SJ Interview: Harriet Wistrich

Harriet Wistrich, Founder and Director of the Centre for Women’s Justice, a revered solicitor who has acted in many high-profile cases, talks to Solicitors Journal about her new book, Sister in Law: Fighting for Justice in a System Designed by Men, which has been nominated for the 2025 Women’s Prize for Non-Fiction. In the book, Harriet provides shocking details on ten hard-won cases relating to criminal justice and that highlight failings of the legal system, as well as demonstrating that despite the significance of the challenges faced, achieving justice and bringing about real change is possible.

What inspired you to write the book?

I was encouraged to by friends and others who felt it was time I wrote about some of the cases I have been involved in which have become quite high profile.

How did you choose the cases to include?

I mainly chose cases which have had a wider impact or which touched me personally in some way, although my career has involved a wider range of cases, because of my current and more recent focus and passion I have focussed on cases involving violence against women mainly. There is one exception, the case involving the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes by the police. I included this because it was such an important case and I learnt a great deal from working on it, particularly around the politics of policing!

What impact would you like the book to have? 

To inspire feminists, young lawyers and others wanting to make a change, to educate around how badly our criminal justice system serves women and to demonstrate creative ways to fight for justice.

How did you find the experience of writing the book? 

I enjoyed it more than I expected as it was a creative process (working out the best way to tell each story) and it was also a very reflective process.

What do you think it takes to be an effective lawyer fighting for those let down by the system? 

Always start the battle by listening to your client and working with her, and be open to working collaboratively.

Does the law adequately protect the rights of the most vulnerable?

No.

How often do miscarriages of justice occur in your experience and why do they happen? 

There are several ways that miscarriages of justice arise in the context of the work I do. Very often victims of domestic abuse prosecuted for killing abusive partners fail in their attempts to argue self-defence or even to succeed with partial defences that would reduce a murder conviction to manslaughter and are instead convicted of murder. In most of the cases I have seen, this is the wrong outcome. We also see many cases involving victims of domestic abuse prosecuted for offending in a context where they were coerced. There is no effective defence available and many are convicted when they shouldn’t be.

We also see cases where perpetrators of rape and other forms of violence towards women are acquitted in circumstances where there is very powerful evidence against them. This is another example of myths/stereotypes/misogynist attitudes infecting the criminal justice system to such an extent that from the victim’s perspective some outcomes appear to be a miscarriage of justice. Really bad failures by the police or prosecution can also contribute to unjust outcomes for victims.

You have worked on some high-profile and extremely sensitive cases; can you tell us a bit about what drives you to keep going in the face of so many seemingly insurmountable hurdles? And how you manage to keep a healthy distance when dealing with highly emotive cases? 

I think when I feel that someone has suffered a clear injustice and I feel some empathy for them I am driven to keep on fighting. Obviously, the fact that sometimes we win at the end is a motivating factor!  

Are we closer to having a just system in the UK than when you started your career in law?  

Unfortunately, I don’t think things have improved that much. Some things are better, but some are worse.

Your title Fighting for Justice in a System Designed by Men is very powerful; how can the legal system be changed in order to protect the rights of everyone? 

Ultimately, I think women will always suffer injustice whilst there exists structural inequality between men and women in wider society. That inequality which carries with it a culture of misogyny and victim blaming infects the way our laws are interpreted and how the criminal justice system operates. There are some legislative changes needed. Top of my list would be to create a statutory defence for women who offend as a result of domestic abuse, coercive control and other forms of male violence. Additionally, we need to see huge improvements in the way that those acting in the criminal justice system, from police, prosecutors and judges to those working within the probation system, understand and apply their understanding of male violence against women in their practice.

Is there a need for more lawyers supporting those that have been let down by the justice system? Is there a way that more lawyers can be supported to take this path?

Yes, there is a need for more lawyers. At the Centre for Women’s Justice we are inundated with requests for help and do our best to respond, either through signposting, referral to lawyers on our panel and/or by advising ourselves, but we know that it is often not possible to find a lawyer who can help. Funding is inevitably a huge problem, whilst there is some legal aid available for certain types of cases, this is limited to supporting those on very low incomes, those that don’t meet the threshold usually don’t have the means to pay. The legal aid rates are also very low and as a consequence we are, for example, seeing very few new lawyers specialising in criminal defence. It is generally not a lucrative area of practice, so those that work in this area need to be very dedicated.

How important is it that the general public is engaged in the fight for justice?

Very important as it is public scrutiny that can help prevent the rot from setting in.

