moved faster – if the process were already behind me – I’d feel freer and lighter to move forward with positive life plans. Instead, I walk around with a stone in my shoe, always there, weighing on every choice and project. And still, that’s not a reason to give up.”


– Testimony of a survivor of violence



Support cannot replace Justice. But it can help to heal where the legal system cannot: in one’s relationship with oneself, in the ability to feel legitimate, in the possibility of rebuilding without waiting for external validation.


Recognising this need also means moving beyond an exclusively legal understanding of “reparation”. 



Recognition beyond the law


What this article highlights is not a failure of justice, but a structural limitation: the law cannot do everything. It cannot fully embrace the complexity of human experience, nor heal every form of suffering. It cannot issue a conviction without proof, nor acknowledge what escapes legal definitions.


But that doesn’t mean victims should be left alone with their pain. Other spaces of recognition exist. Other forms of healing and reparation are possible. Other paths to rebuilding can be found. The role of institutions, professionals, and civil society is to make those alternatives visible, accessible, and legitimate.


Because in the end, what many victims are looking for is perhaps this above all: to be believed, to be heard, to be supported — even when justice is powerless.



Another form of justice: restorative justice


In the face of these limitations, one approach is gaining ground: restorative justice. It does not replace criminal justice but can serve as a meaningful complement – one that focuses not on punishment, but on the human consequences of harm, aiming to provide those affected with symbolic reparation and a form of recognition.


In French-speaking Switzerland, restorative justice can take the form of a conversation, a facilitated meeting (such as victim – offender mediation or dialogue), a discussion circle, or an exchange with a third party – allowing space to put the experience into words, to be heard, and sometimes, to receive answers.


This approach is still relatively unknown to the wider public and many professionals. Yet it opens up important possibilities: in situations where institutional recognition is not attainable, it offers relational recognition — which can be a decisive step in the healing process.



“Restorative justice is based on the idea that “delivering justice” means focusing on the harm and suffering caused by the offence, and trying to repair them in line with the needs of those who have been affected. It is a form of justice that is “taken” rather than handed down by a judge; restorative justice processes place victims and offenders at the centre, giving them an active role, provided they both give their consent. The participants themselves help shape the process – its pace, its content, and its outcome.”


Excerpt from the interview with Camille Perrier Depeursinge, Professor of Law at the University of Lausanne and specialist in restorative justice, available below.





INTERVIEWS



Albane Bruigom • Police


Chief Inspector at the Lausanne Criminal Police, Albane Bruigom heads the Special Unit for Victim Support (USPV), a structure created in 2022 to improve support for victims in the broadest sense of the term.


Trained at the Lausanne Police Academy in 1996, she began her career in intervention units, then joined emergency response (Police-secours). In 2001, she moved to the Criminal Police, spending a year with the narcotics unit before being assigned to the vice squad as an inspector. In 2006, she was appointed deputy head of the unit.


Throughout her career, she has completed numerous specialist trainings: support for adult and child victims, sexual assaults, abuse, perpetrator typologies, as well as leadership courses at the Swiss Police Institute.


Today, she leads the USPV, which has notably implemented support services for victims of domestic violence, conflicts within couples or ex-couples (regardless of gender), stalking, and harassment in public spaces.



In your daily work, do you often encounter victims of violence whose experiences cannot, or cannot yet, be prosecuted under criminal law?


Yes, very regularly, we meet people who have experienced harassment. Depending on the situation, it is sometimes possible to file a complaint – but not always.


To give you an example: when someone receives unwanted gifts or is followed in the street, these actions do not always constitute grounds for a complaint. However, if the person ends up having to change their daily habits to avoid crossing paths with the harasser, they may then be able to file a complaint for “coercion.”


Even in the absence of a formal complaint, we welcome people who wish to speak with us at our “off-site” Police facility, located in downtown Lausanne. This space is dedicated exclusively to receiving victims, who may be accompanied by a trusted person. 


How do you explain the situation to these individuals? What do you say to avoid discouraging them or deepening their sense of abandonment?


Since 2022, our Unit has been handling specific situations such as stalking or harassment in public spaces. When it is possible and the victim wishes to proceed, we record their complaint and carry out the subsequent investigation.


