Ulteriori informazioni
This edited collection addresses the obstacles and challenges on prosecuting domestic violence cases effectively as the ECtHR stressed its significance in various landmark judgments such as Opuz v. Turkey, 2009. The perpetrators of domestic violence (and violence against women) may enjoy impunity or receive lenient punishment and this lies as one of the main concerns of victims as well as lack of protection of victims. Just recently, in 2020, the ECtHR highlighted that violence against women was under-reported, under-investigated, under-prosecuted, and under-sentenced. (Tërshana v. Albania, para. 156). This is mainly because that domestic violence cases have their challenging features that that bring out some obstacles for carrying out an effective investigation such as victim s vulnerability, requiring a prompt response and taking reasonable and appropriate measures for protection of women victim and difficulties on obtaining evidence and the like . It is quite common that the victim may withdraw their complaint under the pressure of the perpetrators. Further, the victims mostly do not want their partners to be prisoned, rather they simply seek for ending violence. Therefore, these cases requires a peculiar prosecution approach unlike incident-based crime such as burglary. Therefore, a holistic approach to domestic violence cases is essential. Considering domestic violence cases challenging features also for procedural authorities in terms of evidence or qualification of violent act as unique or multiples, as expressed in the legal sense of criminal law concepts, with respect to the vulnerability of the victims. DV [domestic violence] cases are difficult to prosecute . The classical tools and approach of the criminal law may fail to response these cases effectively. The comparative analysis draws conclusions from different jurisdictions in Europe, as such, to reach a holistic solution on how to tackle the issue of ineffective criminal prosecution.
Sommario
Introduction: A Comparative Approach to Domestic Violence.- Part I: Jurisdictional Contributions: Main Obstacles to an Effective Criminal Prosecution.- Prosecuting Domestic Violence: Balancing the Public and the Private Interest: The Example of Greek Legislation.- How to Initiate the Criminal Prosecution of a Domestic Violence Case, ex officio or ex parte?: The Example of Turkish Law.- Punitive and Preventive Measures against Domestic Violence in Italy: A Critical Assessment.- Domestic Violence in Spain from a Gender Perspective: Risk Assessment and Analysis.- The Role of Police and Prosecutorial Bodies in Resolving Cases of Domestic Violence: The Example of Serbia.- The Vulnerability of Domestic Violence Victims from A Gender Perspective in Spanish Criminal Proceedings: Challenges and Proposals against the Phenomenon of Secondary Victimization.- Right to Access a Lawyer for Victims of Domestic Violence: The Example of Italian Criminal Justice.- Applicability of Restorative Justice in Cases of Domestic Violence- Case Study of Bosnia and Herzegovina.- The Holistic Approach Towards Domestic Violence and the Urgent Need for Its Effective Implementation: The Case of Republic of North Macedonia.- Part II: The ECtHR s Perspective: Positive Obligation and State s Intervention in Domestic Violence.- The State's Duty to Protect Domestic Violence Victims from a Gender Perspective: Brief Reference to the Jurisprudential Developments of the European Court of Human Rights Jurisprudence.- Post-Talpis Reflections: Reassessing and Redefining ECHR Standards and Italy s Approach to Domestic Violence.- Concluding Remarks: Common Problems and Core Solutions in Prosecuting Domestic Violence.
Info autore
Dr. Rahime Erbä is an associate professor of criminal law at Istanbul University. She completed her law degree at Selçuk University and her master’s in public law at Istanbul University, with an Erasmus term at Justus Liebig University in Gießen. She received her PhD in 2019 on the topic of omissions in criminal law. Dr. Erbä conducted doctoral research at Osnabrück University (2016–2017) and was a visiting scholar at the Max Planck Institute in Freiburg, the University of Zürich, Freie Universität Berlin, and the University of Bologna. Between 2023 and 2024, she was a TÜB¿TAK fellow at the University of Glasgow, conducting postdoctoral research in criminal law and justice. She has also collaborated with the Turkish Ministry of Justice on offender intervention programs. Dr. Erbä has edited and authored books on criminal law, gender-based violence, and comparative criminal procedure, including titles with Istanbul University Press, Pisa University Press and Lexington. She is section editor at the
Journal of Penal Law and Criminology and serves on the editorial board of
Women’s Studies International Forum (Elsevier).
Riassunto
This edited collection addresses the obstacles and challenges on prosecuting domestic violence cases effectively as the ECtHR stressed its significance in various landmark judgments such as Opuz v. Turkey, 2009. The perpetrators of domestic violence (and violence against women) may enjoy impunity or receive lenient punishment and this lies as one of the main concerns of victims as well as lack of protection of victims. Just recently, in 2020, the ECtHR highlighted that “violence against women was under-reported, under-investigated, under-prosecuted, and under-sentenced.” (Tërshana v. Albania, para. 156). This is mainly because that ‘domestic violence cases have their challenging features that that bring out some obstacles for carrying out an effective investigation such as victim’s vulnerability, requiring a prompt response and taking reasonable and appropriate measures for protection of women victim and difficulties on obtaining evidence and the like’. It is quite common that the victim may withdraw their complaint under the pressure of the perpetrators. Further, the victims mostly do not want their partners to be prisoned, rather they simply seek for ending violence. Therefore, these cases requires a peculiar prosecution approach unlike incident-based crime such as burglary. Therefore, ‘a holistic approach to domestic violence cases is essential. Considering domestic violence cases’ challenging features — also for procedural authorities in terms of evidence or qualification of violent act as unique or multiples, as expressed in the legal sense of criminal law concepts, with respect to the vulnerability of the victims. ‘DV [domestic violence] cases are difficult to prosecute’. The classical tools and approach of the criminal law may fail to response these cases effectively. The comparative analysis draws conclusions from different jurisdictions in Europe, as such, to reach a holistic solution on how to tackle the issue of ineffective criminal prosecution.
