Introduction
Identified as « the science about victims and victimity», in the 1940s, the term victim was outlined in a general way, attributing to it all possible assumptions in this matter.
With the fatal consequences that World War II brought to humanity, students of the subject begin to feel the need to investigate and with it, publish various works related to crime victims. Among other authors stands out in outlining these concepts, the father of this knowledge, and author of the book SyracuseThe criminal and her victims Rouge, the German researcher Hans von Hentig who focuses her studies on the different victim typologies based on biological and social factors
In our positive law victimological studies that influenced the intellectuals of the time stand out. In this sense, highlights the draft Penal Code of Don Fernando Ortiz, of 1926, where ten articles are allocated to compensation for damages and protection of victims.
The importance and focus on the subject is on the rise and it was not until 1973 that the First International Symposium on Victimology was held in Jerusalem, where its members met every three years, being founded in Germany in 1979, in its third session: the World Society of Victimology, where they raise criteria and reflections as to whether this is an independent science or is part of Criminology. The emerging discipline is emancipated from the mere criminal emphasis, and begins to advocate for the rights of victims from a constitutional perspective, which implies placing more emphasis on macro-victimization events, that is, events in which large groups are victimized.
There is talk of macrovictimizations for abuse of power, something that Benjamin Mendelshon had already outlined, and it begins to acquire disciplinary autonomy to stop being an appendix of criminal law and criminology, which is where the dogmatic victim reflection and the issue of rights of victims within the criminal process.
The present work aims in a general way, to identify the concept of victimology, its doctrinal classification, as well as the treatment they receive in criminal legislation, those subjects called victims of crime and what has been in terms of prevention, the positions adopted before the phenomenon victimological, in our society.
Victimology in the criminal process
Victimology is the study of the causes for which certain people are victims of a crime and how the lifestyle entails a greater or lesser probability that a certain person is a victim of a crime.The field of victimology includes or may include, depending on the different authors, a large number of disciplines or subjects, such as: Anthropology, Biology, Psychology, Psychiatry, Medicine, Criminal Law, which concur in its study method to study the victim, using their own methods and claims, thanks to which a victimological knowledge has been consolidated, thus resulting in the need for a science that integrates and coordinates the information from these other sciences applied to the victim phenomenon. Being a requirement of scientific knowledge, victimologists should continue their work to place this system of knowledge in a higher instance, of that transdisciplinary structure.
Victimology is a science that scientifically studies the victim and their role in the crime, which we cannot affirm that this is an experimental science, because it is not ethical to victimize in order to experiment, which does concern applying the method of study in the field of therapeutics and victim prevention, where the use of the empirical method for the study of the criminal phenomenon made up of the victim-offender binomial constitutes a fundamental essence of the victimological interest.
The study of victims is multidisciplinary and does not refer only to victims of a crime, but also to those who are victims of accidents (traffic), natural disasters, war crimes and abuse of power. Professionals related to victimology can be scientists, legal, social or political operators.
The study of victims can be carried out from the perspective of a particular victim or from an epistemological point of view, analyzing the causes for which groups of individuals are more or less likely to be affected.
Luis Rodríguez Manzanera identifies the object of study of victimology, based on three fundamental elements: the individual level represented by the victim, a behavioral level related to victimization and a general level that would be victimity.
Victimology has developed especially in the last decade. At present, there is an increasing presence of Cuban specialists dedicated to victimological issues, although they are still insufficient, if we compare the knowledge that has been developed in this science at the international level and the guarantees that the Cuban revolutionary process has created to give it increasing satisfaction of the needs of the population.
The victimization process was understood to be the chain of facts or circumstances or acts that cause harm, prejudice, impairment or suffering to the victim, studying the primary victimization, which lies in the individual experience received by the crime and the secondary victimization that is derived of the victim's relations with the penal system.
Primary Victimization
In primary victimization, no significant differences were found in any of the variables with sex and age, nor were risk factors identified.
The theory of "routine activities" of Cohen and Felson (1979: 589, cited by Viano, E. 1999: 10) can help in the reflection on what could be happening. This theory has been tested in property crimes with positive results. These authors privilege the situations that provide the opportunity to commit crimes rather than the personal characteristics of the individuals who commit them.
To fully understand these opportunities, the authors present three concepts that must interact in space and time: motivated perpetrators, appropriate targets, and the absence of guardians capable of acting against violations.
The impact of the economic limitations of the last decade in Cuba has limited the mobility options of the population and this leads to narrowing the range of daily activities of the victim, making it easier for the perpetrator to evaluate their possible movements. The suitability of the victim would be given by the circumstances of the routine of their activities, the existence of objects that are accessible to the offender and that he knows the situation.
The consequences of crime were seen in two fundamental dimensions: the psychological effects and the economic effects.
The economic consequences refer not only to the loss of the objects, but also to the expenses, which after the crime, the family members must assume to return what was stolen, repair the damage caused and take new security measures for the home.
Psychologically, after the initial alarm reaction, feelings undergo a reorganization and psychological effects undergo a transformation as time goes by.
