Electricity subsidies hurt the Treasury
This allows us to understand that the victim does not lose his quality for being an active party in the criminal process, so that his actions cannot be re-victimizing, a new affectation to his rights within the judicial process would entail direct responsibility on the State who, instead of protecting rights, violates them.
The United Nations, with the aforementioned, allows understanding that the person, when identified as a victim, can immediately include his or her family, close relatives or peers, which cannot be understood from the declaration of guilt, i.e., if a criminal proceeding does not conclude with the determination of guilt of the offender, the guarantees of protection against the victim or victims could be maintained.
In another vein, Rodriguez (2016), referring to the victim, states that “Criminal Law does not deal with the victim and cannot deal with him or her. This assertion can be substantiated with a simple example: the victim of a sexual assault is the victim of such crime regardless of what the Criminal Law does, and will not cease to hold the empirical quality of victim because the aggressor is criminally prosecuted.” (p.176)
Care of image and privacy on cell phones and networks
The UN Declaration relates the needs of these victims to a series of rights, including the right to respect and recognition, the right to protection, access to justice and fair treatment, assistance and support, and reparation for the negative effects of the crime in the form of restitution and compensation.
Indeed, the first and most essential need of victims is recognition. Human dignity is a fundamental right. Treating victims with compassion and respect for their dignity is a fundamental aspect of doing them justice. For many victims, it is important that they are recognized as victims and that their suffering as a result of a wrongful act against them is acknowledged.
All professionals who are in regular contact with victims should be trained in victims’ rights and provided with the appropriate tools to assess individual needs in order to determine the needs and situation of each victim.
*Lawyer, Universidad de Chile. Master in Comparative and European Private Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. PhD Candidate in Law, University of Edinburgh, Scotland. ANID scholarship holder for doctoral studies abroad (2016). Tutor for the Scottish Liability Law course.
With respect to secondary victims, it seems inappropriate to trivialize references to depression, which is a pathological alteration of mood to be diagnosed by the competent health professional, which, in turn, is neither synonymous with mere distress nor a mere add-on in a long list of manifestations of psychic distress 17 . In other words, it is not in accordance with medical advances and the distinctions made by health professionals 18 , that pathological ailments, on the one hand, and anguish, on the other, are all subject without any nuance to the same regime of reparation.
Clearly this case can be framed as a tort of defamation, and more specifically as a slander actionable per se, since it involves an accusation of the commission of a crime. Even so, given that this case involves an unintentional mistake in the identity of the person, having been attributed the crime committed by another person in respect of whom it was true, the Defamation Act 1996 describes a procedure whereby the defendant admits his mistake, offers such apologies in writing and publishes them in an appropriate form, and reaches a reparation agreement with the victim 43 .
The Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and furthering an area of freedom, security and justice, the cornerstone of which is the mutual recognition of judicial decisions in civil and criminal matters.
Article 82(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for the establishment of minimum rules applicable in the Member States, in so far as necessary to facilitate mutual recognition of judgments and judicial decisions, and police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters having a cross-border dimension, in particular as regards the rights of crime victims.
In its Resolution of 10 June 2011 on a roadmap for strengthening victims’ rights and protection, in particular in criminal proceedings (6) (“Budapest Roadmap”), the Council stated that measures should be taken at Union level to strengthen the rights, support and protection of victims of crime. To that end, and in accordance with that Resolution, the purpose of this Directive is to review and supplement the principles set out in Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA and to make significant progress in the protection of victims throughout the Union, in particular in criminal proceedings.