By Aisha K. Gill*
In London at the end of January, a 31-year-old woman and her daughters suffered horrifying injuries after being assaulted with an alkaline corrosive substance. Sadly, corrosive substance attacks such as this are not isolated incidents. Over the last 15 years, they have been on the rise across the world, including in the UK.
These attacks involve splashing a corrosive substance, frequently sulphuric or nitric acid, onto the victim’s face or body. Corrosive substances melt the skin tissue, often exposing or dissolving the bones underneath. They can lead to permanent disfigurement – scarring and/or a narrowing of the nostrils, eyelids and ears – and permanent damage to sight and hearing.
Attackers who target the face in particular aim to maim and disfigure their victim, but not necessarily to kill. This can cause devastating social and psychological difficulties for victims, including ongoing health problems, social isolation, a loss of social and economic status, and poverty and destitution.
Corrosive substance attacks as gendered violence
Corrosive substance violence is horrific in all cases. But what is often left out of the discussion is that it is a form of gendered violence that mainly targets women. While such attacks are perpetrated against both men and women, the vast majority of victims – 80% globally – are women, and the majority of perpetrators are male.
As a grassroot activist researcher working on gender-based violence, particularly among minority ethnic communities, I have seen the devastating physical, psychological and social impact these crimes have on victims. As a specialist in criminal justice responses to violence against women and girls, I have also provided expert evidence in UK courts on the cultural contexts at play in cases of gender-based violence, including corrosive substance attacks. The Crown Prosecution Service drew on my expertise in a 2012 acid attack case.
My research and experience suggest that the motivations behind corrosive substance attacks on women lie in patriarchal notions of shame, honour and loss of face. Such attacks are often retribution for women’s rejection of men’s sexual advances, and they are related to domestic violence, abuse and other “honour”-based forms violence.
Corrosive substance attacks remain common in India and the rest of South Asia, despite bans on over-the-counter sales of acid. In the Indian subcontinent, where acid is widely available and relatively inexpensive, traditional patriarchal perceptions of women as subordinate to men continue to be held. Attacks are increasing as women in India enjoy growing access to education and economic independence.
In patriarchal societies, women are often told that they embody their family’s respect and honour. Their behaviours, thoughts and actions must never bring shame on the family. Divorced or separated women are particularly pressured to meet these expectations.
As a result, men often believe they have power and control over women’s beauty and sexuality. When women make their own marriage choices or exit violent relationships to protect their own and their children’s safety, men interpret these actions through a patriarchal lens, and they may respond with coercion or physical violence.
While details are still emerging about the Clapham case, it has been reported that the suspect and victim had been in a relationship before the attack.
How the law ignores violence against women 
In the UK, alleged perpetrators of corrosive substance attacks tend to be charged under the Offensive Weapons Act (2019). If convicted, they may receive a sentence of life imprisonment. Someone carrying acid or other forms of corrosive substance can also be charged with possession of an offensive weapon under the Prevention of Crime Act (1953), which carries a maximum penalty of four years in prison.
If a victim dies as the result of a corrosive substance attack, the alleged perpetrator can also be charged with murder or manslaughter. Although few such attacks result in death, the intention to permanently disfigure the victim can still lead to a murder charge.
The problem with the current approach is that it largely punishes people for obtaining the corrosive substance, while ignoring the impact on the victim – and the gendered aspect of the crime.
Corrosive substance attacks where police are able to identify a gendered motivation should be treated in a similar way to racial and religious hate crimes, where sentences are increased if a hate crime is identified. This would encourage police to take the issue more seriously, and it would recognise victims as being affected by domestic abuse or gender-based discrimination. A number of UK women have reported not being taken seriously by police when they report threats of corrosive substance attacks.
Corrosive substance violence against women usually does not happen out of the blue. Survivors of such attacks have called for a better understanding of the motives behind them and how they intersect with other serious crimes. As women’s rights are eroded around the world in favour of patriarchal narratives that preserve male ‘honour’, gender-based corrosive substance attacks risk becoming legitimised.
The criminal justice system must do more to support those whose lives have been affected. This starts with the acknowledgement that these are not just horrific, random attacks – they are very often targeted violence against women.
*Professor Aisha K. Gill CBE is a Professor of Criminology at the School for Policy Studies, University of Bristol. Her main areas of interest focus on health and criminal justice responses to violence against Black, minority ethnic and refugee women and girls in the UK, Afghanistan, Georgia, Iraqi Kurdistan, Libya, India, Pakistan, Syria and Yemen. Aisha also leads the Centre for Gender and Violence Research.
This article is republished from The Conversation.