Options for Action Alongside or Instead of Criminal Proceedings

 

Why are alternatives to the criminal process needed?

There is often a social expectation for survivors to file a police complaint and pursue criminal proceedings against the offender. This expectation stems from the assumption that the role of the law enforcement system is to maintain public order and address offenses and behaviors that disrupt public safety and that threaten residents and citizens.

However, most survivors decide not to file a police complaint. About 90% of those who contact support centers avoid filing a complaint. A 2014 report by the Ministry of Public Security estimated that around 94% of survivors do not file complaints. The choice not to file a complaint has various reasons, related to the consequences of the assault, social structures, and the difficulty of coping with the invasiveness and lack of control involved in the criminal process. Even in cases where survivors choose to take action and file a complaint, data shows that 8 out of 10 sexual offense cases are closed without an indictment, primarily  due to lack of evidence or the expiration of the statute of limitations. Because the criminal process does not always guarantee justice for survivors or  an appropriate response, there are additional solutions, some institutional and some from civil society, survivors can pursue today.

On this page you can find information about the following alternatives: civil proceedings, National Insurance, negotiation, mediation, restorative justice , a resolution forum , a community-based interventio, processes , and the Documentation Project .

Civil Proceedings

Unlike criminal law, which focuses on proving guilt and punishing the offender, the main purpose of civil tort law is to compensate survivors for the damages caused to them by the harm, which carry an economic price (for example, costs of treatment, harm to family life, and loss of earning potential).

In a civil proceeding, the survivor is the one who sues the offender, unlike in a criminal process where the state is responsible for prosecuting the offender. The civil lawsuit allows confrontation with the offender within the legal system, but control over managing the case remains with the plaintiff and does not pass to the police or prosecution. Additionally, it is possible to sue other parties responsible for the harm, such as educational or religious institutions.

Alongside its advantages, the civil process, like the criminal process, is subject to the complex procedures and rules of the legal system. Additionally, because there is a need to hire a private lawyer, financial barriers often prevent survivors from filing a lawsuit.

Further reading: Civil lawsuit for sexual offenses .

 

National Insurance

The National Insurance Institute recognizes sexual assault as a reason for  receiving a general disability allowance. The allowance is a monthly financial stipend , temporary or permanent, determined by the degree of disability and earning capacity as assessed by National Insurance. In addition to the allowance, one can receive assistance with rent payments, property tax reductions, vocational rehabilitation, scholarships for education, and more. The recognition by National Insurance of the damage caused by sexual assault and receiving this support essentially serves as an official acknowledgment by the state that sexual assault occurred and has  severe consequences for the survivor.

Additional information about the rights of victims in the National Insurance System can be read here , or  on the National Insurance website.

If you need assistance navigating these resources or have specific questions, please reach out. .

 

Negotiation

Negotiation is usually conducted through the lawyers of the involved parties, aiming to reach agreements to resolve the conflict between the survivor and the offender and/or the organization/workplace. The agreements may include financial compensation, acknowledgment of responsibility for wrongdoing, and other arrangements concerning interactions between the survivor and the offender.

Initially, the lawyer contacts the other party (usually the offender’s side) to inform them that she represents the survivor and offers to conduct direct negotiations to avoid the need of  the legal process. If the other party agrees to engage in dialogue, the lawyers handle the discussions, which include proposals, counteroffers, objections, etc., ultimately leading to an agreement or abandonment of this route.

As mentioned, the negotiation takes place through the parties’ representatives (lawyers), with the parties themselves—the survivor, the offender, and other involved individuals—not directly participating. Throughout the process, the survivor’s lawyer keeps them informed and advances the negotiation according to their wishes. Communication between the survivor and the other party is limited and does not include direct dialogue but occurs only through the lawyer as an intermediary. It is important to note that if the negotiation fails, the matter can continue through the legal system.

Negotiation between lawyers can partially meet the needs of survivors. Through this process, they may receive acknowledgment of harm and financial or other compensation. The process can be quick and provide the survivor with what they want without having to face the procedures of the legal system. For some survivors, these remedies under these conditions may be considered achieving justice. Another possible advantage is maintaining privacy and avoiding uncontrolled or unwanted public exposure of the case.

At the same time, it is important to note the inherent limitations of this process and its inability to provide a space for interpersonal dialogue that allows the survivor to confront the offender. This approach seems suitable for survivors seeking financial remedies and arrangements related to future conduct outside the court system, without having to face the offender or engage in emotional conversations related to the harm.

 

Mediation

Mediation is a conflict resolution process in which a neutral third party facilitates negotiations aimed at reaching a mutually agreed-upon solution. The parties take part in discussions, usually accompanied by their lawyers. The process is voluntary and based on the parties’ consent, with the mediator having no authority to decide the dispute. Mediation can include a physical meeting between the survivor and the offender but can also proceed without such a meeting, with only their lawyers present. The process typically focuses on the consequences of the harm and financial compensation. Mediation does not require going to court, although sometimes cases are referred to mediation after starting legal proceedings. Because the process is based on agreement, it allows for a degree of control and choice for the parties involved.

