Abstract
This chapter discusses victim empowerment from a victimological perspective on three levels. The first concerns legislative issues. Selected Polish statutes aimed at giving greater protection to victims of crime are analyzed, along with their most recent amendments. The justifications for these amendments (i.e., the aims and assumptions that guided the legislature), which include compensation for victims of crime, the rights and safeguards for victims in criminal proceedings, and the situation regarding victims of domestic violence, are the main object of this study. The second level involves verifying how these legislative assumptions actually work in practice in the justice system. Assessing whether, and to what extent, victims of crime have been able to exercise their rights, i.e., the extent to which the justice system takes the interests of victims of crime into consideration and ensures that they are supported and protected and not subjected to secondary victimization, has been made possible by analyzing a variety of victimological studies. The third level involves analyzing discourse. Some of the public debate on signing the Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence, which was recently held in Poland, is elucidated and explained. The sometimes heated arguments that broke out among those both for and against show that the attitude to victims of crime and the necessity of ensuring them legal protection is a difficult subject in Poland. The very question of protecting and assisting victims is often pushed aside in favor of ideological contentions. The issues raised allow for an evaluation as to whether the rights of victims have been incorporated into the real aims of the Polish justice system or whether they remain no more than a pipe dream.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For more on punitiveness in Poland, see Klaus, Rzeplińska, and Woźniakowska-Fajst (2011).
- 2.
The “Victims’ Rights Charter” (www.elblag.policja.gov.pl/p_d_f/karta _praw_ofiary.pdf) is a Ministry of Justice initiative. Although it has no legal effect, the Charter lists the rights to which the victim is entitled, as well as information on the entities from whom or what they can be claimed.
- 3.
The authorisation of the court is given effect in imposing the obligation set out in CC Art. 72 § 1 Pt. 7a and Pt. 7b. This concerns the obligation to refrain from making contact with the victim or other persons in a specified manner or approaching the victim or other persons, as well as the obligation to vacate premises jointly occupied with the victim.
- 4.
Some of the most important changes include inserting a prohibition on parents and guardians administering corporal punishment to children into the Act of 25 February 1964—the Family and Guardianship Code (J.L. No. 9, Item 59 with amendments). On the other hand, two new penal measures were inserted into the Criminal Code, constituting a milestone in safeguarding the rights of victims of domestic violence: (1) the option of ordering a prohibition on approaching specific people for 1–15 years; and (2) the option of ordering the vacation of premises occupied jointly with the victim for 1–10 years.
- 5.
This change also brought about a change in the title of the Act by striking out the term “intentional.”
- 6.
In one case, the victim was examined 8 times as a witness, subjected to a medical examination, and made to participate in 3 line-ups with a witness and in 2 with a suspect. Moreover, a single examination of a rape victim is rare. Two are the norm and there are often three—and that is just in the preliminary proceedings (Dudka, 2012).
- 7.
Such activities should be the exception—especially in the cases surveyed. Being subjected to examinations has become tantamount to illegal deprivation of freedom. Presumably, the trauma that such a crime causes the victim and his/her reluctance to meet the offender again are not trivial.
- 8.
Data from the General Prosecutor to the Deputy Marshall of the Senate dated 23 January 2013 (No. PG II P 070/1/13).
- 9.
Although in the overwhelming majority of cases involving property damage, the offender repaired such damage either prior to judgement or by order of the court (together, this occurred in 94 % of cases) when the court ordered a conditional stay of proceedings (Jankowski, Momot, & Ważny, 2011: 32).
- 10.
The inordinately complicated form that has to be filed for compensation is also worth noting. This is incomprehensible to many victims. The courts have ordered applicants to put additional information in the form in 73 % of cases. This means that it must be completely incomprehensible to the public (Mazowiecka, 2012: 225).
- 11.
- 12.
Lawyers have seldom appeared in compensation cases. However, the courts have awarded the victim the monetary relief claimed in 68 % of the cases where they were present (Mazowiecka, 2012: 227–228).
- 13.
This has brought about enormous variation in the circumstances of victims. For example, wealthy people, who can afford a dental implant after losing a tooth as a result of a crime, will have their costs reimbursed, while poor people, who cannot meet these expenses upfront are left without any support. Some examples of the compensation that has been allowed in different cases: 2,525 vs. 86 EUR for having a tooth knocked out; 1,635 EUR for having two front teeth knocked out and sustaining a fractured skull; and 35 EUR for a disabled person who sustained multiple injuries, a fractured skull and a broken tooth (Mazowiecka, 2012: 323–325).
