Implementing victims' rights : a case study of India

Abstract

In contemporary criminal justice systems, the state brings a criminal prosecution, thereby reducing the status of a victim to a witness instead of a party. When a crime is committed, it is the victim who is the prime sufferer and seeks justice to get a sense of satisfaction and healing. However, the victim loses control over criminal proceedings due to the theory of public wrong, that the state acts as guardian to its citizens and takes over the criminal prosecution. Such an arrangement can lead to alienation of victims from the criminal process, resulting in their dissatisfaction and misery. The existing literature suggests the justice authorities and police can contribute to the ‘secondary victimization’ of victims by keeping them uninvolved and uninformed about the status of their own case. With the constant efforts of victim groups, the concept of victims’ rights, encompassing the rights to be informed, to participate in trials, to provide a victim impact statement, to compensation, to protection, etc., has been introduced to enable victims to have a certain standing in the criminal process. However, there is an inconsistency among jurisdictions in the adoption and implementation of these victims’ rights. As a result, even though the issue of victim alienation has evolved, it is far from being adequately addressed across jurisdictions. The focus of the prevailing literature is mainly on arguing in favour of victims’ rights and debating the effectiveness of such rights. This research takes the discussion on victims’ rights forward by developing conceptual models of implementation of victims’ rights. It also studies the different ways in which victims’ rights have been practically implemented across jurisdictions with specific attention paid to India. The questions addressed in the research are as follows:

Q1. With reference to the purposes served by victims’ rights, what are the different conceptual models of implementation of victims’ rights?

Q2. Using the conceptual models developed for Q1 and from studying how countries have implemented victims’ rights, is it possible to construct a framework to describe, compare and evaluate different approaches to the implementation of victims’ rights?

Q3. Applying the framework developed for Q2, how has India implemented victims’ rights and what reforms should it consider adopting and why?

In this research, using a qualitative methodology, doctrinal and empirical research methods have been adopted. For framing different conceptual models of implementation of victims’ rights, the doctrinal research on the existing criminal justice (process) models has been helpful. The legislative review along with policy guidelines for the implementation of victims’ rights has served as the main source for studying the various victims’ rights implementation approaches. In developing an illustrative case study, empirical research has been conducted in India with victims, judges, public prosecutors and other relevant stakeholders in the criminal process to identify and analyze the existing implementation of victims’ rights. Reforms are suggested.