Victims' rights
Victims' rights are legal rights afforded to victims of crime. These may include the right to restitution, the right to a victims' advocate, the right not to be excluded from criminal justice proceedings, and the right to speak at criminal justice proceedings.[1][2]
United States[edit]
History[edit]
During the colonial and revolutionary periods, the United States criminal justice system was victim-centric, in that crimes were often investigated and prosecuted by individual victims. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, however, the role of the victim in criminal proceedings was reduced, owing to shifts in attitudes in the way crimes were perceived; the criminal justice system became seen as a tool to remedy social harms rather than an avenue to redress personal harm.[3]
The modern crime victims' rights movement began in the 1970s, in part as a response to the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision Linda R.S. v. Richard D. (410 U.S. 614). In Linda R.S., the court ruled that the complainant did not have the legal standing to keep the prosecutors' office from discriminately applying a statute criminalizing non-payment of child support. In dicta, the court articulated the then-prevailing view that a private crime victims have no jurisdiction in deciding the process of a criminal prosecution.[3] This ruling served as a high-water mark in the shift away from the victim-centric approach to criminal justice,[4] relegating the role of victims in the criminal trial to being evidence for the prosecution.[5]
The Linda R.S. ruling, notwithstanding, stated that Congress could create legislation that safeguards victims' rights and provides standing to victims where they would otherwise not have any.[6] At the same time, social consciousness about victims' rights surged. Supporters of the law and order, civil rights, and feminist movement challenged conventional views of the criminal justice system on the role of the victim. By providing educational resources and legal assistance and establishing the country's first hotlines and shelters for victims of crime, much of the movements' work later became the grassroots foundation of the modern victims' rights movement.[7]
In 1982, President Ronald Reagan's Task Force on Victims of Crime released its final report which detailed the concerns of victims' rights advocates, stating that "innocent victims of crime have been overlooked, their pleas for justice have gone unheeded, and their wounds — personal, emotional, financial — have gone unattended".[8] The report contained 68 recommendations for service providers and government officials, many of which are mandated through victims' rights legislation today,[9] as well as a recommendation for a victims' rights amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[10]
In the decades that followed, proponents of victims' rights experienced substantial legislative success. Today, the victims' rights movement continues to increase access to procedural mechanisms for victims to enforce their rights and promote legislation that guarantees those substantive rights.[11] Modern victims' rights organizations include the National Alliance of Victims' Rights Attorneys,[12] National Organization for Victim Assistance,[13] and the National Center for Victims of Crime.[14]
Victims' rights legislation[edit]
Since 1982, thirty-three states have amended their constitutions to address victims' rights, and all states have passed victims' rights legislation.[3] That same year, Congress passed the first piece of federal crime victims' rights legislation, the Victim and Witness Protection Act.[15] In 1984, the Victims of Crime Act was passed. A decade later, in 1994, the Violence Against Women Act became law. In 2004, the landmark Crime Victims' Rights Act was passed, granting crime victims eight specific rights, and providing standing for individual victims to assert those rights in court.[16]
Non-EU European nations[edit]
United Kingdom[edit]
In 1974, the charity Victim Support was set up in Bristol, aimed at providing help and support to victims of crime on a local and national level.[102] Trained volunteers and employees offer free, confidential, practical and emotional support to people affected by crime in England and Wales. The charity offers support to around one million victims of crime per year. People may seek practical or emotional help, for example, making their home secure after a burglary, applying for compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, getting re-housed, or asking for counselling through a GP.[103]
In Scotland and Northern Ireland, similar services are provided by the charities Victim Support Scotland and Victim Support NI.
In 1985, the United Nations adopted the Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power,[104] which outlines international best practices for treatment of crime victims. The report recognizes an offender's obligation to make fair restitution to his or her victim, acknowledges that victims are entitled to fair treatment and access to the mechanisms of justice, and generally draws attention to the need for victims' rights in the criminal justice process.[105]
Other United Nations provisions that touch on victims' rights include The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination of Women (CEDAW);[106] and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).[107] The ICCPR has been ratified by 172 nations, including the United States, Canada, Russia, and France. It includes the following provisions related to victims' rights:[20]
Criticisms of the victim-inclusion approach[edit]
Some academics have argued that the recognition of victims' rights directly undermines defendant's rights, since designating the accuser as a "victim" presupposes that the alleged crime actually occurred, even before it is established to be in a court of law.[108] Others have criticised victims' rights for impinging on prosecutorial discretion.[109] Victims' rights have also been criticised for shifting the focus in criminal proceedings on vengeance and personal emotion.[110] In connection with the last of these criticisms, it has been noted that victims seeking "closure" may promote outcomes as diverse as retribution, on one hand, and forgiveness on the other, and the legal system is inadequate to providing therapeutic satisfaction in either case.[110]
Proponents of victims' rights respond by noting that victims' rights of privacy, protection and participation are civil rights that ensure that individual harm is among the harms recognized by the system, and that such rights afford a voice in the process, not a veto of enforcement discretion. Proponents also cite the criminal courts' well-established capacity to afford rights to participants other than the defendants (such as the media), suggesting that accommodation of victims' interests is both possible and desirable.[111]