Victims in the Dutch Criminal Justice System: The effects of Treatment on Victims’ Attitudes and Compliance
| DOI | 10.1177/026975809500300405 |
| Published date | 01 January 1995 |
| Date | 01 January 1995 |
| Author | Jo-Anne Wemmers |
International
Review ofVictimology,
1995,
Vol.
3,
pp.
323-341
0269-7580/95 $10
©
1995
A B Academic Publishers-Printed
in
Great Britain
VICTIMS
IN
THE
DUTCH
CRIMINAL
JUSTICE
SYSTEM:
THE
EFFECTS
OF
TREATMENT
ON
VICTIMS'
ATTITUDES
AND
COMPLIANCE
JO-ANNE
WEMMERS*
Ministry
of
Justice,
Research
and
Documentation
Centre,
Terminal
Noord,
Schedeldoekshaven
131,
2511
EM
The
Hague,
The
Netherlands
ABSTRACT
The
present
study
attempts
to
address the question of
how
victim notification influences
the
relationship between victims
and
the
criminal justice system.
It
examines empirically
the
effects
of victim notification
on
their satisfaction with
the
performance of the public prosecution, their
feelings of obligation to obey
the
law
and
law-abiding
behavior.
It
does
so
by
reporting the results
of a survey that
was
conducted
as
part of the evaluation of
new
measures
to
improve
the
position
of victims within
the
criminal justice system, which
are
currently being introduced
in
the
Nether-
lands. Procedures that allow
the
passive participation of victims
in
the
criminal justice procedure
are
judged
to
be
more
fair than procedures which exclude victims. Moreover,
how
victims
are
treated
by
the
prosecution
has
a significant impact
on
their subsequent attitudes towards authorities
and
their
law
abiding behaviour. Following a review of the literature concerning the impact of
victim participation
in
the criminal justice system
and
a description of recent developments
in
the
treatment of victims
in
the
Dutch criminal procedure, the method and results of the present
study
are
described.
The
paper closes with a discussion of the findings
and
their implications
for
victim
policy.
INTRODUCTION
In the Netherlands, guidelines for police and public prosecutors regarding the
treatment
of
victims were first introduced in 1986. Initially the guidelines applied
only to victims of serious violent and/or sex crimes but a year later they were
extended to include all victims
of
felonies (Richtlijnen, 1987). The Dutch victim
guidelines are directed at the rendering
of
actual services by the police and the
prosecutors to victims. The legal position
of
victims is still relatively weak. The
authorities have been given well defined duties concerning victims. These include
asking victims
if
they want to be kept informed
of
the developments in their case
and if they desire restitution from the offender. Furthermore, they are required to
inform victims who want information and to assist in arranging restitution.
Since 1987, efforts to improve the position
ofthe
victim in the criminal justice
system have continued. In 1988 the committee Terwee, named after the woman
who chaired the committee, Mrs C.A. Terwee-van Hilten, made a number
of
recommendations to improve the basis for new legislation which has been
*Correspondence
to
P.O.
Box
20301,
2500
EH
The
Hague,
The
Netherlands
324
accepted by the Dutch parliament. This legislation, commonly referred to as
'Terwee', expands the existing possibilities for victims to obtain restitution within
the criminal justice procedure. This includes, for example, the introduction
of
restitution orders. Together with this legislation a new set
of
guidelines has been
developed. Under the new guidelines police and public prosecutors continue to
be
responsible for information and restitution for victims
of
crime. Through these
new measures it is hoped that relationship between citizens and government will
improve (MvT, wetsvoorstel21345). The new guidelines and legislation are being
introduced gradually. In April1993 they were introduced in two regional offices
of
the public prosecutor. Two years later, in 1995, they will be introduced
nationally.
Research shows that notification is important for victims. Shapland et a/.
(1985), for example find that victims want a "respected and acknowledged role"
within the criminal justice system. Participation can involve an opportunity to
express one's concern about the crime or simply being kept informed about what
is happening in one's case. Victim participation in the criminal justice process -
active or passive -is important for victims' conception
of
fairness (Umbreit,
1990). Research on procedural justice confirms that participation in legal proce-
dures is important to citizens' judgements about whether the legal authorities
acted fairly. Legal procedures which do not allow the parties involved in a dispute
to participate are judged to be less fair than procedures in which the parties are
given this opportunity (Thibaut and Walker, 1975; Tyler, 1988, 1990). These
findings suggest that when victims are treated in accordance with the guidelines,
they should feel that they have been treated fairly.
An important goal
of
victim policy is to improve the relationship between
citizens and government. Various studies support this assumption. For example,
Shapland eta/. (1985) fmd that failure by the police or courts to inform the victim
of
the developments in his/her case forms an important source
of
dissatisfaction
with authorities. The authors emphasize the importance
of
a fair procedure,
finding that the inability
of
police to catch the offender has little influence on
victim satisfaction. This conclusion is also reached by
Vander
Vijver (1983;
1993). Within the framework
of
civil law, research on procedural justice suggests
that procedures and processes influence the satisfaction
of
those subject to the
procedure (Thibaut and Walker, 1975). Moreover, research on procedural justice
shows that although the favourability and fairness
of
outcomes are often found
to affect procedural justice judgements, fair procedures have an independent
influence on evaluations. Fair procedures provide a "cushion
of
support" making
unfavourable outcomes more palatable (Lind and Tyler, 1988; Tyler, 1990).
Others argue that outcomes are more important than treatment and consequent-
ly victim participation can have a negative effect on victim satisfaction with the
justice system. For example, Fattah (1986) argues that victim participation may
create expectations among victims that are not or could not be met. Disappoint-
ment following negative outcomes may aggravate the victim's feeling
of
frustra-
tion and dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system. Erez and Tontodonato
To continue reading
Request your trial