European jurisprudence on the protection of crime victims

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................2
2. The role of the victim as defined by the Victims Directive ..................................3
2.1 Comparison with other tools ............................................................................3
2.2 Elaboration of the provisions of the Victims Directive ..................................5
3. Project of the European Network for the Protection of Victims ........................7
3.1. General information .........................................................................................7
3.2. The ENVR 10 framework
3.2.1. Access to information
3.2.2. Cross-border cases
3.2.3. Compensation
3.2.4 Individual evaluation
3.3. Conclusions of the Council for the establishment of a European
information network on the protection of victims
4. Conclusions
BIBLIOGRAPHY
10

1
 1. Introduction

A few years ago, victims had only a few rights that were also included in the
domestic legal order of the respective states. Chief among these were the right to be
heard, informed and present within criminal justice systems. Despite these important
safeguards, we can only label them as exceptions, confirming the rule that more
extensive protections for crime victims have not even been codified, but largely
absent. Among the most important rights that were omitted from various legal systems
was the right to be informed of the arrest or release of the potential perpetrator of the
crime.
As a rule, the victims were not informed about the judicial debate either,
which meant that the presence of the perpetrator was unknown to them.
However, in recent years the subject of crime victims has received
considerable attention at EU level. It is clear that cultural, social and political
developments in recent decades have allowed victim protection to become part of EU
law, which has emerged in many different initiatives. This paper responds to recent
work by the European Union to ensure the effectiveness of EU legislation on victims.
Nowadays, the result is that victim protections are more strengthened in our
jurisdictions. Existing EU legislation on victims' rights shows that the EU wants to
protect victims of crime 1. To this end, it created the legal framework for establishing
minimum standards for the protection, support and protection of victims of crime.
The Treaty of Lisbon established the precise competence of the EU to adopt
legislative measures on the protection of victims of crime, and the Stockholm program
came with the intention of establishing an integrated and coordinated approach to
victims within the EU. More precisely, after the adoption of the Treaty of Lisbon
which provides for minimum standards applicable in the member states with the aim
of facilitating the mutual recognition of court judgments and other judicial decisions
and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters of a cross-border nature, the
EU's efforts acquired a new dimension. This concerns in a more concrete way the
victims of crimes and their protection. The same statements about concrete measures
were made by the Council of the European Union.

1
Council of the EU, The Stockholm Program – An open and secure Europe that serves and protects
citizens, 2 December 2009, 17024

2
 In addition, based on the Stockholm Program - An Open and Secure Europe,
the Commission and Member States were asked to examine how to improve
legislation and practical support measures for the protection of victims in terms of
special attention, support and recognition priority. granted to all crime victims.
The effective activity of the Member States was further translated into the
creation of the European Network for the Protection of Victims (hereinafter referred
to as "ENVR"). It focuses on further strengthening the position of victims not only in
criminal matters but also in civil matters throughout the EU. It should be noted that
strengthening the position of victims is an important step to be taken by establishing
their rights in EU law. However, victims will only have a full-fledged position when
they can exercise their protection in practice and receive the support and protection
they need from Member States.

2. The role of the victim as defined by the Victims Directive

2.1 Comparison with other tools

As mentioned above, victim protections were increasingly not enshrined in

national laws, nor could they be found in any legally binding global or regional
instruments. After several reminders of the indisputable relevance of the subject, a
slight shift towards more explicit rules covering victim protection was observed 2.
Regarding the first international legal documents on the protection of victims, Rover,
cited by Viktoryova and Blatnicky, mentioned the UN Declaration of Basic Principles
of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power adopted by the UN General
Assembly in 1985 and the Convention of 3Nations United Against Transnational
Organized Crime adopted in 2000 and the United Nations Convention against
Corruption of 2003 respectively, both of which contain explicit provisions on
procedural protection of victims 4.

