Abstract
Crime victims’ compensation has become a major issue within Dutch criminal policy. Legal procedures have been subject to change, leading towards the convergence of tort law and criminal law. Such a convergence calls for a reflection (on the application) of the core concepts of responsibility, accountability and liability. Moreover, the current pursuit of victims’ compensation affects procedural issues, specifically with regard to the issue of enforcement. Leaving aside the issue of the legitimacy of victims’ compensation, this convergence raises the question of how to preserve the delicate balance that flows from the use of the law as an instrument to preserve social order. The topical question is not whether convergence is occurring, but how we must deal with it in order to find a (new) equilibrium between the public interest and the interest of the individual who has experienced a harmful wrong.
Highlights
From the mid-1980s onwards the image and the position of the victim has changed; as a result an extra layer has been added to the concept of crime: ‘crime’ nowadays represents a violation of the public interest, as well as a violation of the individual victim’s interest.[1]
Presented as a subsidiary claim, brought forward in the context of the adhesion procedure, redress for crime-related tort has become a focal point within Dutch criminal policy.[2]
Concentrating on the victim’s claim for compensation as deposited in the context of the adhesion procedure (Article 51f Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure (Wetboek van Strafvordering, Sv), the question I set out to answer is whether the topical convergence between tort and crime does affect the core concepts of responsibility, accountability and liability, and how this relates to the theme of enforcement
Summary
From the mid-1980s onwards the image and the position of the victim has changed; as a result an extra layer has been added to the concept of crime: ‘crime’ nowadays represents a violation of the public interest, as well as a violation of the individual victim’s interest.[1]. Presented as a subsidiary claim, brought forward in the context of the adhesion procedure, redress for crime-related tort has become a focal point within Dutch criminal policy.[2] to date, victims’ compensation relates to elements of procedural justice and ‘sanctioning’, implying a link with the topic of enforcement To phrase it differently: to date, victims’ compensation relates to the legitimacy of ‘the law’.3. Kool are elaborated upon; both preliminary observations and a more detailed analysis will be presented (Sections 3 to 5) Such an exercise is necessary to develop an overview of the (legal) consequences of the topical political focus on victims’ compensation with regard to the civil law and the criminal law. My aspiration is only to make a crossover in order to graze unknown meadows
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