The fear or fear caused by the criminal act acquires special importance because it not only occurs at the individual level or the family nucleus, but also extends to the community and is transformed into a collective experience or state of mind, which generates consequences of greater importance; associated or not with a previous victimization.
Lahosa Cañellas, J (1992: 205) affirms that victimization surveys show that people prefer to protect their properties, even above self-protection measures that protect their own physical integrity.
Secondary Victimization
The first contact that the victim has with the justice system is when it is going to make the complaint. The main reason, the first reason for the victims studied was to recover the object, a reasonable motivation, taking into account how difficult it is to recover family assets or objects and memories.
The second argument is to make the fact known to the police so that they can fulfill their role of criminal search and prosecution. Not of less importance are the reasons why impunity is not favored, "it is a duty" and "to punish the guilty."
In the investigations carried out by Shapland and Cohen, cited by Beristain, A. (1999: 77), similar results are raised, where the victims in the first contacts with the police are satisfied with the police behavior, but this situation worsens over time. long of time; they are finding less understanding and above all they complain about lack of information.
The satisfaction of the victim in relation to the criminal process can be evaluated in two senses: one is related to his role as a witness and the other to his appreciation of the trial as such.
In this sense, the victims direct their preference to be part of the process, to present evidence and to any other act derived from a greater participation in it, although they favor the systematic information they wish to receive about their case.
These interesting responses are an expression of the limitations that victims feel in the judicial process and exemplify why leading specialists at the international level advocate for legislative changes in favor of greater rights for victims.
By way of conclusion, it can be noted that the victim of the crime suffers not only a loss of property, but also economic, psychological and social effects that extend well beyond the moment of the crime.
The failure of this effort begins with the few subsequent contacts with the police and the poor information he receives from them, which influences an ambiguous expectation about the possible solution of his case.
The clarification of the crime and the information on the case, even if it is not entirely favorable, become the most important and expected indicators by the interviewees, not only because it measures the efficiency of the system operators but because it allows the victim to possible compensation for the stolen objects and the fullness of the feeling of justice.
Compliance with this type of research in the country reveals the usefulness of the studies of victimization processes that are configured according to the particularity of each crime and whose results allow the creation of specific programs or measures that contribute to their prevention. and to the satisfaction of the victims.
The tasks whose objectives are crime prevention and assistance to victims are closely linked and the actions derived from them can be perfected through the Prevention and Social Care Commissions that exist at all levels in each country, including at the community level and made up of key institutions such as representatives of the agencies, education, health, justice, work and social security, among others.
The specialists who currently carry out victimological investigations and promote their development are convinced that this would allow to reduce the impact of the criminal event, would allow the development of measures that activate assistance work in the community, facilitate training in victimological assistance and make possible the attention to the victim.
Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that despite the numerous regulations enunciated in favor of the victim, our national laws suffer from omissions and imperfections for the same, especially when she is located within the process as a mere witness.
- Once a criminal act has been reported, it is impossible for the victim to escape the criminal process.
- It is not a party to the process nor does it have the right to review the proceedings because it is considered that its interests are represented by the Prosecutor on behalf of the State.
- When it comes to a victim-witness of charges, fearful of possible reprisals on the part of the accused, his relatives or friends, lacks police and legal protection.
- As a victim-witness, you cannot witness the development of the oral trial.
- You are obliged to testify and conform to the truth, or otherwise you could commit the crime of perjury, running the risk of becoming a victim into a defendant.
- If you do not attend the official summons notified by the operators of the judicial system without justified reason, you may be fined and conducted by the public force, and if you persist in your conduct you may be prosecuted for the crime of denial of assistance to justice.
- The ascendants, descendants and relatives of the accused up to the fourth degree of consanguinity are not obliged to testify against him, however, there is no equal excuse in the case of the relatives of the victims, who are often victimized also for various reasons.
- In most of the Criminal Procedure laws, the victim only has the right to exercise the private action in the case of free dismissal, after fulfilling the requirements required by the Law.
- Once the accused has been acquitted or if the victim is dissatisfied with the sanction imposed, if the State decides not to appeal the sentence, the victim does not have the right to appeal himself.
For all of the above, it is evident that any modification to the Criminal Legislation in favor of the situation of the victims in the process will be a step forward for society and its men.
Prevention from a victimological perspective
Prevention can be defined as the set of measures designed to prevent a certain event from occurring, from reoccurring, or to reducing its frequency or severity. One of those measures is victim prevention.
If we start from the Theory of Opportunity, we said that for criminal behavior to occur, three elements must be present: a predisposed criminal, a suitable victim and an absence of control.
For prevention purposes, given the difficulty involved in persuading someone who is willing to commit the crime, it seems clear that it was necessary to act on the victim or on the control systems. But how to act? Well, for example, with prevention programs aimed at certain groups especially predisposed to suffer victimization, with awareness campaigns on surveillance and security measures, installation of security cameras, increasing security personnel, etc..
Some authors, such as BARBERET, are especially critical of this type of prevention, arguing that in a way it implies a restriction of rights over people, over possible victims, while these restrictions should fall on the offender.
