Framework Decision 2008/947/JHA explicitly combines offenders’ rehabilitation with other purposes, such as the improvement of the protection of victims. This article provides one of the first analysis of the aim of ‘victim protection’ in the Framework Decision and of its limited usefulness. The relationship between victims’ right after sentencing and the transfer of probation measures reveals a contradictory system unable to coordinate victims’ protection and compensation and offenders’ social rehabilitation.
AebiMFTiagoMM (2018) SPACE I – 2018: Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics: Prison Populations. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
2.
AebiMFBerger-KoloppLBurkhardtC, et al. (2019) Foreign Offenders in Prison and on Probation in Europe: Trends from 2005 to 2015 (Inmates) and Situation in 2015 (Inmates and Probationers). Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
3.
AllegrezzaS (2015) Victim’s statute within Directive 2012/29/EU. In: LupáriaL (ed.) Victims and Criminal Justice: European Standards and National Good Practices. Alphen aan den Rijn: Wolters Kluwer, pp. 3–19.
4.
AndreouP (2009) Gegenseitige Anerkennung von Entscheidungen in Strafsachen in der Europäischen Union. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
5.
AshworthA (2000) Victims’ rights, defendants’ rights and criminal procedure. In: CrawfordAGoodeyJ (eds) Integrating a Victim Perspective within Criminal Justice. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 185–204.
6.
AspP (2005) Mutual recognition and the development of criminal law cooperation within the EU. In: HusaboEStrandbakkenA (eds) Harmonization of Criminal Law in Europe. Antwerp: Intersentia, pp. 23–40.
7.
BahrSJHarrisLFisherJK, et al. (2010) Successful reentry: What differentiates successful and unsuccessful parolees?International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology54(5): 667–692.
8.
BanksDGottfredsonDC (2003) The effects of drug treatment and supervision on time to rearrest among drug treatment court participants. Journal of Drug Issues33(2): 385–412.
9.
BanksJ (2011) Foreign national prisoners in the UK: Explanations and implications. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice50(2): 184–198.
10.
BhuiHS (2009) Foreign national prisoners: Issues and debates. In: BhuiHS (ed.) Race and Criminal Justice. London: SAGE, pp. 154–169.
CantonR (2018a) An Introduction to the Philosophy of Punishment. London: Palgrave Mcmillan.
13.
CantonR (2018b) Probation and the philosophy of punishment. Probation Journal65(3): 252–268.
14.
De MesmaeckerV (2012) Antidotes to injustice? Victim statements’ impact on victims’ sense of security. International Review of Victimology18(2): 133–153.
15.
De WreeEVander BekenTVermeulenG (2009) The transfer of sentenced persons in Europe. Punishment & Society11(1): 111–128.
16.
DoakJ (2005) Victims’ rights in criminal trials: Prospects for participation. Journal of Law and Society32(2): 294–316.
17.
DoakJHenhamRMitchellB (2009) Victims and the sentencing process: Developing participatory rights?Legal Studies29(4): 651–677.
18.
DuffA (2001) Punishment, Communication and Community. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
19.
DurnescuI (2010) Foreign prisoners and probation. To discriminate or not. In: GroenhuijsenMSde KooijmansTRoosTA (eds) Liber Amicorum Anton Van Kalmthouth. Apeldoorn, Antwerpen, Portland: Maklu, pp.63–70.
20.
DurnescuI (2011) Pains of probation: Effective practice and human rights. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology55(4): 530–545.
21.
DurnescuI (2017) Framework decisions 2008/947 and 2009/829: State of play and challenges. ERA Forum18(1): 355–363.
22.
EdwardsI (2004) An ambiguous participant: The crime victim and criminal justice decision-making. British Journal of Criminology44(6): 967–982.
23.
ErezERobertsJ (2013) Victim participation in criminal justice. In: DavisRCLurigioAHermanS (eds) Victims of Crime. 4th edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 251–270.
24.
Faraldo CabanaPFernández BessaC (2019) ¿Fracaso del reconocimiento mutuo de resoluciones de libertad vigilada? Una reflexión sobre la situación de los condenados extranjeros de nacionalidad comunitaria [Failure of the mutual recognition of probation decisions in Spain? Reflecting on the situation of the sentenced eu national foreigners failure of the mutual recognition of probation decisions in Spain? Reflecting on the situation of the sentenced eu national foreigners failure of the mutual recognition of probation decisions in Spain? reflecting on the situation of the sentenced eu national foreigners]. Migraciones47: 151–175.
25.
FloreDBoslySHonhonA, et al. (eds) (2012) Probation Measures and Alternative Sanctions in the European Union. Cambridge: Intersentia.
26.
FreixesTRománL (dirs) (2015) The European Protection Order: Its Application to the Victims of Gender Violence. Madrid: Tecnos.
27.
HepburnJRGriffinML (2004) The effect of social bonds on successful adjustment to probation: An event history analysis. Criminal Justice Review29(1): 46–75.
