@book{
author = "Nikolić-Ristanović, Vesna and Ćopić, Sanja and Nikolić, Jasmina and Šaćiri, Bejan",
year = "2018",
abstract = "Komparativna analiza podrške žrtvama pripremljena je u cilju sticanja
znanja o načinu uređenja i funkcionisanju podrške žrtvama u izabranim
državama Balkana: Srbiji, Hrvatskoj, Bosni i Hercegovini, Crnoj Gori i
Makedoniji. Izabrane su države koje dele isto pravno nasleđe, jer su bile
u sastavu Socijalističke Federativne Republike Jugoslavije, imaju sličan
sistem pravosuđa i dele slična iskustva vezana za razvoj podrške žrtvama.
Iskustva Hrvatske, kao poslednje države koja je pristupila Evropskoj uniji
(EU) (2013), značajna su za druge države regiona, koje su u procesu pregovaranja
o pristupanja EU (Srbija i Crna Gora), imaju status zemlje kandidata
(Makedoniju) ili su potencijalni kandidat za pristupanje EU (Bosna i Hercegovina),
te su u obavezi ili nastoje da usklade svoje zakonodavstvo, politiku
i prakse sa pravnim tekovinama Evropske unije kako bi se osiguralo da žrtve
kriminaliteta dobiju potrebne informacije, podršku i zaštitu.
U ovom izveštaju prikazani su i analizirani nalazi do kojih se došlo triangulacijom
podataka prikupljenih na dva načina: kvalitativnom analizom
normativnog okvira i analitičkih dokumenata o sistemu podrške žrtvama
u izabranim državama i putem empirijskog istraživanja primenom ankete,
koje je obuhvatilo 127 pružalaca podrške žrtvama u izabranim zemljama.
Polazni okvir za analizu podrške žrtvama čine odredbe Direktive EU o
uspostavljanju minimalnih standarda o pravima, podršci i zaštiti žrtava
kriminaliteta (Direktiva EU o pravima žrtava). Fokus analize je na četiri
ključna pitanja: definisanje pojma „žrtva“ u krivičnom zakonodavstvu, definisanje
prava žrtve u krivičnom zakonodavstvu, pravo žrtve na informisanje
o svojim pravima i dostupnim oblicima pomoći, podrške i zaštite, i pravo
na besplatan pristup poverljivim službama za žrtve, pre, tokom i nakon
krivičnog postupka.
Analiza je pokazala da osim u Hrvatskoj i Makedoniji, pojam žrtve nije
definisan u krivičnom procesnom zakonodavstvu ostalih posmatranih
država. U Hrvatskoj, i delom u Makedoniji, žrtva je poseban procesnopravni
subjekt. Kada je u pitanju učešće žrtve u krivičnom postupku, u svim
posmatranim zemljama se ono vezuje za institut oštećenog. Uvođenjem
pojma „žrtva“ i njegovim jasnim razgraničenjem od pojma oštećenog omogućava
se da žrtva bude prepoznata kao poseban procesni subjekt, što je
važno zbog poštovanja prava i zaštite koju bi trebalo jednako garantovati svakoj žrtvi, bez obzira da li će učestvovati dalje u postupku u svojstvu
oštećenog ili ne.
U pogledu definisanja osnovnih prava žrtve u krivičnom procesnom zakonodavstvu
najdalje je otišla Hrvatska, koja je prenela odredbe Direktive
EU o pravima žrtava u svoje nacionalno zakonodavstvo.1 Ovaj
primer treba da slede i ostale posmatrane države. Potrebno je jasno definisati
prava koja žrtva može da ostvari u krivičnom postupku u svojstvu
oštećenog i prava koja žrtvama treba garantovati nezavisno od učešća u
krivičnom postupku.
Pravo žrtve na informacije je ključno za ostvarivanje ostalih prava, ali
to nije prepoznato u svim posmatranim državama. Obaveza pružanja žrtvama
informacija regulisana je pozitivnim propisima Hrvatske i Makedonije,
što je posledica prepoznavanja žrtve kao posebnog procesnog subjekta.
U ostalim posmatranim državama zakonom kojim se reguliše krivični
postupak predviđa se obaveza informisanja žrtve o procesnim pravima ali
samo u situaciji kada svoja prava u postupku ostvaruje kroz institut oštećenog.
