protection of crime victims by legal means: international and european law and policy
Clicks: 152
ID: 165273
2015
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
152 views
33 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #47 of 57 articles by views in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The article addresses the development of international and European policy in
relation to victims of crime. It starts with an outline of the 1985 United
Nations (UN) Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime
and Abuse of Power. It demonstrates that compliance by Member States with the
provisions of the Declaration is still unsatisfactory, despite serious
efforts by the UN to promote its standards and norms. A similar trend is
described on a regional level in Europe. In 2001, the European Union adopted
a Framework Decision (a legally binding instrument) on minimum rights for
crime victims in the criminal justice system. This document brought some
improvement to victims and their position compared to the UN Declaration,
particularly in terms of limit repeated questioning, advanced informational
rights, reimbursement of expenses and construction of court facilities.
Nevertheless, evaluations undertaken in 2004 and 2009 have proved that none
of the Member States fully complied with its content. This document was
replaced with the new one - the EU Directive on establishing minimum
standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime. It is
stronger instrument than the Framework Decision and it includes more
demanding standards. But, its implementation needs to be monitored.
Therefore, in the presentation it is argued that a lack of compliance is
usually followed by the adoption of an even stronger legal instrument,
containing even more ambitious rights for victims of crime. It is questioned
whether this is the most productive approach. It is doubted that “hard law”
is always more effective than “soft law”. The most recent generation of more
elevated rights run the risk of leading to “victim fatigue” on the part of
the officials responsible for the operation of the criminal justice system.
| Reference Key |
marc2015temidaprotection
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Groenhuijsen Marc |
| Journal | Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) |
| Year | 2015 |
| DOI |
10.2298/TEM1501003G
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.