Across the spectrum of European legal systems a variety of models have been created to enhance the victim's chances of receiving compensation for injuries and losses suffered as a consequence of a criminal offence. In this article, three models are examined which allow the victim to claim compensation from the offender within the context of the criminal process. Each of these models has evolved in a distinct legal tradition and has specific merits and limitations. After weighing the respective strengths and weaknesses, and indicating how each model can be improved, the article concludes with a set of criteria that form a blue print of ‘best practice’.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
B&A Groep (1998). Slachtofferzorg in Nederland. Den Haag.
2.
BrienenM.E.I.HoegenE.H. (1998). Information Systems for Victims of Crime: Results of Comparative Research. International Review of Victimology, 5, 163–188.
3.
BrienenM.E.I.KoopmansI.M. (1998). Voeging en schadevergoedingsmaatregel: het slachtoffer blijft slachtoffer. Enkele kritische opmerkingen over de rechtspraktijk in het licht van de Wet Terwee. Nederlands Juristen Blad, 30, 1345–1350.
4.
ByrneR.McCutcheonJ.P. (1996). The Irish Legal System. 3rd Edition. Butterworths; Ireland.
5.
GreerD.(ed.) (1996). Compensating Crime Victims, A European Survey. Max-Planck-Institute for Foreign and International Law; Freiburg.
6.
GroenhuijsenM.S.WinkelJ.W. (1993–1994). The ‘focusing on victims-program’, a new substitute penal sanction for youthful offenders. International Debates of Victimology. WSNV, 306–329.
7.
GroenhuijsenM.S. (1995). Schadevergoeding voor slachtoffers van delicten in het strafgeding. Ars Aequi Libri; Nijmegen.
8.
HamiltonJ.WisniewskiM. (1996). The Use of the Compensation order in Scotland. The Scottish Office Central Research Unit, Crime and Criminal Justice Research Findings No 14.
9.
Home Office (March 1999). Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, Home Secretary ‘s Action Plan. London.
10.
JUSTICE Committee (1998). Victims in Criminal Justice, report on the role of the victim in criminal justice. JUSTICE.
11.
JungerM.Van HeckeT. (1982). Schadevergoeding binnen het strafrecht. Ministry of Justice/WODC, SDU uitgeverij; ‘s Gravenhage.
12.
KrainzK.W. (1991). The position of injured parties in the Austrian criminal procedure — First results of an empirical investigation. InVictims and criminal justice (KaiserG.KuryH.AlbrechtH.-J., eds.) pp. 629–668. Max-Planck-Institute for Foreign and International Law; Freiburg.
13.
Van der LandenD. (1992). Straf en maatregel. Gouda Quint; Arnhem.
14.
The Magistrates' Association, Victim Support, Justices' Clerks Society, Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrates (April 1995). Payment of Compensation Orders. London.
15.
MaguireM.ShaplandJ. (1997). Provision for Victims in an International Context. InVictims of Crime (DavisR.C.LurigioA.J.WesleyG.S., eds.) pp. 211–228. 2nd edition. SAGE Publications; Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi.
16.
Ministerie van Justitie (1998). Beleidsnotitie slachtofferzorg. Den Haag.
17.
MoxonD.CorkeryJ.M.HeddermanC. (1992). Developments in the Use of Compensation Orders in Magistrates' Courts since October 1988. Home Office Research Study No 126. London.
18.
Parliamentary All Party Penal Affairs Group (July 1996). Increasing the Rights of Victims of Crime. London.
19.
SebbaL. (1996). ThirdParties, Victims and the Criminal Justice System. Ohio State University Press; Columbus.
20.
SoftleyP. (1978). Compensation orders in Magistrates' Courts. Home Office Research Study No 43. London.
21.
Statens offentliga utredningar (1998). SOU 1998:40 Justitiedepartementet, Brottsoffer. Vad har gjorts? Vad bör göras?Betänkande av Brottsofferutredningen. Stockholm.
22.
Victim Support (1993). Compensating the victim of crime, report of an independent working party convened by Victim Support. London.
