Malini Laxminarayan

Victim Satisfaction with Criminal Justice: A Systematic Review

Abstract The authors conducted a systematic review on the topic of victim satisfaction with criminal justice to examine which aspects of the procedure and the legal outcome are associated with victim satisfaction. The systematic review resulted in 22 articles. Factors were conceptualized into (1) variables related to the procedure and (2) variables related to the outcome. The study uncovered covariates of satisfaction in both categories. Findings, however, were ambiguous. The mixed findings suggest there is a need to understand both the differences among victims and when certain facets are more important in influencing satisfaction with the judicial process.

Interactional justice, coping and the legal system: Needs of vulnerable victims

Secondary victimization refers to re-victimization by society, including the response of the criminal justice system. One form of secondary victimization is interactional injustice. The concept of interactional justice posits that people are concerned about their treatment by others during conflict resolution procedures. Proper treatment by legal authorities refers to receiving adequate information about the procedure (known as informational justice) and being treated in a respectful and dignified manner (known as interpersonal justice). One’s ability to cope with the crime may also be influenced by the criminal justice system. Particularly for vulnerable victims, there appears to be a special need for proper treatment and attention to the victim’s ability to cope. Female victims of violence, namely sexual and domestic violence, are one example of vulnerable victims. This victimization often consists of immensely violating and sometimes chronic repeated behaviour. The perceptions of interpersonal justice, informational justice and the procedure’s effect on the victim’s ability to cope for three categories of victims (domestic violence victims, victims of sexual abuse and victims of other serious crimes) in the Netherlands are compared. Multiple regression analyses indicate that there are in fact differences between groups. Victims of sexual assault perceived interpersonal justice as significantly lower than did victims of other serious crimes. The procedural effect on one’s ability to cope was experienced to the least extent by victims of domestic violence. Informational justice did not differ among groups.

Procedural and interactional justice : A comparative study of victims in the Netherlands and New South Wales

Justice evaluations have become a widely studied area in the past 25 years. Such research indicates that victims have numerous legal preferences, which are in tune with the theories of procedural and interactional justice. This study examines these theories with regard to victims and the justice system from a comparative perspective including the Netherlands and New South Wales. After outlining the victim’s position in criminal justice, hierarchical regression analysis investigates several differences in perceptions of justice. Findings indicate that victims in the Netherlands perceived greater levels of process control and decision control, in addition to less improper treatment by the defence counsel. Accuracy and treatment by the police, prosecutor and judge were not significantly different between legal systems. Implications are discussed.

The Effect of Retributive and Restorative Sentencing on Psychological Effects of Criminal Proceedings

Retribution and restoration have been cited as two goals of sentencing for victims. Furthermore, there is a perspective that acknowledges the overlap of these two aims, seeking to obtain restoration through retribution. Achieving these goals may have implications for the victim’s psychological well-being. The current study examines 101 victims of serious crime and how different outcomes may impact their perceptions of psychological well-being. Incarceration, community service, compensation from the offender, and compensation from the state, in addition to acquittals, are included as predictors of the dependent variable. After reviewing the literature on retributive and restorative sentencing, also making a distinction between compensation from the offender and compensation from the state, hierarchical regression analysis finds that compensation from the offender is the only sentencing option significantly associated with psychological effects.

Psychological effects of criminal proceedings through contact with the judge: The moderating effect of legal system structure.

Psychological effects of criminal proceedings on victims have often been the focus of victimological research. The criminal justice system is repeatedly acknowledged as a source of additional harm for victims. Such a generalization, however, cannot be made to all legal systems universally to the same degree. This article compares the adversarial and inquisitorial structures of criminal justice and examines how the latter may in fact be beneficial to victims well-being. More specifically, contact with the judge and presence at trial may be one positive form of victim participation in its most informal sense. Hierarchical regression analysis is conducted using victims of serious crimes in the Netherlands and New South Wales (NSW), Australia, to test this hypothesis. The type of legal system (i.e., inquisitorial versus adversarial) is used as a moderating variable on the relationship between contact with the judge and psychological effects. The findings indicate that victims in the Netherlands report a significant relationship, where contact with the judge is predictive of a less negative impact on psychological effects, while a non-significant relationship is found for victims in NSW.

Book review: Restorative justice realities Empirical research in a European context

internally coherent and effective in practice. Finally, as a modest aspiration, the acknowledgement of victims’ suffering may be the most important outcome of any process. While the book provides an insight into a victimological perspective of international crimes with a focus on Africa, there are a number of points which detract from this objective. First, the majority of chapters focus on the Rwandan genocide. While this was one of the worst crimes in the twentieth century, there have been numerous other similar crimes committed throughout Africa that are not mentioned, such as in Sudan. Although the focus on Rwanda is understandable considering the location of the conference, and a number of countries are discussed by different authors, there could have been a greater effort to examine African conflicts in depth to provide a more pan-African experience of international crimes. Second, certain crimes were neglected by the book, such as forced displacement, or economic exploitation and slavery, which affect millions of African civilians, causing immense suffering and vulnerability. Although pertinent crimes such as sexual violence and crimes committed against children are discussed, there could have been more attention paid to other forms of victimization. Third, there could have been a greater examination of why certain individuals or groups are victimized more than others, and the role of identity, such as religion and ethnicity, in the commission of international crimes; this is to an extent done for gender, but not for other crimes. An assessment of victimization factors in different conflicts would have given the book a greater insight into the African experience of victimization caused by international crimes. Fourth, the book focuses on the responses to international crimes, such as judicial and non-judicial mechanisms, possibly explaining why other issues are not discussed in greater depth. However, in order to respond effectively to victimization and to prevent their recurrence in the future, the harm as well as the causes need to be assessed. Finally, as a minor point, an index would have been helpful to quickly navigate the book on certain issues. Nonetheless, this book is a welcomed and valuable addition to the study of victimology by firmly expanding the discipline beyond domestic victimization to a greater understanding of victims of international crimes. As the coverage of the contents of this book reveal, there is a dearth of original research and information. The book also includes a widely sourced bibliography, which will be helpful to researchers and practitioners. A conference in Asia is contemplated, which will hopefully build on the insightful research included within this book. In all, this book will be very useful to academics, legal and non-legal practitioners, and students who are interested in victimology international crimes, victims, international criminal justice and transitional justice. This book and future ones will hopefully build on our understanding of victimization of international crimes so we can more effectively respond and prevent such suffering.