Considered positive and a huge improvement for the protection of victims is the right to gratuitous awarding of representation for accessory prosecution in case of sexual violence and severe criminal offenses. Furthermore, there is principally the option to apply for legal aid at court if victims are not able to sufficiently utilise their interests, if they cannot be expected to do so and/or if they cannot carry the costs themselves.
At times, financing of solicitor support is extremely restrictively handled by legal aid, except in cases of sexual violence and, accordingly, there are hardly any options for victims without support to obtain a consultancy mandate. Consequently, the pending legal costs represent an obstacle for many victims.
Services can be requested for other consequential costs of separation (moving etc.) at the Weißer Ring, however, there is no legal claim to this form of assistance. It is also possible to apply for victim compensation at the federal states for consequential costs in the area of medical treatments or for compensation toward living expenses, which are generally only awarded to a small number of applicants and usually only if the offender was sentenced according to criminal law. Interviews with victims show that the assessment and evaluation represent severe stress for the victims, but that the compensations are perceived as important and essential support.
The EU Directive on Victims’ Rights includes the right to compensation payments by the perpetrator. As well as the payment of compensation for pain and suffering as an ordinance, it is also possible to negotiate compensation claims in the criminal proceedings in the context of the so-called adhesive procedure. However, interviewed criminal court judges consider this to be of little value as this may cause delays in proceedings and requires clarification of competencies according to civil law. Instead, they consider it desirable that the result of the criminal proceedings is binding for civil courts in case of sentencing. Currently, the collection of evidence and evaluation has to be once again executed in their entirety, as reported by several victims. This represents significant stress for the victims; sometimes, this also results in contradictory evaluation, presenting the victim with the risk of significant costs in the context of the civil proceedings. Further education of judges regarding adhesive procedures would be increasingly necessary in this case.
I was subsequently told that I would not receive any legal aid for the civil procedure. I actually consider this to be absurd because, as I said, he has been sentenced; so why do I have to use my money, even if I had a lot of money now, why would I have to use my money for something which has already been proven?
Survivor of intimate partner violence
55
The interviews with the victims revealed that not only the direct consequential costs of the offenses and the management of the consequences of the offense cause financial stress, but also due permanent loss of income based on the inability to work and the reduction of earning capacity as a result of damages to the health, as well as opportunity costs due to breaks in the income biography. These permanent financial consequential costs can also not be completely compensated in case of successfully awarded victim compensation payments.
I even became unemployed through the incident and am now receiving reduction of earning capacity pension.
Survivor of intimate partner violence
# Protection by police, prosecutor’s office and court (Article 18)
Protective measures against repeated victimisation are, on one hand, measures by the police to prevent danger, such as barring orders (for up to two weeks) in situations of imminent danger, cautioning the offender and taking him into custody. In addition, court protection orders can be applied for according to the Act for Protection Against Violence, which can include restraining orders and/or the relinquishment of the joint residence.
Currently, there is no standardised comprehensive risk evaluation by the police;
however, experts state that the police are increasingly risk aware and act adequately.
The applied preventive measures are often assessed as very positive by victims and experienced as effective protection in acute situations of danger. However, the compliance with barring orders as well as court protection orders is often not supervised, and violations are not effectively sanctioned.
Victims are often also not informed by police about the option of protection from violence according to civil law. Without respective information, victims are generally not able to utilise these options. In addition, there is a close connection between a subjective feeling of safety and protection from repeated victimisation on one hand and the willingness to participate in criminal proceedings on the other. Various needs for improvement become clear with respect to safety and protection measures:
⊲ Sometimes, interviewed victims do not receive sufficient protection in cases of stalking and threats. Sometimes, the police refer to a lack of legal authority to intervene as long as the offender has not become acutely physically violent, even if severe physical violence has occurred in the past. However, also regardless of this fact, emergency calls in case of stalking and dangerous threat, even in high risk cases, are sometimes not taken seriously or the incident is even minimised, if it does not pertain to directly experienced physical violence.
⊲ Many reports describe the problem that decisions regarding custody and access rights do not consider violence as jeopardising the wellbeing of the child on one hand, and that also injunctions according to the Act for Protection Against Violence can often be disabled if child visiting rights entail contact, and that accompanied access occurs only temporarily.
56
One could act correctly regarding the files and the entire procedure and yet, nothing is done. This is a kind of rethinking we now have to perform.
Public prosecutor
The judge then turned to me and that was more important to me than the entire sentence, because it was really great. He said that I had allowed questions which were not even necessary and that I should not tell myself that it is my fault and that I should never allow anyone to tell me that; he could completely understand how I had acted in the relationship.
And then he said at the end: “You are not at fault.
Survivor of intimate partner violence
57
IRELAND
1. Overview of Ireland’s National Toolkit
It was decided, after detailed consideration of INASC research findings both from Ireland and other partner countries, and after consultation with our National Advisory Committee, to construct our National Domestic Violence Toolkit for use in Criminal Proceedings, by producing a separate reference checklist of Domestic Violence victims’ support and protection needs, to include recommendations to meet these needs, for use by each of the following:
⊲ An Garda Síochána,
⊲ Prosecuting authorities (whether Garda personnel or DPP staff or agents);
⊲ Courts Service staff;
⊲ Judges in domestic violence related criminal proceedings.