As an example, in sexual crimes, in order to avoid aggression, it is recommended not to go out at night, to exercise extreme precautions, etc., or in cases of robberies in homes, homes tend to become fortresses, but all these measures that represent restriction of rights should fall on the offender and not have to bear the victim.
This theory, obviously, does not hold because it limits itself to criticizing victim prevention but does not say how the offender should be acted upon to avoid committing crimes.
It should be borne in mind that the main victim prevention mechanism is revealed by information campaigns.
For their part, FELSON and CLARKE have referred to the means of social control (formal and informal) and to individuals as the essential nuclei of crime prevention.
In short, we can define victim prevention as the application of a series of measures to modify the environment and the living conditions of potential victims in order to restrict criminal opportunities to a minimum.
Importance of the complaint
The complaint of the victim can occur immediately after the assault or be delayed in time and forms a subsequent mechanism of the «iter victim».
The victim represents the key of the legal system, it is the one that has in his hands the implementation of the penal system, since the filing of his complaint entails the action of the system and the correction of the aggressor. Their role is especially important in semi-public crimes in which the formalization of the complaint is required to be able to prosecute them.
The role of the victim is associated with three main areas:
As a primary detector of social deviations from the criminal law.
As a quantifier of damages and violations of legal rights.
And as a participant in the selection of criminal responses.
We can say, therefore, that the complaint, as victim cooperation, is essential nucleus to prevent crime.
However, in the behavior of the victim we can distinguish two hypotheses: that they file a complaint or that they do not. His decision is influenced by a number of factors, both inhibiting and favoring the complaint.
A) Factors inhibiting the complaint:
- Insufficient motivation, apathy or lack of incentives (eg the damage caused is minimal)
- Distrust in the system, shown by the lack of protection and fear of reprisals by the perpetrator. Fear is an essential deterrent factor to refrain from filing a complaint and can act in two ways: definitive (in which case there will be no complaint) or temporary (the complaint is filed later, which generates other problems such as loss of evidence).
- Ignorance or lack of knowledge, as in cases of victims asleep or deprived of knowledge, battered women who are not aware of their situation, etc.
B) Factors favoring the complaint:
Following HERRERA MORENO, the following are fundamentally distinguished:
The feeling of social duty.
The desire for emotional and financial satisfaction.
And the intention to find a way out of a conflict.
Of these hypotheses, perhaps the second is the one that supposes a greater motivation for the victims, but the truth is that it is very difficult for them to satisfy their expectations through the complaint, so after a first judicial experience the victim thinks a lot more to formalize it again.
Prevention models
In the field of victim prevention we can distinguish three major prevention models: evolutionary, situational and social.
a) Evolutionary model
This model is based on the idea that it is possible to identify risk factors for criminal behavior of the subjects. They are factors of an individual, family and school nature, which act as predictors of the subject's behavior, and allow predicting future criminal behavior. As an example, school failure, alcohol abuse, drug use, etc.
This model proposes to carry out intervention programs on these people who are at risk of crime, programs such as training in social skills, control of impulsivity, school programs, etc. The objective of these programs would be to tackle the risk factors associated with criminal behavior. The main criticism of this model is that it is trying to intervene in pre-criminal situations, that is, before behaviors that have not yet become a criminal offense, so it is impossible to impose such programs on the subjects.
b) Situational Model:
It is based on the Theory of Opportunity (for criminal behavior to occur, three elements must concur: a predisposed offender, a propitious victim and an absence of control) and tries to avoid the concurrence of these three variables by acting on one or more of them.
As already mentioned, for these prevention purposes, given the difficulty involved in persuading the offender, it seems clear that it was necessary to act especially on the victim or on the control systems.
c) Social prevention model
This model finds its foundation in the Theory of social disorganization.
This theory says that in cities there are areas that register higher crime rates, called transition zones, in which a population in decline coexists, with frequent problems and a large movement of people, which produces that social disorganization that will end up generating crime.
Here it is proposed to act on such disorganization that criminality originates, advocating for the establishment of social structures that reduce crime rates.
By way of conclusion, of the three models cited, for prevention purposes, it seems that the most real is the situational model, since the evolutionary model presents application problems due to its pre-criminal intervention, and the social model does not take into account that the The intervention of the victims is limited because they are immersed in disorganization.
Bibliography
Beristain, Antonio. (1999) Does society / judiciary attend to its victim-witnesses ?. Victimology Magazine 18. Crime Victim Assistance Center. Editorial Advocatus. Cordoba Argentina. Page 37-101.
Cohen, Lawrence, and Marcus Felson. Taken from Viano, Emilio (1999). Daily life and Victimization, Victimology Magazine 18. Editorial Advocatus. Argentina. Page 7-35
Lahosa Cañellas, Josep M. (1992). The Perception of the citizens of Barcelona of citizen security. Papers D`Estudis Magazine. Formacio 8 Cycosa Graphics. Catalonia. Page 201-205.
Collective of Authors, Criminology. Editorial Félix Varela, page 298-332.