If filing a complaint is not possible or the victim chooses not to do so, we may – depending on the situation and with their consent – summon the perpetrator to the police station. We then initiate a discussion aimed at reasoning with the individual to stop the unwanted behaviour. This is a preliminary police intervention, not a form of mediation, and it works very effectively.


Our goal is to ensure that the victim has all the information they need to understand what can or cannot be done. Beyond listening, it’s also essential to identify, from the very beginning, what the victim wants.


What resources do you direct individuals to when they are suffering, particularly if their situation does not fall within the traditional legal framework?


All victims who contact the police are referred to LAVI (Victim Support Centres), provided they are recognised as such.


In cases of harassment in public spaces, most victims are not eligible for LAVI support. In these situations, we provide ongoing follow-up in our “off-site” police premises in order to advise them as effectively as possible.


I would also add that since February 2023, our Unit has been managing the City of Lausanne’s street harassment reporting platform. Individuals can report incidents either anonymously or by leaving their contact details so that we can get in touch. Few cases are concerned, but sometimes the individuals do have the option of filing a complaint.


For intimate partner violence – whether current or former relationships – in addition to LAVI, we refer victims to the Malley Prairie support centre and/or to the Violence Medicine Unit at CHUV for potential medical documentation, and we refer perpetrators to the Ale Prevention Centre.


In your view, what makes a difference, in those moments, for a victim who cannot rely on judicial recognition?


First of all, I should say that victims generally want one thing above all: for the violence to stop. If we take the example of obsessive harassment or domestic violence in current or former relationships, very often the victim simply wants life to return to normal. Filing a complaint may come later, but not necessarily.


I believe it’s essential that a victim seeking help and advice from the police feels heard, understood, and reassured. In my view, it’s not acceptable to tell a victim that nothing can be done. We must take the time and consider every possible option. I should also clarify that in cases of offences subject to mandatory prosecution, we don’t have the same level of discretion, as we are required to refer the case to the Public Prosecutor.


As a professional, have you observed any changes in how victims' voices are acknowledged within police institutions?


Yes, since 2001, I’ve seen clear progress, particularly in the use of video interviews in cases of sexual abuse and mistreatment of minors—whether in terms of technique, procedures, or the training of specialists.


Even though all police officers receive basic victim support training during their time at the police academy, they also benefit from continuing education provided in part by some of our external partners.


Having started my career in the police nearly 29 years ago, I can say that the approach has evolved positively, and our current knowledge cannot be compared to what we had when I first entered the profession. I’m especially thinking of domestic violence and the concept of the cycle of violence, which is now widely understood and integrated.


In the current context, where some forms of violence remain without conviction, how do you see the evolution of the Police’s role? Do you believe it can go beyond its judicial mission?


As I mentioned earlier, summoning perpetrators even in the absence of a formal complaint is already a form of response. I should add that this way of working is quite new.


Looking ahead, I think we might need to train police officers to carry out mediation between the parties involved. I’ve personally taken an interest in restorative justice, and I’ve even discussed it with certain victims.


Of course, from a policing perspective, we want perpetrators to be heard and referred to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. But we must also, and above all, take the wishes of the victims into account.



Muriel Golay • LAVI


Muriel Golay is the Director of the Geneva Centre for Victim Support (Centre LAVI), where she has worked for many years in the fight against gender-based and sexual violence. Between 2003 and 2015, she worked for the Geneva Office for the Promotion of Equality between Women and Men, which she later went on to lead.


She is particularly committed to improving access to justice for victims, and has developed practical tools such as My logbook, to stay on track during criminal proceedings (2024) – a series of publications and educational videos designed to help individuals prepare for the judicial process.



In your view, what does official recognition as a victim under LAVI mean for the person concerned?


That depends very much on the context of the violence and the point at which the person approaches us.


If, for instance, they come to us after experiencing an offence that has been confirmed by a medical report, after being referred by the Police following an intervention at the scene, or if the perpetrator has already been convicted, then their expectations towards the LAVI Centre will mainly focus on receiving information about their rights and the services they can access through us.


If they come to the Centre at the very beginning of their help-seeking process, we are sometimes the first people they talk to about what happened. In that case, being heard, believed and validated in their suffering becomes particularly important. The fact that we help them find words for their pain – and that those words are normalised – also plays a key role. “I thought I was going crazy,” we sometimes hear from people who are experiencing severe stress symptoms (hypervigilance, insomnia, intrusive memories, etc.) to the point that they can no longer function in daily life – without realising that these symptoms are completely normal responses to an experience that, by its very nature, is not.