- 14.
It has to be stressed that even in cases where applications are dismissed as unfounded by virtue of being inconsistent with the Act, these proceedings take 5 months on average and the longest has taken almost 30 months. Additional work is frequently demanded from victims in these proceedings, even though a declaration that their applications are unfounded would be extremely simple in most cases, as the provisions of the Act make this plain (Mazowiecka, 2012: 228 and foll.).
- 15.
This compares with 55.3 % of convicted robbers receiving prison terms and 44.5 % receiving suspended sentences in 2012.
- 16.
These obligations mainly consist of refraining from alcohol (95 % overall) and rarely involve protecting the victim. The court has imposed an obligation to “improve behaviour towards the victim and desist from quarrelling” in 42 % of cases but has only ordered an apology to the victim in 4 %, prohibited contact in 2.5 %, and ordered the offender to vacate jointly occupied premises and not approach the victim in 1 % (Budyn-Kulik, 2009: 50).
- 17.
Judges have made similar appraisals in cases of women victims of human trafficking, assessing their way of life prior to falling victim to this crime and using such terms to describe them as “goods,” “prostitutes,” “young ladies” and “people in search of adventure” (Koss-Goryszewska, 2013; Namysłowska-Gabrysiak, 2010).
- 18.
Barely 1 in 19 men who use violence against women were punished for it (Gruszczyńska, 2007: 119–120).
References
Amir, M. (1967). Victim precipitated forcible rape. Journal of Criminology, Criminal Law and Police, 58(4), 493–502.
Bieńkowska, E. (2012). Wiktymizacja wtórna – geneza, istota i rola w przekształcaniu polityki traktowania ofiar przestępstw [Secondary victimisation: Its origin, its essence and its role in reforming crime victim policies]. In L. Mazowiecka (Ed.), Wiktymizacja wtórna – geneza, istota i rola w przekształcaniu polityki traktowania ofiar przestępstw [Secondary victimisation: Its origin, its essence and its role in reforming crime victim policies] (pp. 53–79). Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer.
Błachnio-Parzych, A. (2009). Samoistny środek karny jako instrument racjonalnej polityki karnej [The independent penal measure as a rational penal policy tool]. In J. Jakubowska-Hara & J. Skupiński (Eds.), Alternatywy pozbawienia wolności w polskiej polityce karnej [Alternatives to custodial sentences in Polish criminal policy] (pp. 142–169). Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.
Borkowska, O., & Płatek, M. (2011). Skala przestępstwa zgwałcenia w Polsce [The scale of rape in Poland]. In J. Piotrowska & A. Synakiewicz (Eds.), Dość Milczenia. Przemoc seksualna wobec kobiet i problem gwałtu w Polsce [Enough silence: Sexual violence against women and the issue of rape in Poland] (pp. 10–22). Warsaw: Fundacja Feminoteka.
Budyn-Kulik, M. (2009). Przemoc w rodzinie – analiza wiktymologiczna oraz prawnokarne środki przeciwdziałania [Domestic violence: Victimological analysis and criminal law preventive measures]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Budyn-Kulik, M. (2012). Oddziaływanie na sprawców przemocy w rodzinie przez sądy poprzez nakładanie obowiązku uczestnictwa w programach korekcyjno-edukacyjnych [The effect of court orders to participate in correctional and educational programs on domestic violence offenders]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Buzawa, E. S. (2013). Victims of domestic violence. In R. Davis, A. J. Lurigo, & S. Herman (Eds.), Victims of crime (pp. 29–56). Los Angeles: Sage.
Criminal Injuries Compensation Fund pays out € 12.7 million. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.government.nl/news/2014/03/17/criminal-injuries-compensation-fund-pays-out-12-7-million.html.
Dudka, K. (2006). Skuteczność instrumentów ochrony praw pokrzywdzonych w postępowaniu przygotowawczym w świetle badań empirycznych [The effectiveness of legal measures to protect victims in preliminary proceedings in light of empirical studies]. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS.
