KEY POINTS:
Victims of crime should receive a lump-sum payment from a taxpayer-supported fund, Victim Support said yesterday.
Parliament's law and order select committee is considering the Criminal Proceeds Recovery Bill, which is intended to strengthen laws governing the seizure of illegally gained assets from criminals.
Victim Support chief executive Marie Knight told the committee that reparations should be paid into a central compensation fund from which victims could receive a lump-sum payment.
"This is the fairest way for victims who are not awarded compensation by the criminal justice system or in cases where the offender is not caught or cannot afford to pay."
She said state-funded victim compensation schemes, paid for from general revenue and criminal fines, operated in at least 29 countries. In some countries, the State directly compensated the victim, then sought reparation from the offender.
The Human Rights Commission has previously called on Parliament to set up such a scheme.
Ms Knight said Victim Support applauded the intention of the bill to confiscate property from criminals and recompense their victims but felt that in its present form it fell well short of the potential good it could do for victims.
"One of the biggest irritations for victims is where reparation is ordered and they either don't receive payment or it is drip fed in such small amounts it can be years before the repayment is completed. This is a situation where the victim is further disempowered, and it is also providing an interest-free loan for the offender."
That situation was highlighted by the Sensible Sentencing Trust in its submission. It brought a victim of childhood sexual abuse and rape by her father to address the committee.
She said the court had ordered she receive a $3000 lump-sum payment from her father before he was imprisoned and another $3000 at $100 a week after his release.
The woman said her father was released from prison last month.
"To date, I haven't had any contact from the justice system or anybody in regard to that money that he was asked to pay me," she said.
Trust spokesman Stephen Franks said no inquiry had been held into whether the woman's attacker could have afforded the entire lump-sum payment immediately.
"We look at this bill as focusing very much on headline stuff, when every day the message is going out that we don't know when [the woman] will get her money."
Mr Franks said that, as written, the bill was dangerous to important liberties, as it would allow broad powers of confiscation of property without a successful conviction.