Certain models of mediation, like transformative mediation, humanistic mediation, and narrative mediation, offer more advanced tools for managing emotional dialogue and complexities involved in cases of harassment and sexual assault.

Sometimes, close relatives of both the survivor and the offender participate in mediation. In some cases, part or all of the meetings are held separately, without joint sessions between the parties, with efforts made to tailor the process to the specific case and the participants’ needs. The goal of mediation is to reach an agreement acceptable to both parties. The process typically lasts between one and three months. In principle, mediation is not a therapeutic process and does not delve deeply into the emotional layers of the harm. Its advantages over legal proceedings include efficiency, confidentiality, relative speed, and the potential to meet the survivor’s need for acknowledgment. Some participants describe mediation as a positive experience that met their needs at the time. Others say the process was generally successful but ended without sufficient emotional processing, confrontation with the offender, or closure. 

 

Restorative Justice

Restorative justice is an approach based on the recognition that the harmful act primarily damages people and relationships, affecting many personal and social dimensions of the survivor. This approach broadly defines “victims of the offense” as those harmed directly or indirectly by the act, including family members, friends, and community members affected by it. The various practices under this approach involve meetings where some or all affected parties participate. The dialogue during these meetings is based on emotional communication about the harm and its consequences, and ultimately, the participants build agreements regarding repairing the damage caused. The restorative justice process consists of several individual meetings with different participants, leading up to a joint meeting where the discussion focuses on the harm and its effects, aiming to reach agreements between the parties. These agreements often include financial compensation for the survivor.

 

Unlike the negotiation and mediation processes, restorative justice operates on a preliminary condition: the offender must take responsibility for the harm caused and willingly agree to participate. Because of this prerequisite acknowledgment and the flexible nature of the process, which can be tailored to the needs of survivors, restorative justice can be empowering and enable the achievement of justice. Various studies in the field indicate high satisfaction among survivors who have participated in restorative justice processes.

 

At the same time, it is important to note that the characteristics of the process—namely, the offender’s acknowledgment of the act and their consent to participate—make it suitable for only a very specific subset of cases and not appropriate for other cases of sexual harm. 

 

In recent years, restorative justice processes in cases of sexual harm have gained significant attention as alternative responses. For example, in the Berliner Committee report that examined the situation of survivors of sexual assault in the law enforcement system, it was reccomended to to develop restorative justice responses for cases of sexual harm.

 

Forum Takana

The forum’s diverse composition—including rabbis from across the spectrum of the Religious Zionist community, senior legal professionals, emotional therapists, and representatives from all relevant educational networks—grants it public legitimacy within the religious community.

Complaints submitted to the forum are reviewed by a professional committee, which decides whether the complaint should be addressed within the forum. If the decision is positive, the panel invites the survivor to share their account. If necessary, additional witnesses are heard or further evidence is presented. Next, the panel invites the accused, presents the complaint to them, and listens to their response. The panel then deliberates on the case and decides how to proceed to prevent further harm by issuing instructions to the accused. The panel monitors compliance with these instructions. In cases where the accused does not cooperate and no agreement is reached on measures to prevent further harm, the forum publicly discloses the accused’s actions and warns the community about their behavior. It is important to note that the forum deals only with harms committed by individuals who hold positions of authority and managerial, spiritual, or educational power, and that its deliberations are kept confidential.

Survivors who turned to Forum Takana describe a positive and empowering experience, with a sense that justice was served. They reported feeling acknowledged regarding the harm and believed their case was being addressed Often, survivors approach the forum out of a sense of community responsibility, a desire to prevent further harm, and a need to receive recognition of the harm from significant figures within the community.

For further reading: Forum Takana 

 

Community-Based Intervention Processes

Community-based intervention processes allow communities, like kibbutzim, moshavim, or informal communities, to address incidents of sexual harm without turning to legal courts or other external authorities. These processes are based on the assumption that the community, including  both the harmed party and the offender, can take responsibility for addressing both sides in an inclusive manner without “excluding” them, aiming for reintegration  back into the community.

The intervention aims to facilitate the processing of the event and includes meetings with the involved parties and significant community members and discussions about the meaning of the harm and its impact on community members. Later in the process, a joint meeting is held where agreements are formed regarding ways of conduct within the community, and sometimes a compensation payment is agreed upon.

The process is usually managed by a professional woman from the therapeutic field, specializing in treating cases of sexual harm. She supports the community intensively for several months and thereafter as needed.

For further reading: Community Support Following Sexual Harm

 

The Documentation Project

The Documentation Project compiles  life stories of survivors of sexual assault, and it is operated by the Sexual Assault Assistance Center in Tel Aviv. It is the first of its kind in the world where filmed testimonies of those who have experienced sexual assault or harm are preserved. The purpose of the archive is to create a safe space for personal stories to be shared that are translated from hidden personal pain to lessons of strength and resilience. 

For more information about the Documentation Project, read here.