prevalence. The Family Court is trying to be proactive and raise awareness of family violence in schools and whilst this is admirable, it requires a more holistic approach involving all relevant sectors of Government, NGOs and stronger support services if it is to be successful. 9.2.4.3 Areas for Improvement The Inquiry identified a number of other features of the current justice system which require further attention to ensure the aim of eradicating family violence is being achieved in the most effective manner and with due regard for the rights of the victim. The first is the widespread use of mediation as part of the judicial process. Currently the Family Court refers all minor family violence crimes to probation for FGC, instead of sentencing. This is a form of mediation facilitated by probation officers where it calls upon relatives of the offender and the victim to meet and discuss ways forward with the family. It is not compulsory for the victim to attend and the conference focuses on the rehabilitation of the offender and gaining the necessary support of the family to achieve that. Whilst probation reports that this has been a successful approach to date, the Inquiry is concerned with the use of mediation without a full risk assessment and lack of M&E to ensure no further harm is caused to the victim. Mediation and its use in family violence cases has been a topic of extensive debate regarding it advantages and disadvantages. Despite this, most individuals consider mediation to be inappropriate especially if notions of evenhandedness and fairness to both parties are not present. 111 Whilst a total ban is not necessarily required, further care and monitoring on its use to ensure no further harm to victims is a necessity. A second area of concern is the use of character references and ifoga (traditional apology) as mitigating factors in sentencing. The use of character references to determine a person’s past behaviour and set an appropriate sentence is commonplace around the world, but in the context of family violence in Samoa it is problematic. The first point to note is that often the people providing the character references are either doing so out of social obligation, or are perpetrators themselves with a vested interest in the continuation of family violence and impunity for those who commit it. The second point to note is that family violence is still viewed as an inherently private matter in Samoa meaning that habitual and repeated family violence will usually not be known to those providing the character reference. Savalenoa reported that 100% of her clients had suffered over an extended period. Character references are therefore highly likely to be provided in ignorance of the repeated behaviour of the perpetrator, or as part of the wider environment of impunity. The consequences of these scenarios are that the victim does not receive the justice they deserve. The use of ifoga poses a similar problem and “often prioritises the maintenance of peace between community groups and their leaders (male) over women’s well-being”.112 Furthermore, such practice prevents adequate sanctions being imposed, thus furthering the lack of accountability for perpetrators 111 Aimee Davis. (2006). “Mediating cases involving domestic violence: solution or setback?” Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 8(253). Retrieved from https://cardozojcr.com/vol8no1/CAC101.pdf. 112 Ramona Boodoosingh and Penelope Schoeffel. (2015). “Addressing Violence against Women in Developing Countries: The Case of Samoa.” Document 82 Inquiry anthology.