Do you receive many people who come to you after their case has been closed without further action, or who have not filed a complaint? What are they mainly looking for?


Very few people come to us after their case has been dismissed by the justice system. In the few cases I can recall, they contacted us to ask whether we could help fund an appeal (since legal aid only covers costs retrospectively). I believe this group of people – who would likely need support from the LAVI Centre at that point – is not necessarily small, but that they don’t reach out to us either because they want to move on, or because they’re unaware of our existence (or, more likely, they didn’t fully understand the information given to them by the Police or the Public Prosecutor’s Office, who are both obliged to inform them).


It’s also important to know that many people appear before the authorities without a lawyer – again, often because they didn’t know about us or our services, particularly the fact that we could have referred them to a lawyer and helped fund at least the initial steps in the criminal procedure.


As for those who don’t want to press charges, I’d say they make up a large proportion of the people we support. Their motivation to report to the criminal justice system depends on several factors: the type and context of the violence, their relationship with the perpetrator, and their personal circumstances (such as financial situation or residence status). At the point when they contact us, the reasons for not filing a complaint are mainly shame, fear of not being believed, fear of the perpetrator or of harming the perpetrator and/or their loved ones, anxiety around the criminal process (which is hard to understand, lengthy, costly, and requires repeating the facts), a lack of perceived benefit for the victim – especially if the perpetrator is insolvent – or simply the desire to move on.


On the other hand, motivations for filing a complaint can include fear that the perpetrator might harm others, or requirements imposed by insurance providers (civil liability or accident insurance). For many people, reporting the facts to the authorities also stems from a sense of moral logic, or even duty, without realising what they’ll be confronted with once the process begins.


Why do certain forms of violence, such as harassment or psychological control, not entitle someone to support from the LAVI?


To be granted victim status under LAVI, three criteria must be met: the commission of a criminal offence under Swiss law, a serious impact on the person’s physical, psychological or sexual integrity, and a direct causal link between the two.


Harassment or psychological control are not, in themselves, defined as specific offences in the Penal Code, and their impact is still not widely acknowledged by the justice system.


That said, there has been recent progress in case law – particularly in the context of domestic violence – showing that the psychological impact of such violence is increasingly recognised by the courts, especially in terms of access to LAVI victim status.


In any case, the approach remains the same: the LAVI Centre assesses the reported facts by considering their duration and repetition, and examines their effect on the person’s well-being. We mainly rely on three articles of the Swiss Penal Code when dealing with the most serious forms of psychological violence: coercion (Art. 181 PC), threats (Art. 180 PC), or simple bodily harm (Art. 123 PC). Indeed, some of the most intense forms of psychological violence may fall under this last article, due to the severity of their impact on the victim’s health.


In your experience, what role does psychological support play in victims’ recovery?


Our approach is multi-dimensional (psychological, social and legal), but we do not provide ongoing therapy to victims. Instead, we refer them to psychotherapists and can fully cover the cost of 10 to 15 sessions, as a supplement to LAMal or LAA, and more if necessary, depending on the victim’s needs and financial situation. That said, our emotional support skills are central to our intervention model. We make extensive use of psychoeducation and, when needed, techniques from emergency psychology.


Most victims are keen to be referred for psychotherapeutic support, particularly when the violence they’ve experienced was prolonged or began in childhood. For certain offences, methods such as EMDR are highly effective. Others may prefer more body-oriented approaches. We can, for instance, cover the cost of complementary therapies or participation in support groups. These options are very well received, and our experience shows that they significantly reduce the health impact of the violence endured.


We also know that criminal proceedings often represent a stage during which victims again require support, as the process can reactivate symptoms – for instance, having to revisit the events or being confronted with the perpetrator’s version of the facts.


To address these needs, we are setting up a support group in Geneva focused specifically on the experiences of victims in relation to the criminal justice process.


Do you observe a desire for ‘symbolic justice’ among some victims? How can LAVI respond to this need?


