This is the joint website of  Women Against Rape and Black Women's Rape Action Project. Both organisations are based on self-help and provide support, legal information and advocacy. We campaign for justice and protection for all women and girls, including asylum seekers, who have suffered sexual, domestic and/or racist violence.

WAR was founded in 1976. It has won changes in the law, such as making rape in marriage a crime, set legal precedents and achieved compensation for many women. BWRAP was founded in 1991. It focuses on getting justice for women of colour, bringing out the particular discrimination they face. It has prevented the deportation of many rape survivors. Both organisations are multiracial.




Demanding Justice and protection from the Police and CPS

PRESS RELEASE: Rape survivors join Mothers March

In the Media


For interviews: Lisa on 0207 482 2496
Date: Saturday 12 March
Assembly point: 12 noon Trafalgar Sq (north side), London
Speak-out: 2pm SOAS

Women Against Rape will be hoisting our banner on the Mothers March and taking part in the Speak-out, naming our work of fighting for justice for ourselves, our daughters and other rape survivors.


Women question the unusual zeal in pursuing Julian Assange for rape allegations

In the Media

Letters, Guardian 9 December 2010

Many women in both Sweden and Britain will wonder at the unusual zeal with which Julian Assange is being pursued for rape allegations (Report, 8 December). Women in Sweden don't fare better than we do in Britain when it comes to rape. Though Sweden has the highest per capita number of reported rapes in Europe and these have quadrupled in the last 20 years, conviction rates have decreased. On 23 April 2010 Carina Hägg and Nalin Pekgul (respectively MP and chairwoman of Social Democratic Women in Sweden) wrote in the Göteborgs-Posten that "up to 90% of all reported rapes never get to court. In 2006 six people were convicted of rape though almost 4,000 people were reported". They endorsed Amnesty International's call for an independent inquiry to examine the rape cases that had been closed and the quality of the original investigations.


My experience of using a video link to give evidence in court, by Anushka

I am a survivor of rape and sexual assault, which happened in 2008. It went to court in September 2009, and although I had been threatened by the man’s relatives several times and reported this to the police, they did nothing.

Before the trial the police told me I could give evidence from behind a screen in the courtroom. Or that I could give evidence from a different room using a video link. They didn’t ask me which I preferred, but I said I was prepared to go into court to give evidence. I was not scared of seeing my attacker, but I felt apprehensive about the trial, because I had heard about harsh questioning and humiliation in such trials of women who have been raped.


'My daughter has seen her rapist several times... He just grins at her'

In the Media

Evening Standard, Viv Groskop, 26 November 2010

Taking a stand: Sally Freeman (not her real name) is angry that the police didn’t do more to convict her daughter’s rapist

It's back in the news,” sighs Sally Freeman. “Women are still having to go and complain.”

Freeman has spent the past four years campaigning to raise awareness of the police's incompetent treatment of rape cases.

As the Evening Standard reported this month, three officers from the Met's “Sapphire” sex crimes unit face possible prosecution over allegations that part of a victim's statement was fabricated.

Freeman's interest is personal — she has watched her 20-year-old daughter's life be virtually destroyed in the wake of a rape case where a conviction was not secured.


Reporting sex attack to police was the beginning of a new ordeal, says victim

In the Media

The Times, Analysis Fiona Hamilton

Last updated September 15 2010 12:01AM

For Anushka, being raped by a former partner was an “intrusion of everything”, she said. “It isn’t just unwanted sex, it’s a complete invasion of your mind, your body, your soul. It destroys you for a long time. You have no trust, you don’t want a relationship.”

When she went to the police to report the assault, believing that she had a clear-cut case, she could have hardly believed that her ordeal was about to get worse. “They don’t treat you with any care at all, I was distraught,” the 48-year-old told The Times.

She felt completely let down by the justice system because the police did not pay enough attention to her case.


Rape reform is shelved

In the Media

The Times

Fiona Hamilton London Correspondent

September 14 2010 10:37PM


The Defence Case

Court report – the Defence case

DS Wood was recalled to the witness box to answer the questions he was unable to answer in previous days. He confirmed that:
- Vaginal swabs had not been tested for lubricant (although Mrs Sherwood had always said the rapist used a condom).
- Mrs Sherwood had not been seen “vigorously hitting herself” in the vagina in order to cause injury, as claimed by the prosecutor, but that two officers claimed to have seen her “rubbing herself”.

Mrs Sherwood later explained that she had tried to shift her hips as she was numb on the cold ground and that an officer had pulled her legs straight telling her to stay still. She emphatically denied injuring herself.


Report of the trial of Mrs Gail Sherwood in Bristol Crown Court

There seems to be an increasing trend to prosecute women who reported rape and were not believed by police.  On 8 January 2010 Mrs Gail Sherwood was put on trial in Bristol Crown Court accused of making false allegations.  She has had WAR’s support for nearly two years.

We are concerned that the trial should be accurately reported as the media coverage of such cases is often biased and sensational. So far newspapers have only mentioned the prosecution’s arguments, sometimes inaccurately. The defence begins on Monday 1 February and we hope that the media will present what Mrs Sherwood and her witnesses say.


Taxi rapes case lays police failures bare

In the Media

John Worboys's victims were let down by a careless and prejudiced police investigation. It's an all too familiar story

Lisa Longstaff
Comment is Free Wednesday 20 January 2010

DSC04318LisaGDN.JPGThe young victim of convicted rapist John Worboys said it all: "If something like this had happened in a private business, people would have been sacked. I just do not see how these people can carry on in the police."

The report from the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) on what went wrong with the Worboys police investigation is once again a catalogue of carelessness and prejudice: evidence not gathered, witnesses not interviewed and, most importantly, bias against victims.

Syndicate content