The victim should not lead the disciplinary or corrective process. They should have input, especially in matters which relate to their own safety and well being. But not a veto on organizational decisions.

This conduct is a violation not only of the individual but of the goals, structure and politics of the org, and movement. I wouldn't exactly characterize giving primacy to the individual victim to direct things as "victim blaming" but it is not the right way to go about things.

First of all, it isn't fair to put the weight of that decision on the victim. Some people will have the impression that they are to blame when the consequences come down. In this situation (which is typical when talking of an org) people the victim respects and has relationship with are on side of the perpetrator. Or she did at some point, and knows others would still feel that way.

Victims are not objective, and often feel compassion. They do not want to ruin things for other people. They may be inclined to get on with life and try to let it go. I will bet you 1 gallon of diesel that the perpetrator was also abusive to those who were protecting him. At least some of them (especially women). If not already common knowledge to those close to the situation, it'll come out in the next couple of months.

The organization itself is at fault and the organization must take action to fix the problem. It must engage in a process, which the membership views as legitimate, to make possible repairs and prevent future damage. Very important, the process should be comprehensible and visible, an opportunity for internal political development for all, regarding the correct behavior between comrades, and how this should be enforced. The process and its outcomes must be seen as binding not only on the perpetrators for their past actions, but also on the entire membership going forward. This may not be compatible with the individual ideas of one victim.

Ultimately, the formal power rests with the org to determine and implement its criteria for membership, officers etc. It is responsible to form itself in a manner most compatible with its overall revolutionary goals.

I think that the number one concern of any communist organization is to excise dangerous criminal and reprehensible actors from harming others in the communist organization, as they create endless liabilities. What the victim wants can fluctuate depending on where they are in their recovery as we can see from Marissa's experience and from my own personal experience. I think as a victim of sexual violence, the ultimate best thing for the victim is to completely separate from the abuser and the geographic location the abuse occurred at. In an ideal world with perfect information, we would simply summarily execute or castrate all sexual abusers or find a way to preempt them.

Can the PSL be considered a feminist organization with leadership that refuses to excise predators immediately? No, they cannot. The PSL central committee also immediately went to attack Marissa rather than staying professional, which shows incompetence.