Absolutely. First and foremost, it’s important to emphasise the symbolic weight of criminal law and its proper application for citizens, in terms of their sense of justice, safety, and respect for public order. For this reason, the feeling of not having been acknowledged – or worse, not having been treated with respect – during the criminal process can lead to deep anger, frustration, and a significant loss of trust in the authorities.


Conversely, simply being listened to and treated with respect by those authorities already has a very positive impact on a victim’s sense of recognition.


We can also guide, advise or explain what alternative forms of justice might be available, such as restorative justice or mediation (criminal or otherwise). However, I must say that most of the time, when we first meet someone, they’re not yet at that stage. These considerations tend to emerge later on, and by that time, we’re not always still in contact with the person. At that earlier stage, we are more likely to focus on questions around filing a complaint – what the person expects from it, what it means to them, and so on.


In any case, as far as our work at the LAVI Centre is concerned, unlike the criminal authorities, our role is not to investigate or assess guilt. This allows us to listen to and validate the victim’s experience, which helps to meet their need to be believed and heard – and naturally strengthens the trust they place in us.


Do you see any changes in the way society (or institutions) perceive violence that is not recognised by the justice system?


Absolutely. There is no doubt that, in general, society today views certain violent behaviours as unacceptable – even though, in practice, the formal justice system remains limited in its ability to provide recognition and protection. This is especially true for gender-based violence and violence against children.


That said, despite increased visibility, many forms of violence still remain, in my opinion, in society’s blind spot. Incest is a clear example – we now know how widespread it is, yet the number of reported cases remains very low.


Overall, much more needs to be done to prevent violence, whether through education, awareness campaigns, or by improving victim protection before the violence reaches severe levels.


If you could expand LAVI’s scope of action tomorrow, what would be your top priority?


In 2023, to mark LAVI’s 30th anniversary, the LAVI Conference of French-speaking Switzerland chose to focus on access to justice through 15 recommendations (www.lavi30ans.ch). These call for action at various levels: reforming the federal law on assistance for victims of crime, amending certain aspects of criminal procedure, improving inter-institutional and multidisciplinary support, increasing public awareness efforts, and expanding training – particularly for professionals in the criminal justice system, but also for civil authorities dealing with victims as defined by LAVI, as well as for those working in the social and healthcare sectors.


From a justice perspective, I believe the three top priorities in terms of victim support should be: ensuring victims are treated with empathy and without judgment throughout the criminal proceedings, improving access to clear and comprehensible information, and promoting innovative and constructive measures to support their recovery.



Camille Perrier Depeursinge • Restorative justice


Camille Perrier Depeursinge is a Full Professor at the University of Lausanne. Appointed in 2018, she teaches general and special criminal law, alternative dispute resolution methods in criminal matters, and environmental criminal law. She studied at the Universities of Lausanne and Zurich before writing a doctoral thesis on “Mediation in Swiss Criminal Law” at the University of Lausanne. She was admitted to the bar in 2012 and practised law until 2023 in a Lausanne-based firm, focusing mainly on criminal law.


In 2006, she worked for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Tanzania. From 2013 to 2015, she lived in Mountain View, California, where she attended numerous courses at Stanford University as an auditor and worked as a support assistant at the California School for the Deaf. She helped found AJURES (the Association for Restorative Justice in Switzerland), which she has chaired since its creation in 2015.



How would you define restorative justice to someone unfamiliar with the concept?


Restorative justice is based on the idea that “delivering justice” means focusing on the harm and suffering caused by the offence, and trying to repair them in line with the needs of those who have been affected.


It is a form of justice that is “taken” rather than handed down by a judge; restorative justice processes place victims and offenders at the centre, giving them an active role, provided they both give their consent. The participants themselves help shape the process – its pace, its content, and its outcome. 


In what kind of situations can restorative justice be considered? 


In any situation with a broadly penal dimension – that is, where one person has been harmed by another – without the need for a formal judgement confirming that a criminal offence has been committed. What matters is that the people involved are willing and give their informed consent, and that the process is facilitated by a trained professional who ensures it is properly prepared, guided, and supported.


In your view, what can restorative justice offer a victim that the criminal justice system cannot?


In my opinion – and according to the research in this field – a great deal more satisfaction! It offers recognition of their suffering, a safe space in which to share their story and be heard, the chance to get answers to unresolved questions (such as “Why me?” or “How can I prevent this from happening again?”), and a restored sense of agency and dignity. 