How do you go about effectively communicating complex legal issues to the public?  

Try to keep it simple and focus on the issues of justice rather than the finer technicalities of the law.  As a solicitor who has mainly advised clients through complex legal processes, I have to judge in each case how much the client wants to know everything, some do and for them I will set out the detail in correspondence, others are less interested and just want to understand the gist, the risk and the possible outcomes.

Can you share your thoughts on any of the recent legal scandals, for instance the Post Office scandal? Have any of the revelations shocked you?

I don’t think, thankfully, that I have become immune to shock at some of the legal scandals over the years. Certainly, it was shocking that so many honest Post Office workers could end up being prosecuted or made to ‘pay back’ debts created by a faulty computer accounting system. The case I was involved in that truly shocked me when it was first revealed was the operation of undercover police officers who spied on protest groups and deceived women into long-term sexual relationships, most people thought that this sort of thing didn’t happen in the UK.

Do you think the UK lives up to its reputation as fair and just? Does the legal system make sure those responsible will be held accountable?

There is lots I see that is not just or fair. But comparatively with other countries, I am not sure. At least there is some degree of a rule of law and an imperfect system of accountability. There is certainly more that could be done to improve accountability.

What do you think needs to be done to ensure that misogyny and sexism and other forms of discrimination in UK policing are adequately addressed? 

There are a range of reforms that need to take place to systems of police discipline, accountability, vetting and so on. The Centre for Women’s Justice produced a report recently on Police Perpetrated Domestic Abuse, which addresses some of the steps needed. 

What reforms would you like to see in regard to law and policy? 

As above, there are a number of reforms related to the criminalisation of survivors that we are advocating, from the creation of statutory defences, to changes in the code of practice for crown prosecutors and much better training and accountability systems. Specialist domestic abuse courts have proved to be effective and they need to be created and resourced again. The Centre for Women’s Justice website includes a range of recommendations for change, consultation responses and resources for those interested in knowing more.

If you could change one thing about the legal system, what would it be? 

My focus is on criminal justice and what I would like to see is a justice system that is able to properly distinguish between a victim and a perpetrator, too often it doesn’t and we see a failure to adequately tackle those that represent a risk and a shameful lack of resourcing for cases brought against those that are vulnerable and victims who get caught up in offending.

What are your thoughts on coercive control almost a decade since it was recognised as a crime? 

It is a very important new form of legislation, although the way it is framed in English law does not encapsulate all the aspects it should cover, but it has opened up the possibility of prosecuting domestic abuse in a way that takes into account the whole system of control rather than focussing only on individual acts. It has also opened up the possibility of prosecuting men who cause the suicide of women they have been abusing. It doesn’t provide a defence for victims who offend as a consequence of abuse, but it can inform our understanding of the impact of that abuse, which is how it was used in Sally Challen’s case.

Is our understanding of coercive control adequate?

No, there is still a lot to learn and it is not identified, investigated or prosecuted enough.

What are your views on ethics within the legal profession, particularly in regard to law firms taking on clients’ intent on using the law to intimidate vulnerable parties?

There needs to be much greater safeguards to prevent the abuse of laws by abusers. We see this a lot in the family courts, through the use of defamation and sometimes through private prosecutions. Obviously, many lawyers follow the money and don’t consider how they may be enabling an abuser.

Were there any cases that you regret not including in the book?

There were a few other cases I wanted to include which may have made a great story. I did write one additional chapter about a vulnerable woman who held her MP accountable for his improper relationship with her, but ultimately the former client changed her mind about her story being included in the book.

What are your views on the importance and future of legal aid in the UK? 

It is a much needed but rare resource, which in the current economic climate is fast disappearing.

Can you tell us anything about the cases you are working on now?  

At the Centre for Women’s Justice, we have recently started a criminal appeals project looking at some of the many cases we have been contacted about where victims of abuse have been convicted of murder. As the Law Commission are about to consult in relation to the homicide laws, we decided to focus some of our litigation in this area and I am in the process of considering whether there are grounds of appeal in a number of these cases.

What sort of case would you like to get your teeth into? 

Anything where I see an injustice that needs to be challenged, particularly when it related to a wider interest.

What achievements are you most proud of so far in your career? 

I am very lucky to have had a number of important successes, including the cases I brought on behalf of the Worboys victims, the collective challenge brought by victims of undercover police and several criminal appeals by women who were convicted of murder, including Emma Humphreys and Sally Challen.

Copyright & permissions