Zato je potrebno u zakone ostalih država kojima se reguliše krivični
postupak uvesti striktna pravila kojima bi se na sistematičan način uredila
obaveza obaveštavanja žrtve o pravima kojima raspolaže i to od prvog kontakta
sa nadležnim organom, kao što su policija, tužilaštvo i sud.
Službe za žrtve predstavljaju ključni mehanizam za omogućavanje uživanja
prava žrtava i pomoć žrtvama, te u svim državama obuhvaćenim
istraživanjem podršku žrtvama pružaju organizacije civilnog društva i
državne službe. Kada su u pitanju državne službe, mahom se radi o službama
koje postoje pri pravosudnim organima, odnosno pri tužilaštvima i/
ili sudovima i sigurnim kućama ili prihvatilištima pri ustanovama socijalne
zaštite. Jedino u Makedoniji ne postoje službe za podršku žrtvama pri pravosudnim
organima.
Državne službe pružaju veoma konkretne i fokusirane usluge, koje su
često ograničene na usko definisane grupe korisnika i tokom ograničenog
vremenskog perioda. One najčešće pružaju podršku žrtvama kao
oštećenima i svedocima u krivičnom postupku, dakle, samo licima koja
dolaze u kontakt sa pravosudnim organima i to tokom trajanja krivičnog
postupka, i usluge smeštaja za žene i decu žrtve nasilja, kada su u pitanju
sigurne kuće ili prihvatilišta pri ustanovama socijalne zaštite.
Organizacije civilnog društva pružaju širi krug specijalizovanih usluga
za konkretne ugrožene grupe žrtava i koriste inkluzivniji pristup, što kontinuitet njihovog rada i nivo usluga koje se pružaju žrtvama na godišnjem
nivou u svim državama obuhvaćenim analizom, pa je zato neophodno
obezbediti stabilno i dugoročno finansiranje usluga podrške žrtvama.
Finansiranje usluga podrške od strane države je ključno za obezbeđivanje
jednakog pristupa službama za sve žrtve na celoj teritoriji države. S tim u
vezi, neophodno je u svim državama obuhvaćenim istraživanjem prethodno
sprovesti analizu fiskalnog uticaja, tj. procene kolika je potreba za ovom
vrstom podrške od strane države i kolika sredstva je potrebno obezbediti
kako bi se osigurala adekvatna podrška žrtvama.
Podeljenost usluga koje pružaju organizacije civilnog društva i državne
službe zahteva uspostavljanje saradnje pružalaca podrške i
koordinaciju postojećih usluga. Umrežavanje i saradnja državnih službi
i organizacija civilnog društva jedan je od optimalnih modela/strategija
uspostavljanja nacionalnog sistema podrške žrtvama. Takav pristup omogućava
kombinovanje podrške žrtvama u okviru i izvan krivičnopravnog
sistema, pružanje usluga za sve žrtve i specijalizovanih vidova podrške,
upućivanje među organizacijama i institucijama koje su uključene u pružanje
podrške. Međutim, takav pristup zahteva precizno regulisanje modela
koordinacije usluga pružalaca podrške žrtvama na nacionalnom nivou.kontinuitet njihovog rada i nivo usluga koje se pružaju žrtvama na godišnjem
nivou u svim državama obuhvaćenim analizom, pa je zato neophodno
obezbediti stabilno i dugoročno finansiranje usluga podrške žrtvama.
Finansiranje usluga podrške od strane države je ključno za obezbeđivanje
jednakog pristupa službama za sve žrtve na celoj teritoriji države. S tim u
vezi, neophodno je u svim državama obuhvaćenim istraživanjem prethodno
sprovesti analizu fiskalnog uticaja, tj. procene kolika je potreba za ovom
vrstom podrške od strane države i kolika sredstva je potrebno obezbediti
kako bi se osigurala adekvatna podrška žrtvama.