How can someone initiate a restorative justice process?


By contacting a specialised organisation, such as AJURES (Association for Restorative Justice in Switzerland, ajures.ch), and providing their canton of residence and a way to be contacted. A trained mediator will then get in touch to arrange a first meeting. The professionals will work with the victim to assess whether a restorative justice process could be of value and, if so, how to move forward.


Have you supported individuals for whom this process allowed a form of healing or release, even in the absence of a court ruling?


I am not a practitioner of restorative justice myself. However, I chair an organisation that facilitates such processes for the parties involved. Let me quote the words of a victim who recently took part in such a process: “Thank you for welcoming me with such attentiveness, kindness and humanity. Thank you for being these precious witnesses, for offering me such a gentle and safe space – a space that allowed me to reclaim my full legitimacy and self-worth. […] A new chapter in my life is beginning, and it’s thanks to you. You have been my guardian angels through this ordeal, and I will never forget it.”


What obstacles or reservations do you see, either from victims or professionals, when it comes to restorative justice?


It is only ever offered as an option – the victim may not want it, may not feel ready, or may have no wish to engage in anything involving the offender. Professionals often fear the risk of secondary victimisation – that the process might do more harm than good. To prevent this, restorative processes are prepared with great care and always tailored to the individual. It is also recommended that participants be supported by a mental health professional (such as a psychologist or therapist).  


How can this approach be better known among victims and institutional actors in Switzerland?


The film All Your Faces (Je verrai toujours vos visages), by Jeanne Herry, has played an important role in raising awareness of these processes. But we also work directly with criminal justice and prison authorities, and we present restorative justice to victim support associations, psychologists, LAVI Centres, and so on.


What developments or changes would you like to see to strengthen the role of restorative justice in our society?


There should be a clearer legal framework so that authorities feel more confident recommending these processes to those involved. The State should also cover the cost of such processes; at present, even if the cost is modest, our association relies on foundation grants so that the parties themselves don’t have to pay. It’s also vital to recognise the work of restorative justice professionals, who receive specific training, develop expertise, and work continually as part of a network. Finally, information about these options needs to be more widely shared, so that anyone affected by an offence knows these processes exist – and that information should come from the police, victim support centres, prosecutors, judges, prisons, probation services, mental health professionals, etc.






Illustration Jorm Sangsorn | iStockPhoto



 
 

SUPPORT VICTIME PAS SEULE !

 

Beneficiary:

Association VPS

1260 Nyon

Alternative Bank Switzerland

CH10 0839 0039 8657 1000 5

[QR payment slip]

don_web.jpg
qr-code_vect.png

TWINT

Scan this QR code from your Twint app or click here from your phone!

 

Your donations will help us develop, print/produce, and distribute information and awareness tools for people who have been victims of physical, mental, and sexual violence (and their loved ones) in French-speaking Switzerland. Whether one-time or a regular payment, any amount of support is valuable. A warm thank you!

Example of one-time support: CHF 200.–, 500.–, or 1’000.–

Example of regular support: CHF 20.–, 50.–, or 100.– per month

 

​You can also support VPS by purchasing this beautiful collection of solidarity magnets!

magnets_footer.png

© 2021-2025

This information platform was created by Chloé, a former victim, with the participation of the Police Cantonale Vaudoise, Me Céline Jarry-Lacombe | lawyer in Vevey, Mr. Pierre Jaquier | LAVI counsellor in Lausanne, Ms. Céline Degonda | psychotherapist in Lausanne, and Ms. Cécile Greset | scientific collaborator and doctoral candidate at the Institute of Gender Studies in Geneva, for the website launch in March 2022.

 

A special thank you to those who shared their invaluable testimony. Would you like to share your story anonymously? You can submit your testimony here!

A warm thank you to survivors and everyone contributing to the success of various VPS projects ♥ Thank you to the professionals who review the content on the platform and tools and who contribute to blog articles. Thank you to everyone who volunteered to translate the online vioence scaler into their language. Lastly, a special thanks to Soroptimist International Nyon-Rolle for their support and collaboration.

ALL REPRODUCTION, EVEN PARTIAL, IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT AUTHORISATION.

bottom of page