2
Ashworth, Andrew, Zender, Lucia, Preventive Justice, Oxford Monographs on Criminal Law and
Justice , Oxford University Press, 2014, p.175
3
Fuerea, Augustin, European Union Law – principles, actions, freedoms , Universul Juridic Publishing
House, Bucharest, 2016, p.154
4
Novokmet, Ante. The right of a victim to a review of a decision not to prosecute as provided for in
Article 11 of Directive 2012/29/EU and an assessment of its transposition in Germany, Italy, France
and Croatia. Utrecht Law Review, 2016, roč.12, č. 2, p. 87.

3
 In the following lines we will focus on Directive 2012/29/EU of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards
for the protection, support and protection of victims of crime (hereinafter referred to
as the "Victims Directive") provides, in general, a wider scope of the victim's
procedural rights. The purpose of the Victims Directive is to review and supplement
the principles set out in Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA of 15 March
2001 on the status of victims in criminal proceedings in order to improve the
protection of victims' rights in the EU. (hereinafter referred to as the "Framework
Decision") 5, mainly in criminal proceedings. The Framework Decision, as stated by
Groenhuijsen and Pemberton, was the first hard law instrument on crime victims at
the international level 6. Although high hopes were placed on it, its implementation
was not successful. In 2009, the Commission stated that the national legislation of
many Member States contained numerous omissions and reflected the practice
existing before the adoption of the Framework Decision. On the other hand, the
framework decision referred to above remains applicable to Denmark even after the
deadline for the transposition of the Victims Directive has passed for the other 27
Member States (recital 71 of the preamble of the Victims Directive), because
Denmark has not adopted this. Therefore, in the judicial cooperation with Denmark,
the respective regime according to the Council Framework Decision should be
maintained.
In this context, it is interesting to note that Romania, like other member states,
has not yet fully transposed the Victims Directive. What is worth noting is that
Romania is making efforts to protect victims' rights arising from the Victims'
Directive. One of the new approaches of the directive is better profiled cooperation
and coordination of services. This actually led to the establishment of a European
information network on victim protection. Due to this achievement and the binding
force of the Victims Directive, it can be characterized as a bigger step towards better
protection of victims' rights and harmonization of procedural rules in EU member
states.
5
European Union: Council of the European Union, Council Framework Decision of 15
March 2001 on the status of victims in criminal proceedings, 2001/220/JAI, 15 March
2001 [online]. Available at: < http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ TXT/PDF/?uri=C
ELEX:32001F0220&from=EN > Accessed: 17.04.2022.
6
Calderoni, Francesco, Organized Crime Legislation in the European Union – Harmonization and
Approximation of Criminal Law , National Legislation and the EU Framework Decision on the Fight
Against Organized Crime, Springer Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, New York, 2010;

4
 2.2 Elaboration of the provisions of the Victims' Directive

The aim of the Victims Directive is to ensure that "victims of crime receive
adequate information, support and protection and are able to participate in criminal
proceedings". Art. 1 a), describes the victim as:
(i) an individual who has suffered harm, including physical, mental or
emotional harm or economic loss that was directly caused by a crime; (ii) family
members of a person whose death was directly caused by a crime and who have
suffered damage as a result of that person's death 7;
In addition, the important aspect enshrined in the Victims Directive is the right
to receive information from the first contact with a competent authority, as stipulated
in Article 4.8
This problem is closely related to the educational level of the society. Society's
awareness is very low and the victim learns about his protection and responsibilities at
the first contact with the competent authorities, which may be too late in terms of his
psychological or physical harm suffered by the crime.
Victims Directive in art. 4 para. 1 regulates the list of rights that must be
granted to the victim from the first contact with a competent authority.
Craig&Gráinne provides the following suggestions for improvement in terms
of improving the education offered to the public society and the organization of
training for people in first contact with victims:9
• to provide a better education offered at secondary school and/or at the Police
Academy,
• trainings for first contact persons such as police officers, prosecutors, judges,
probation and mediation officers and other entities that come into contact with crime
victims.

