Lawyers want special board to deal with Jersey abuse victims' claims

Island's law may present insurmountable obstacles

Irish model suggested to determine compensation

Clare Dyer

The Guardian

Victims of child abuse decades ago at the Jersey children's home Haut de la Garenne will face insurmountable obstacles in seeking compensation under Jersey law, according to lawyers.

Jersey's criminal injuries compensation board can make awards only for injuries sustained after May 1 1991, and claims for damages in the civil courts have to be launched within three years of the victim's turning 18.

Haut de la Garenne closed in 1986 and more than 100 people have come forward saying they were abused there during the 1960s, 70s and 80s. A police investigation has resulted in three arrests and the discovery of fragments of children's teeth and bones in the cellar.

But faced with a legal system ill-equipped to deal with historic abuse, lawyers are calling on the Jersey authorities to set up a redress board to ensure justice for victims.

They suggest as a model the residential institutions redress board set up in Ireland in 2002, which compensates victims of physical, sexual and emotional abuse and neglect. Similar compensation programmes for victims of institutional abuse were established in Canada in the 1990s. Caroline Dorey, an advocate at Backhurst Dorey and Crane in St Helier, said: "Jersey is under scrutiny as never before. It's crucial that we are seen to be doing everything we can to get to the bottom of whatever happened at Haut de la Garenne, and to provide proper restitution for those affected.

"Although the island is justifiably proud of its legal system, the current situation poses new and extraordinary challenges. We owe it to the island in general, and of course those survivors of child abuse in particular, to ensure that we introduce whatever means are necessary to meet the current situation as openly as possible, and that justice is seen to be done.

"A redress board which is specifically set up to investigate and assess civil claims arising from this historic abuse would seem an appropriate way forward."

Tracey Emmott, an English solicitor specialising in child abuse at the law firm Pictons in Luton, echoes Dorey's call for a redress board.

A panel member of the Association of Child Abuse Lawyers, she has experience with the Irish board, which paid €40,000 (£32,000) compensation to one of her clients. "My own view is that a redress board would be the appropriate body for Jersey," she said. "It was welcomed by the Irish people because it was a recognition of how seriously the government took the complaints.

"And I think similar sentiments would be echoed in Jersey. Especially given all the allegations of cover-ups, there is all the more reason to be seen to be doing something appropriate."

The move would be supported by Fay Maxted, chief executive of The Survivors Trust, which represents 130 specialist sexual violence and abuse services throughout the UK and Ireland.

"We understand the suffering of victims abused in childhood and the long-term impact on physical, emotional and psychological health of victims, which is often worsened where abuse has taken place in an institution," she said.

"The redress boards set up in Nova Scotia and Ontario in the 1990s, and in Ireland in 2002, have been able to allow victims the opportunity to be heard and recompensed in some way and given communities the opportunity to challenge the silence and secrecy that concealed the abuse in the past."