Dudka, K. (2012). Podstawy umorzenia i odmowy wszczęcia postępowania karnego w sprawach o przestępstwa zgwałcenia [Grounds for discontinuing and refusing to initiate criminal proceedings in rape cases]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Dudka, K., & Artymiak, G. (2012). Sytuacja pokrzywdzonego w procesie karnym, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem roli oskarżyciela posiłkowego i powoda cywilnego [The status of the victim in a criminal trial with a focus on the roles of auxiliary prosecutor and civil plaintiff]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Gardocka, T. (2012). Skazanie bez rozprawy w kontekście praw pokrzywdzonego [Judgement without trial in the context of victims’ rights]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Gardocki, L. (2011). Prawo karne [Criminal law]. Warsaw: C.H. BECK.
Garland, D. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gąsior, M. (2014). Pracuje w rządzie i przy episkopacie, napisał książkę z apb Hoserem [He works for the government and the episcopate, and wrote a book with abp. Hoser]. Retrieved from http://natemat.pl/85903,pracuje-w-rzadzie-i-przy-episkopacie-napisal-ksiazke-z-abp-hoserem-kim-jest-wiceminister-sprawiedliwosci-michal-krolikowski
Gawlik, P. (2013). Polacy nie zdaja sobie sprawy z zakazu bicia dzieci [Poles do not understand the prohibition on striking children]. Gazeta Wyborcza. Retrieved from http://wyborcza.pl/1,75478,14974844,Polacy_nie_zdaja_sobie_sprawy_z_zakazu_bicia_dzieci_.html.
Grabowska, M. (2011). Pomiędzy wiedzą a stereotypem: Instytucje publiczne i organizacje pomocowe wobec problemu gwałtu: Raport z badań [Between knowledge and stereotype: Public institutions and aid organisations on rape: Research report]. In J. Piotrowska & A. Synakiewicz (Eds.), Dość milczenia: Przemoc seksualna wobec kobiet i problem gwałtu w Polsce [Enough silence: Sexual violence against women and the issue of rape in Poland] (pp. 121–190). Warsaw: Fundacja Feminoteka.
Gruszczyńska, B. (2007). Przemoc wobec kobiet w Polsce: Aspekty prawnokryminologiczne [Violence against women in Poland: Legal and criminological aspects]. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer.
Grzegorczyk, T., & Tylman, J. (2003). Polskie Postępowanie karne [Polish criminal procedure]. Warsaw: Lexis Nexis.
Jankowski, M., Momot, S., & Ważny, A. (2011). Warunkowe umorzenie postępowania [Conditional stay of procedure]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Jordan, J. (2013). From victim to survivor – and from survivor to victim: Reconceptualising the survivor journey. Sexual Abuse in Australia and New Zealand, 5(2), 48–56.
Kamińska-Szmaj, I. (2001). Słowa na wolności [Words at large]. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Europa.
Kania, S. (2014). Kempa: nie dyskryminuję ideologii gender [Kempa: I do not discriminate against gender ideology]. Retrieved from http://www.wprost.pl/ar/432321/Kempa-Nie-dyskryminuje-ideologii-gender/.
Klaus, W., Rzeplińska, I., & Woźniakowska-Fajst, D. (2011). Development of punitiveness in Poland. In H. Kury & E. Shea (Eds.), Punitiveness: International developments (pp. 245–268). Bochum: Universitaetsverlag Brockmeyer.
Koss-Goryszewska, M. (2013). Wizerunek ofiary handlu kobietami w krajowym orzecznictwie karnym na podstawie analizy wyroków w sprawach o handel ludźmi w latach 1997–2009 [The image of the victims of trafficking in women in Polish case law based on an analysis of the judgments in human trafficking cases 1997–2009]. Archiwum Kryminologii, 35, 156–187.
Łagodziński, S. (2011). Praktyka przyznawania świadczeń na podstawie ustawy z 7. 7. 2005 r. o państwowej kompensacie przysługującej ofiarom niektórych przestępstw [The practice of admitting testimony on the basis of the Act on state compensation for victims of selected crimes of 7 July 2005]. Prawo w działaniu, 9, 119–141.
Marczewski, M. (2008). Powody niezadowolenia ofiar z przyjęcia zgłoszenia przestępstwa [Why victims are dissatisfied with the reception they receive when they report a crime]. In A. Siemaszko (Ed.), Geografia występku i strachu: Polskie Badanie Przestępczości’07 [Geography of crime and fear: Polish crime studies 2007] (pp. 53–60). Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Mazowiecka, L. (2012). Państwowa kompensata dla ofiar przestępstw [State compensation for victims of crime]. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer.