7
European Union: Council of the European Union, Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Union
Parliament and of the Council of October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support
and protection of victims of crime and replacing the framework Council Decision 2001/220/JHA, 14
November 2012, L 315/57, art. 1 para 1 [online]. Available at:
<http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2012:315:0057:0073:EN:P DF>
Accessed 17.04.2022 [Directive, 2012] .
8
Fuerea, Augustin, European Union Law – principles, actions, freedoms , Universul Juridic Publishing
House, Bucharest, 2016, p.178
9
Craig, Paul, de Búrca, Gráinne, European Union Law. Commentaries, jurisprudence and doctrine ,
Hamangiu Publishing House, Bucharest, 2017, p.121

5
 In addition, the police must know how to interpret the information required by
the victim, reflecting the particularities of specific cases. The list elaborated in art. 4
para. 1 provides some new provisions that establish more victims' rights and may
agree with Medelsky's view that it is not enough if the police officer learns how to
interpret these rights through practice. This article states as follows:
"Member States shall ensure that officials likely to come into contact with
victims, such as police officers and judicial staff, receive both general and specialist
training at a level appropriate to their contact with victims, in order to increase their
awareness of victims' needs and to enable them to deal with victims in an impartial,
respectful and professional manner. "
Comparing the 2012 Directive with the previous Framework Decision, it
provides for a broader definition of victim, including family members. In addition, the
rules on cooperation between Member States' authorities have been expanded and
contain new provisions that require Member States to make victims more aware of
their protection, which can be seen by the wording of Art. 26. Art. 26 paragraph (1) of
the Victims Directive enshrines that Member States must take appropriate measures to
facilitate cooperation between them in order to improve victims' access to the
protection provided for in the Directive and in national legislation. This article is also
the legal basis for the creation of the informal European Victim Protection Network 10.
The guidance document of DG Justice further specifies the importance of
communication between Member States and the establishment of national contact
points which are recommended to share their best practices and cooperate through
networks of national contact points through several platforms from within the EU.
The network fulfills this objective of the Victims Directive by enabling Member
States to share their knowledge and best practices, to foster cooperation in cross-
border cases and to organize contact point meetings for these purposes. This
requirement also follows from art. 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which
guarantees everyone the right to effective access to justice 11.
10
[Directive, 2012], supra note 17, art. 26 para. 1.
11
Art. 47 will have the following content: "Any person whose rights and freedoms guaranteed by the
law of
The Union are violated has the right to an effective appeal before a court in accordance with
the conditions provided for in this article. Everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing
within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal previously established
by law. Anyone will have the opportunity to be advised, defended and represented.
Legal aid is made available to those who do not have sufficient resources, to the extent that this aid is
necessary to ensure effective access to justice." European Convention, Charter of Fundamental Rights

6
3. Project of the European Network for the Protection of Victims

3.1. general information

The project to create ENVR was initiated by the Netherlands, leading the
project together with their co-founders Slovakia, France and Ireland. ENVR's support
and establishment was declared in an 18-month Trio presidency program 12
. The
existence of the network is based on the grant for the action which will end in May
2017. According to Article D(10) of the Council conclusions, ENVR should evaluate
its work in consultation with the Commission to decide on the need for its
continuation.
In this sense, we must emphasize that the idea of a permanent ENVR is not
excluded and support for this idea can also be found in the fact that the Commission is
jointly opening two new calls for proposals that offer grants for actions to support
transnational projects to strengthen the rights of crime victims.
The priorities of the first project can be found on the Commission's website,
but they are mostly concerned with the implementation and practical application of
the instruments that correspond to the ENVR objectives. In addition, it should focus
on 13:
• developing ways to provide relevant information about protection,
procedures, support, compensation system,
• finding the best way to cooperate in cross-border cases,
• improving procedures taking into account the individual assessment.
The second project should focus on discussions about possible new legislation,
mainly on:
• identifying the needs that are the mission in the current legislation;
• the exchange of good practices between member states;
• analytical works on data collection, survey preparation.

of the European Union, 2012/C 326/02, October 2, 2000, art. 47.