Podeljenost usluga koje pružaju organizacije civilnog društva i državne
službe zahteva uspostavljanje saradnje pružalaca podrške i
koordinaciju postojećih usluga. Umrežavanje i saradnja državnih službi
i organizacija civilnog društva jedan je od optimalnih modela/strategija
uspostavljanja nacionalnog sistema podrške žrtvama. Takav pristup omogućava
kombinovanje podrške žrtvama u okviru i izvan krivičnopravnog
sistema, pružanje usluga za sve žrtve i specijalizovanih vidova podrške,
upućivanje među organizacijama i institucijama koje su uključene u pružanje
podrške. Međutim, takav pristup zahteva precizno regulisanje modela
koordinacije usluga pružalaca podrške žrtvama na nacionalnom nivou., This report examines organization and functioning of victim support
in the selected Balkan countries: Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Montenegro and Macedonia. Selected countries share the same
legal heritage, their justice systems are similar and they experience similar
challenges in establishing victim support. Experience of Croatia, as the last
state to join the European Union (EU) (2013), is relevant for other countries
in the Balkan region, which are in the process of negotiations on the accession
to the EU (Serbia and Montenegro), have the status of a candidate
country (Macedonia) or are potential EU candidate country (Bosnia and
Herzegovina), and are therefore obliged or committed to harmonize their
legislation, policy and practice with the EU acquis in order to ensure that
victims of crime receive necessary information, support and protection.
The report is prepared by triangulation of data collected in two ways:
by qualitative analysis of the normative framework and analytic reports on
victim support systems in the selected countries and a survey, which consulted
127 victim support services in the observed countries.
The EU Directive on establishing minimum standards on the rights,
support and protection of victims of crime (Victims’ Rights Directive)
served as a framework for the comparative analysis. The focus was on
the following aspects: defining the term ‘victim’ in the criminal legislation,
defining victims’ rights in the criminal legislation, victim’s right to receive
information, and victim’s right to access confidential victim support services
free of charge, before, during and for an appropriate time after criminal
proceedings.
Except in Croatia and Macedonia, the term victim is not defined in the
criminal procedure codes of other observed countries. In Croatia, and
partly in Macedonia, the victim is a separate procedural subject. In all countries
encompassed by the analysis victim’s participation in the criminal
procedure is linked to the institution of the injured party. Introducing the
term ‘victim’ and making a clear distinction from the notion ‘injured party’
enables victims to be recognized as separate process entities. This is important
for respecting rights and protection that should be equally granted
to each victim, regardless of his/her subsequent participation in the
criminal proceedings in the capacity of an injured party. In defining victim’s rights, Croatia has gone far away, due to the transposition
of the Victims’ Rights Directive into its national legislation.2
This should be followed by other countries in the region as well. In this respect,
it is necessary to clearly define the rights that the victim can exercise
in the criminal proceedings in the capacity of an injured party, and the rights
that should be granted to all victims irrespective of their participation
in the criminal proceedings.
Right to receive information from the first contact with a competent
authority is crucial for enabling victims to access other rights; nevertheless,
this right is not recognized in all assessed countries. The
obligation to provide victims information is foreseen in the criminal legislation
of Croatia and Macedonia, which is a direct consequence of recognizing
the victim as a separate entity within the criminal procedure code.
In other countries, obligation to notify victim of his/her rights refers only
to procedural rights when a victim participates in the criminal procedure in
his/her capacity of an injured party. It is therefore necessary to introduce
strict rules that would systematically regulate the obligation to notify the
victim on his/her rights from the first contact with the competent authority,
including the police, the prosecution and the court.
Victim support services are recognized as key mechanisms for enabling
victims to access their rights and assistance and in all observed
countries support is provided by civil society organizations and the
state services. As for the state services, they mainly refer to victim and
witness support services within the prosecutor’s offices and/or courts, and
safe houses or shelters in the social welfare institutions. Only in Macedonia
there are no victim and witness support services within the judiciary.
State services provide very specific and focused services, which are limited
to very narrowly determined users and for a very limited period
of time: support to victims in their capacity of injured parties and/or witnesses
during criminal proceedings, and providing safe accommodation to
women and child victims of violence.
Civil society organizations provide a wider range of services which are
often specialized and targeted to specific vulnerable groups, but they
still have more inclusive approach, which enables victims to get more
forms of assistance at one place. Additionally, civil society organizations
often provide services outside of their premises, they have mobile teams and work after the working hours, which is relevant for accessibility of support
and meeting victims’ needs in a proper way.
Both civil society organizations and state services play an important
role in delivering victim support in all observed countries. Therefore,
it is necessary that finances, standards and policies of victim support are
equally developed in both sectors.
There are few general victim support services in the selected countries.
This category mainly refers to victim and witness support services
in the courts and/or prosecutors’ offices, whose services are limited. An
example of good practice of offering information and referral of all victims
to victim support services is the establishment of the national free line for
victims in Croatia. The analysis also revealed that there is a small number
of specialized support services for child victims in all observed countries.