Ministry of Justice. (2013). Dorośli prawomocnie skazani wg rodzajów przestępstw i wymiaru kary w latach 2008–2012 [Finally sentenced adults by type of crime and size of penalty 2008–2012]. Warsaw: Ministry of Justice. Retrieved from http://isws.ms.gov.pl/pl/baza-statystyczna/opracowania-wieloletnie/download,2577,1.html.
Monkos, A. (2008). Ćwiąkalski nie chce zakazu bicia dzieci [Ćwiąkalski does not want to prohibit the striking of children]. Dziennik.pl. Retrieved from http://wiadomosci.dziennik.pl/polityka/artykuly/134195,cwiakalski-nie-chce-zakazu-bicia-dzieci.html.
Moolenaar, D. (2006). Expenditure on crime in the Netherlands. The Haag: WODC. Retrieved from http://wodc.nl/onderzoeksdatabase/me2006-1-expenditure-on-crime-in-the-netherlands.aspx.
MSU. (2008). Polacy podzieleni w kwestii bicia dzieci [Poles divided on the issue of striking children]. Retrieved from http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/kraj/polacy-podzieleni-w-kwestii-bicia-dzieci/ttp02.
Namysłowska-Gabrysiak, B. (2010). Analiza orzeczeń sądowych za lata 1999–2009 w sprawach dotyczących handlu ludźmi z art. 253 k.k. oraz wybranych losowo spraw z art. 204 § 4 k.k. [Analysis of judgments in human trafficking cases decided under CC Art. 253 and randomly selected cases decided under CC Art. 204 § 4 1999–2009]. Warsaw: Instytut Wymiaru Sprawiedliwości.
Niełaczna, M. (2007). Kompensata dla ofiar przestępstw – prawo a praktyka: Raport z monitoringu działania ustawy o państwowej kompensacie dla ofiar niektórych przestępstw umyślnych [Compensation for victims of crime – law and practice: Monitoring report on the working of the Act on state compensation for victims of selected crimes]. Warsaw: Stowarzyszenie Interwencji Prawnej.
O’Sullivan, C. S. (2013). Sexual violence victimization of women, men, youth, and children. In R. Davis, A. J. Lurigo, & S. Herman (Eds.), Victims of crime (pp. 3–28). Los Angeles: Sage.
PAP. (2013). Burza po wpisie Guziała o gwałcie na Kabatach [Storm over Guział’s Kabaty rape comments]. Retrieved from http://tvp.info/informacje/polska/burza-po-wpisie-guziala-o-gwalcie-na-kabatach/12308702.
Piotrowska, J., & Synakiewicz, A. (2011). Wstęp [Admission]. In J. Piotrowska & A. Synakiewicz (Eds.), Dość Milczenia: Przemoc seksualna wobec kobiet i problem gwałtu w Polsce [Enough silence: Sexual violence against women and the issue of rape in Poland] (pp. 4–9). Warsaw: Fundacja Feminoteka.
Płatek, M. (2011). Przestępstwo zgwałcenia w świetle prawa i perspektywy osób pokrzywdzonych [Rape as viewed by victims and the law]. In J. Piotrowska & A. Synakiewicz (Eds.), Dość Milczenia: Przemoc seksualna wobec kobiet i problem gwałtu w Polsce [Enough silence: Sexual violence against women and the issue of rape in Poland] (pp. 23–43). Warsaw: Fundacja Feminoteka.
Protest przeciw ustawie [Protest against statute]. (2010). Retrieved from https://pl-pl.facebook.com/pages/Protest-przeciw-ustawie-u%C5%82atwiaj%C4%85cej-urz%C4%99dnikom-odbieranie-dzieci-rodzinom/352958063948.
Ratyfikujmy Konwencję Rady Europy w sprawie zapobiegania i zwalczania przemocy wobec kobiet i przemocy domowej! – Petycja [Poland ratifies Convention on combating violence against women and domestic violence! Petition]. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.niebieskalinia.pl/4862-ratyfikujmy-konwencje-rady-europy-w-sprawie-zapobiegania-i-zwalczania-przemocy-wobec-kobiet-i-przemocy-domowej-petycja.