12
European Union: Council of the European Union, Council's 18-month programme,
1 January 2016–30 June 2017 [online]. Available at: <data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-
12396-2015-INIT/en/pdf> Accessed: 17.04.2022
13
Fuerea, Augustin, Fundamental Treaties of the European Union , CH Beck Publishing House,
Bucharest, 2017, p.165

7
 Given that the Commission has prepared the new call for proposals, we can
assume that it is interested in the duration of the ENVR. In practice, the ENVR
meetings have proven useful and have replaced the expert meetings organized by the
Commission. Member States have significant problems to transpose the Victims
Directive and it is logical that they are reserved to present it to the Commission.
Therefore, the idea of establishing the ENVR arose where Member States can discuss
these issues and share their best practices. However, some Member States objected to
the presence of the Commission at the meetings of the ENVR contact points. As for
the Commission awarding the action grant, it was not possible to exclude it from the
meetings. In the end, agreement was reached and the role of the Commission is not
omitted, but limited only to specific parts of the meeting.
Speaking of the duration of the ENVR, it is also evident the interest of the
member states who are now in the middle of discussions about who will hold the
leadership next. Regarding the fact that Malta, like the Netherlands, did not nominate
ENVR contact points, Estonia could hypothetically be considered as a future
presidency which also supported the existence of ENVR together with Hungary which
showed an interest significant.
ENVR's role is to strengthen the protection of victims and to increase the
cooperation of Member States in the field of victims' rights. It is a network of
government officials, instrumental in enabling the standards of relevant EU legislation
to work in everyday practice. It means that it serves public authorities to exchange
their best practices on the implementation of EU law on victims' rights and
cooperation in cross-border cases.
Among the most relevant victim legislation, attention can be drawn to the
Directive on minimum standards for the protection, support and protection of victims
of crime (2012/29/EU) 14
and the Directive on compensation for victims of crime
(2004/80/EU 15). We would like to expand this short list on the European Protection

14
European Union: Council of the European Union, Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Union
Parliament and Council of October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and
protection of victims of crime and replacing the Council framework Decision 2001/220/JHA, 14
November 2012, L 315/57 [online]. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=OJ:L:2012:315:0057:0073:EN:PDF Accessed: 17.04.2022.
15
European Union: Council of the European Union, directive 2004/80/EC on compensation for victims
of crime, 29 April 2004, L 261/15 [online]. Available at: <http://eur-lex.
europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:181:0004:0012:en:PDF> Accessed: 17.04.2022

8
Order Directive (2011/99/EU 16
) and the Regulation on mutual recognition of
protection measures in civil matters (606/2013 17
). This point of view was also
presented in the framework of the European network for "victim protection", which
deals with all the above-mentioned instruments during its sessions, and was also
confirmed by the conclusions of the Council establishing an informal European
network for the protection of victims in Article A paragraph (2) . In addition, the
18

preamble to the aforementioned Council Conclusions reacts to the numerous terrorist

attacks. Therefore, the new draft directive on combating terrorism will be considered
and the article reflecting the protection of victims of terrorism is discussed 19. This
initiative also reacts to the Joint Declaration of the EU Ministers for Justice and Home
Affairs and representatives of the EU institutions, adopted on 24 March 2016.
The difference between ENVR and other networks is that it was created for the
competent public authorities that implement the relevant EU legislation in practice.
As for the contact point meetings, they were organized by the support group
composed of the Netherlands, Slovakia, France and Ireland, which were later joined
by Hungary. Member States had the chance to discuss different topics leading to
finding solutions for the best implementations of the relevant EU legislation during
the meetings, for example, individual assessment, interpretation and translation, cross-
border cases or access to information.
The preliminary meeting in Luxembourg and the first official ENVR meeting
in Amsterdam were organized by the Netherlands with the assistance of the support
group. The most important problems were identified and discussed in Amsterdam and
suggestions were presented on how to solve them. The second official meeting will

