Dobrinka Chankova
Global Advances in Victimology and Psychological Studies 37
Vol 1 (1) | June 2022 |
to all national authorities, agencies and individuals
concerned, and rst of all judges, prosecutors, police,
prisons, probation services, children’s agencies, victims
and restorative practices. e potential of RJ for crime
victims is the key theme of 2021 International RJ week
(21-28 November), according to the main promotor - the
European Forum of Restorative Justice8.
Moreover, recently many cities in Europe, e.g. in
the UK - Bristol, Hull; in Belgium- Leuven; in Italy -
Palermo, Como; in Poland - Gdansk, Wroclaw and in
other countries have acquired or are working to obtain
the status of Restorative City. is does not require a
change in legislation - national or local, just a perception
of a restorative ethos and ideology and practice. In
schools and universities, municipalities, neighbourhoods,
institutions and entire ecosystems of these cities, the
idea of restoration is on a pedestal. Everything is done
in the gentlest, ecological, humane, restorative way
possible. is is especially true for conict resolution and
decision-making based on restorative values - inclusion,
participation, respect, responsibility, solidarity. e aim is
to strengthen relations, encourage active civic behaviour,
build a victim-friendly environment and view conict
as an opportunity for change, not so much as a problem.
is idea deserves attention.
e latest input in this direction came from the UN,
launching in 2020 the second edition of the UN Handbook
of RJ (United Nations, 2020, the rst edition from 2006),
which is helpful guidance for member-states in their
eorts to introduce new models of RJ as a more humane
and modern paradigm of criminal justice and a better
response to crime.
For a long time, RJ was considered appropriate when
it came to minor acts committed by juveniles or persons
for whom the crime was a random fact in life. e practice
has shown, and doctrine has evolved signicantly, that RJ
is particularly relevant in cases of serious encroachment.
us, it is now unquestionably accepted that RJ performs
exceptionally well in a wide range of situations, including
serious crimes involving multiple victims or perpetrators,
hate crimes, intra-group conicts, and a wide range of
systemic or institutionalised human rights violations.
It makes it possible to fully use its therapeutic function
in relation to the trauma experienced and brings other
benets for the victims, related to the guarantees for
their increased safety, the tools for overcoming possible
imbalances, etc. us, it has recently become clear that
RJ is particularly applicable to intimate partner violence,
namely domestic violence, sexual violence, violence
against children, hate crimes, etc. (Sherman and Strang,
2012).
e brief overview shows that the acts, adopted
consistently and systematically over time, are an
expression of increased care for victims of crime in
Europe and globally. Undoubtedly, there is a common
will among international institutions and the modern
rule of law states to ensure the security of citizens and
the humane treatment and protection of victims of crime.
Sometimes, however, there is a signicant discrepancy
between good intentions and results, which has already
been established at dierent levels. And while the legal
framework, although with some approximation, can be
considered satisfactory, the great challenge remains its
practical implementation, which is the criterion for the
adequate protection of victims (Chankova, 2019).
ere are signs that victimology theory and practice
are moving in the right direction to better protect the rights
of victims of crime. e commitment of the institutions
is becoming more and more visible, the role of the
specialised non-governmental organisations is growing,
the academic circles are giving their contribution. But
much remains to be done in the future.
References
Chankova, D. (2012). “e European Protection Order: A
New Instrument in Support of Victims of Crime”, e
European Future of Bulgaria, Collection of Materials from
the Annual Conference of the Faculty of Law, pp. 200-
205, Soa: University of National and World Economy
Centre for the Study of Democracy (2015) Supporting
Vulnerable Groups Before the State, Soa
8Available from: https://search.coe.int/cm/Pages/result_details.aspx?ObjectId=09000016808e35f3