Spurek, S. (2012). Komentarz do ustawy z dnia 10 czerwca 2010 r. o zmianie ustawy o przeciwdziałaniu przemocy w rodzinie oraz niektórych innych ustaw: Przeciwdziałanie przemocy w rodzinie: Komentarz [Commentary on the Act on changes to the Act on countering domestic violence and certain other acts: Countering domestic violence: commentary]. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer.
Szulc, A. (2013). Żona nie krzyczy [My wife doesn’t shout]. Newsweek Polska, (40). Retrieved from http://polska.newsweek.pl/zona-nie-krzyczy-malzenstwo-gwalt-przemoc-maz-zona-newsweek-pl,artykuly,271465,1.html.
Trojanowska, M. (2013). Konwencja Rady Europy o zapobieganiu i zwalczaniu przemocy wobec kobiet i przemocy domowej furtką do wprowadzenia gender? [Council of Europe Convention on violence against women and domestic violence paving the way for gender ideology?]. Retrieved from http://www.fronda.pl/a/konwencji-rady-europy-o-zapobieganiu-i-zwalczaniu-przemocy-wobec-kobiet-i-przemocy-domowej-i-gender,31638.html.
Ula. (2013). Odbieranie dzieci rodzicom – prawo i rzeczywistość [Removing children from their parents – the law and the reality]. Retrieved from http://www.familie.pl/artykul/Odbieranie-dzieci-rodzicom-prawo-i-rzeczywistosc,6586,1.html.
van Dijk, J., van Kesteren, J., & Smit, P. (2007). Criminal victimisation in international perspective: Key findings from the 2004–2005 ICVS and EU ICS. Den Haag: WODC.
Walklate, S. (2009). Victims and the state. In R. Coleman, J. Sim, S. Tombs, & D. Whyte (Eds.), State, power, crime (pp. 174–184). London: Sage.
Walkowiak, W. (2011). Prawa ofiar przestępstw [The rights of victims of crime]. Homines Hominibus, 7, 115–126.
Wiktorska, P. (2013). Nowelizacja ustawy o przeciwdziałaniu przemocy w rodzinie – w kierunku racjonalizacji czy biurokracji [Reforming the Act on countering domestic violence – towards rationalisation or bureaucratisation]. In A. Rzeplinski, I. Rzeplinska, M. Niełaczna, & P. Wiktorska (Eds.), Pozbawienie wolności – funkcje i koszty: Księga jubileuszowa Profesora Teodora Szymanowskiego [Custodial sentences – functions and costs: Volume in commemoration of professor Teodor Szymanowski] (pp. 419–437). Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer.
Wittenberg, A. (2013). Nowa polska obelga zastąpiła żyda, pedała, komunistę [New Polish insult replaces Jew, homo, communist]. Retrieved from http://natemat.pl/31767,nowa-polska-obelga-feministka-zastapila-zyda-pedala-i-komuniste.
Wrona, G. (2011). Obowiązki nakładane na osoby skazane z art. 207 § 1 k.k. w orzecznictwie sądów rejonowych [Obligations imposed on people sentenced under CC Art. 207 § 1 in the regional courts]. Archiwum Kryminologii, 33, 213–226.
Wybranowski, W. (2013). Urzędnicy odbierają rodzinie dzieci [Officials remove children from family]. Tygodnik Lisieckiego Dorzeczy.pl. Retrieved from http://dorzeczy.pl/urzednicy-odbieraja-dzieci/.
Zaduminska, B. (2006). Sytuacja ofiar zgwałcenia w postępowaniu przygotowawczym: Raport z monitoringu [Status of rape victims in preliminary proceedings: Monitoring report]. Kraków. Retrieved from http://www.ekologiasztuka.pl/pdf/f0037zaduminska.pdf.
Zedner, L. (2002). Victims. In M. Maguire, R. Morgan, & R. Reiner (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of criminology (pp. 419–456). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zweig, J., & Yahner, J. (2013). Providing services to victims of crime. In R. Davis, A. J. Lurigo, & S. Herman (Eds.), Victims of crime (pp. 325–347). Los Angeles: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Klaus, W., Buczkowski, K., Wiktorska, P. (2015). Empowering the Victims of Crime: A Real Goal of the Criminal Justice System or No More Than a Pipe Dream?. In: Meško, G., Tankebe, J. (eds) Trust and Legitimacy in Criminal Justice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09813-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09813-5_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09812-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09813-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)