28.
HofmannRNelenH (2020) Cross-border cooperation in the execution of sentences between the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium: An empirical and comparative legal study on the implementation of EU framework decisions 2008/909/JHA and 2008/947/JHA. Crime, Law and Social Change74: 381–404.
29.
KaufmanE (2012) Finding foreigners: Race and the politics of memory in British prisons. Population, Space and Place18(6): 701–714.
30.
KirchengastT (2016) Victims and the Criminal Trial. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
31.
KnapenM (2010) Implementation of framework decisions on the enforcement of foreign criminal judgments: (How) can the aim of resocialisation be achieved? In: GroenhuijsenGKooijmansTde RoosT (eds) Fervet Opus: Liber Amicorum Anton van Kalmthout. Apeldoorn-Antwerp-Portland: Maklu, pp. 113–123.
32.
LonatiS (2018) Is the European protection order sufficiently robust to prevent any discrimination among victims moving across the European Union? An assessment of the first seven years. European Criminal Law Review8(3): 332–367.
33.
MacKenzieD (2002) The impact of formal and informal social controls on the criminal activities of probationers. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency39(3): 243–276.
34.
McNallyGBurkeI (2012) Implementation of the framework decision on the transfer of probation measures between states in the European Union. Eurovista2(2): 70–77.
35.
McNeillF (2006) A desistance paradigm for offender management. Criminology and Criminal Justice6(1): 39–62.
36.
MairGBurkeL (2012) Redemption, Rehabilitation and Risk Management: A History of Probation. London: Routledge.
37.
MorgensternC (2009) European initiatives for harmonisation and minimum standards in the field of community sanctions and measures. European Journal of Probation1(2): 128–141.
38.
NiţuD (2016) Non-custodial sanctions and measures: Principles and rules in the framework of EU legislation. In: BernardiA (ed.) Prison Overcrowding and Alternatives to Detention. Naples: Jovene, pp. 49–66.
39.
O’HaraEA (2005) Victim participation in the criminal process. Journal of Law and Policy13(1): 229–247.
40.
PeersS (2004) Mutual recognition and criminal law in the European Union: Has the council got it wrong?Common Market Law Review41(1): 5–36.
41.
RobinsonG (2008) Late-modern rehabilitation: The evolution of a penal strategy. Punishment & Society10(4): 429–445.
42.
RobinsonPH (2002) Should the victims’ rights movement have influence over criminal law formulation and adjudication?McGeorge Law Review33(4): 749–758.
43.
RöhlKF (1997) Procedural justice: Introduction and overview. In: RöhlKFMachuraS (eds) Procedural Justice. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp. 1–35.
44.
RotmanE (1994) Beyond punishment. In: DuffAGarlandD (eds) A Reader on Punishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 281–305.
45.
SnackenSMcNeillF (2012) Scientific recommendations. In: FloreDBoslySHonhonA, et al. (eds) Probation Measures and Alternative Sanctions in the European Union. Cambridge: Intersentia, pp. 561–571.
46.
UgelvikT (2013) Seeing like a welfare state: Immigration control, statecraft, and a prison with double vision. In: AasKFBosworthM (eds) The Borders of Punishment: Migration, Citizenship, and Social Exclusion. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 183–198.
47.
UgelvikT (2014) The incarceration of foreigners in European prisons. In: PickeringSHamJ (eds) The Routledge Handbook on Crime and International Migration. London; New York: Routledge, pp. 107–120.
48.
Van der AaS (2012) Protection orders in the European member states: Where do we stand and where do we go from here?European Journal of Criminal Policy and Research18: 183–204.
49.
Van der AaS (2015) Post-trial victims’ rights in the EU: Do law enforcement motives still reign supreme?European Law Journal21(2): 239–256.
50.
Van der AaSOuwerkerkJ (2011) The European protection order: No time to waste or a waste of time. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice19(4): 267–288.
51.
Van KalmthoutAMVan der MeulenFHDünkelF (2007) Comparative overview, conclusions and recommendations. In: Van KalmthoutAMVan der MeulenFHDünkelF (eds) Foreigners in European Prisons. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, pp. 7–90.
52.
Van Zyl SmitD (2005) International imprisonment. International and Comparative Law Quarterly54(2): 357–386.
53.
Van Zyl SmitDSnackenSHayesD (2015) ‘One cannot legislate kindness’: Ambiguities in European legal instruments on non-custodial sanctions. Punishment & Society17(1): 3–26.
54.
VisherCAWinterfieldLCoggeshallMB (2005) Ex-offender employment programs and recidivism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology1(3): 295–315.
55.
WarrJ (2016) The deprivation of certitude, legitimacy and hope: Foreign national prisoners and the pains of imprisonment. Criminology and Criminal Justice16(3): 301–318.
56.
WemmersJCyrK (2004) Victims perspective on restorative justice: How much involvement are victims looking for?International Review of Victimology11(2–3): 1–16.