16
European Union: Council of the European Union, Directive 2011/99/EU of the European Parliament
and of the Council on the European Protection Order, 13 December
2012, L 398/2 [online]. Available at:
<http://ec.europa.eu/justice/criminal/files/directive_2011_99_on_epo_en.pdf > Accessed: 28.07.2016
17
European Union: Council of the European Union, Regulation (EU) no. 606/2013 of
The European Parliament and the Council on the mutual recognition of protective measures in
civil matters, 12 June 2013 [online]. Available at:
<http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:261:0015:0018:en:PDF>
Accessed: 17.04.2022.
18
European Union: Council of the European Union, Conclusions of the Council establishing a
Informal European Network on Victims' Rights, 9 June 2016, Article A, paragraph 2 [online].
Available at: <http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9997-2016-INIT/en/ pdf> Accessed:
17.04.2022. [Council conclusions, 2016].
19
For example. European Union: European Commission, Proposal for a Directive of the European
Union to the Parliament and of the Council on Combating Terrorism and Replacing the Council
Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on Combating Terrorism, 2015/0281 (COD), 2 December 2015,
Title V.

9
take place in Bratislava under the Slovak Presidency of the Council of the European
Union which will focus more on practical solutions to the recognized problems. This
meeting intends to focus on Article 4 of the Directive on minimum standards for the
protection, support and protection of victims of crime (2012/29/EU) relating to access
to information for knowledge sharing between national authorities, in particular how
they provide victims information about their protection.
This approach partially covers information related to cross-border cases and
the compensation system. The first step was already taken in February at the meeting
in Amsterdam during which this topic was classified as one of the most problematic
issues. The focus of the meeting in Bratislava will be on finding concrete and practical
solutions regarding the exercise of victims' rights, which are closely related to access
to information that must be easy and accessible. Moreover, it must be said that the e-
justice portal is sometimes unknown even among lawyers and, moreover, it is too
chaotic. That is why this e-justice portal will be part of the discussion.

3.2. The ENVR framework

The framework for member states' discussions is open, but has so far been
more or less focused on access to information, individual assessment and cross-border
cases.

3.2.1. Access to information

The directive constitutes 11 pieces of information that must be provided to
victims without unnecessary delay and from the first contact with a competent
authority. At the same time, the way they are communicated to victims must reflect
their specific needs and expectations. ENVR has therefore started discussions on
access to information with the intention of finding the best way to address all victims
in a useful and appropriate way.

3.2.2. Cross-border cases

As regards cross-border cases, it is important to ensure that any victim can rely
on the same basic level of rights, regardless of their nationality and wherever in the

10
EU the crime takes place 20. It is even more difficult for victims to exercise protection
in cross-border cases. How these rights can be exercised in practice requires, among
other things, more detailed elaboration, expertise and the involvement of several
actors to achieve the big picture. For example, a victim's right to report a crime that
was committed in a foreign jurisdiction differs from state to state. Victims of serious
crime may find it difficult to report their victimization to the relevant authorities.
ENVR is a good platform where these particularities can be discussed.

3.2.3. reparation
Apart from the difficult access to information, victims are often not aware of
their protection and do not have sufficient knowledge of where to find support and
assistance regarding compensation services. This topic was opened during the Dutch
Presidency and deserves further discussion leading to a simplified process of filing a
complaint or claiming compensation.

3.2.4 Individual assessment

Article 22 of the Directive on minimum standards for the protection, support
and protection of victims of crime (2012/29/EU) plays a key role in the Victims
Directive and causes huge practical problems for Member States in implementing it.
That is why ENVR organized workshops during the Amsterdam meeting to open
discussions on individual assessment. This article is closely related to provisions 23,
24, 18 and 8 of the Directive.