Support is mainly available to specific type of victims, in particular to
victims of violence: domestic violence, sexual violence, trafficking in
human beings, war crimes and hate crimes. These findings reflect the
process of development of victim support that followed the same trend
in all assessed countries. Therefore, it is necessary to further advocate
for strengthening of existing and establishment of new general victim support
services outside the criminal justice system, so that victim support
could be equally available to victims of all forms of crime and irrespective
of their participation in the criminal proceedings.
Victim support is most often provided locally: in the region or place
where the organization is located. Geographical access to victim support
services in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina is better compared
to Serbia. A Croatian model can be used as an example of a good practice
in establishing a national victim support system: through establishment
of a partner network of civil society organizations in 13 counties, with
the existence of a network of victim and witness services in the courts,
a network of services has been created that provides equal access to support
for all victims. Nevertheless, even in Croatia cooperation and coordination
of services provided by the state, on one hand, and civil society
organizations, on the other, remain rather challenging.
Electronic and printed media and the Internet are important outreach
tools for informing victims of existing victim support services in all
observed countries. The media needs to be further used to inform citizens
about victims’ rights and available services and a range of methods
should be employed. An example of good practice of using the Internet is the Interactive online map of victim support services in Serbia https://victimservices.
eu.
Referral of victims to victim support services is not systematically
regulated in Serbia and Macedonia, while in Croatia and Bosnia and
Herzegovina it is a key way of informing victims about available victim
support. Victims are referred to victim support by the police, prosecutors,
courts and civil society organizations. It is therefore necessary to develop
a referral mechanism between all institutions and organizations involved
in victim support in other observed countries, including Serbia.
Victim support services in selected countries offer minimum support
to victims as foreseen in the Victims’ Rights Directive. The most
frequent forms of assistance and support provided are: information, emotional
support, and referral to other relevant service providers. However,
the data also revealed that victims do not always receive complete information
about their rights and available services.
Assistance and support are mainly offered through face to face contact
and over the telephone, but using e-mails, internet and social media
is gaining more attention. Thus, it is important to use new forms of communication
with victims, as well, such as online chat, social media, modern
platforms for communication – Skype, Viber, Whatsapp.
Victim support is provided by paid staff and volunteers. Volunteering in
victim support is more spread in Croatia than in other observed countries:
apart from involving volunteers in victim support in civil society organizations,
they are also involved in victim support in victim and witness services
in the courts. This is an example of a good practice and may be used as
a model in other countries as well. This could contribute to the increase
of the number of victims and witnesses who could receive assistance and
support.
The analysis revealed that not all the paid staff and volunteers who
provide victim support in Serbia passed the training for working with
victims. Situation is much better in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia,
where almost all paid staff in organizations covered by the survey have
undergone training for working with victims. In these two countries, all
or almost all volunteers passed the training for working with victims, too.
As foreseen in Article 25 of the Victims’ Rights Directive, both basic and
specialist trainings, as well as entry and ongoing trainings should be provided
to all paid staff and volunteers working with victims. This could ensure
that the rights of victims are respected, that victims receive adequate assistance
and support and are protected from secondary victimization.There is an instability in funding victim support services in all selected
countries. This is especially evident when it comes to civil society organizations,
which are largely dependant on project funding. This negatively
impacts sustainability of services, continuity of their work and the level of
services provided to victims on an annual basis. Therefore, it is necessary
to ensure stable funding for victim support. The state should have a crucial
role in developing necessary funding mechanisms in order to ensure equal
access to services for all victims. In this regard, it is necessary to previously
conduct a financial impact analysis in all countries encompassed by the research
in order to estimate the need for this type of support by the state
and the amount of resources needed to ensure adequate support for all
victims.
To ensure better utilization of resources it is important to establish
cooperation between state and non-state service providers and coordination
of services offered. Networking and cooperation between state
services and civil society organizations is one of the optimal models/strategies
for establishing a national victim support system. Such an approach
allows combining victim support within and outside the criminal justice
system, providing general victim support and specialized services, and
referrals among organizations and institutions involved in victim support.
Such an approach requires a precise regulation of the model of coordination
of victim support services at the national level.",
publisher = "Viktimološko društvo Srbije i Prometej, Viktimološko društvo Srbije Beograd",
title = "Podrška žrtvama u izabranim državama Balkana: Komparativna perspektiva",
pages = "96",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rfasper_2882"
}