3.3. Conclusions of the Council for the establishment of a European

information network on the protection of victims

The conclusions of the Council that established the ENVR are systematically
organized in the Preamble and four chapters on the objective, composition,
organization, financing and evaluation of the network.

20
European Union: Council of the European Union, Conclusions of the Council establishing a
Informal European Network for Victims' Rights, 9 June 2016, Foreword [online]. Available at:
<http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9997-2016-INIT/en/pdf>. Accessed: 28.07. 2016.
[Council Conclusions, 2016].

11
 In the first chapter it is stated that this network will facilitate and strengthen
the activity of the member states in order to fulfill the objectives for which it was
established in terms of cooperation and exchange of good practices of public
authorities 21. The second paragraph refers to the fact that the ENVR is composed of
contact points of political officers who will meet regularly with the participation of
the Commission and possibly other European institutions. The following paragraph
contains information about the organization and funding system of ENVR. The
project is funded by the Action Grant 22and the meeting should be organized twice a
year, chaired by the Member States. The last paragraph recommends that ENVR
evaluates its work in consultation with the Commission.

4. Conclusions

It is practically impossible for a victim to prepare in advance for a crisis

situation, it is even more difficult to live with this type of experience, and often it is
almost impossible to avoid such a situation. Once victims are part of this circle, it is
difficult for them to return to normal life.
It is indisputable that crime victims are given attention by legislators, legal
theorists and practitioners, and the media. On the other hand, we consider paying
more attention to the victims. We also consider it necessary to put more emphasis on
these issues, especially for the general public who are directly affected by this issue
and the victim of the crime is a person who is in a position where they have suffered
injury or damage through no fault of their own .
Therefore, it is important to find concrete and practical solutions for victims,
not only at the national level, but also at the international level, such as exercising
victims' rights in cross-border cases, maximizing synergies between compensation
services, the need to translate documents and facilitate cooperation international
between states.

The conclusions of the Council, 2016, supra note 33, paragraph A2.
21

Ibid., para. C8.

22

12
 In this light, ENVR intends to pay more attention to the position of victims in
cross-border cases. We support the idea related to the exchange of knowledge
between national authorities on the protection, protection and support of victims can
make a good contribution to this. ENVR is the result of the need to organize meetings
of experts to share their knowledge and best practices, to promulgate guidelines,
develop manuals, adopt recommendations and gather information through surveys
leading to uniform approaches and better protection of victims in EU member states.
Last but not least, it is our duty to emphasize that, although Romania is one of
the ENVR leaders, it has not fully transposed the directive. The same goes for our
colleagues, despite the fact that they are way ahead. They adopted the law that reflects
the previous framework decision, but not the directive According to the opinion of
various experts, this separate law does not include the Victims Directive and therefore
needs to be amended soon.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Ashworth, Andrew, Zender, Lucia, Preventive Justice, Oxford Monographs on

Criminal Law and Justice , Oxford University Press, 2014.
2. Calderoni, Francesco, Organized Crime Legislation in the European Union –
Harmonization and Approximation of Criminal Law, National Legislation and the
EU Framework Decision on the Fight Against Organized Crime, Springer
Heidelberg, Dordrecht, London, New York, 2010.

13
3. Craig, Paul, de Búrca, Gráinne, European Union Law. Commentaries,
jurisprudence and doctrine , Hamangiu Publishing House, Bucharest, 2017.
4. Fuerea, Augustin, European Union Law – principles, actions, freedoms ,
Universul Juridic Publishing House, Bucharest, 2016.
5. Fuerea, Augustin, Fundamental Treaties of the European Union , CH Beck
Publishing House, Bucharest, 2017.
6. Novokmet, Ante, Right of a victim to a review of a decision not to prosecute as
provided for in Article 11 of Directive 2012/29/EU and an assessment of its
transposition in Germany, Italy, France and Croatia . Utrecht Law Review, 2016.

14