Rights Of Crime Victims Research Articles

범죄피해자 권리의 헌법적 보장의 의의 - 범죄피해자구조청구권을 중심으로

The state's compensation for crime victims is a financial support provided to victims or their families in cases where the victims have died, sustained disabilities, or suffered severe injuries due to criminal acts, and have not been fully or partially compensated for their damages. This support is given based on the constitutional rights of crime victims. Considering the purpose of this system, the court's consideration of the offender's repayment of the compensation as a mitigating factor in sentencing is an incomprehensible judgment. This paper addresses the importance of protecting the rights of crime victims and their constitutional guarantees. It focuses on the introduction and significance of the crime victim compensation claim. By examining various case laws, the paper reviews the current state and issues of the crime victim protection system and discusses the obligations and roles of the state in ensuring the fundamental rights of crime victims. The necessity of legal and institutional remedies is emphasized to establish the crime victim compensation claim as a constitutional right for the protection of crime victims' human rights. The paper aims to explore measures to ensure that the rights of crime victims are substantively protected.

프랑스·독일·일본에서의 범죄피해자의 형사절차 참가제도와 우리나라에 대한 시사점

France and Germany, that have adopted private prosecution or recognize private participation in litigation, guarantee crime victims the right to participate in criminal proceedings, allowing them to seek redress and protect their rights. However Japan and Korea, which operate criminal procedures based on the principle of state prosecution, perceive the state criminal procedures as an adversarial relationship between the criminal justice agencies and the criminals, and views crime victims as mere objects of protection and support or as targets of preferential measures. Recently, Japan has introduced a system that guarantees crime victims the right to participate in criminal proceedings to a limited extent. Korea attempted to revise the law to introduce a victim participation system that was much weaker than that of France or Germany, and even Japan, but it was ultimately frustrated. Whenever the neglect of the protection of the human rights of crime victims becomes a social issue, the Korean government has established and implemented measures to strengthen the rights of victims. However, except for victims of crimes that attract social attention, such as sexual assault or stalking, the poor status of victims of crimes such as murder, assault, and fraud has not improved much. With only these intermittent and sporadic measures, it is difficult to properly fulfill the state's duty to protect crime victims. In order to improve the poor status of victims, it is necessary to create a principle provision on the protection of suspects' rights and participation in criminal procedures in the Constitution, and declare at the beginning of the Criminal Procedure Act that the rights of crime victims should be protected. And then a device must be established to protect crime victims in a series of criminal procedures such as investigation, prosecution, trial, and execution of sentence. In particular, it is necessary to build a system that stipulates the right of crime victims to express their opinions at each important stage of the criminal procedure, such as the conclusion of the investigation, decision not to prosecute, decision on detention, pronouncement of judgment, and suspension of execution of sentence, and to notify the progress of the criminal procedure.

양형과 피해자

CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA ensures the rights of crime victims at the fundamental rights level by stipulating the right to make statements during judicial proceedings and the right to claim assistance. The necessity of guaranteeing the rights of victims in criminal procedures is an important criterion used in practice when making judgments on specific cases nowadays. Particularly in recent rulings, issues include: ① the revision of sentencing guidelines and changes in the content of ‘non-prosecution requests’ and ‘agreements’ through these revisions, ② the newly implemented criminal deposit, and ③ the distinction and relationship between prosecution conditions and sentencing factors. Traditionally, criminal law has focused on offenders, with victims and their conditions not being a primary concern. Discussions on penal theory have often overlooked victims. To address this, the concept of “restorative justice” is sometimes introduced. However, the status of victims can also be secured through perspectives that view crime as a violation of mutual recognition relationships or through the positive general prevention theory in penal theory. However, considering the provisions of the Criminal Act and the Court Organization Act regarding sentencing, taking victim recovery into account during sentencing can be justified from the perspective of special prevention. Additionally, agreements or deposits should also be seen as meaningful in relation to victim recovery.

Prevalence of Undue Delays in Criminal Proceedings: Realising the Right to a Speedy Trial for Crime Victims in South Africa?

Prevalence of undue delays in criminal proceedings in South Africa poses serious implications not only for the accused person’s right to a fair trial but also for the rights and interests of crime victims. The South African criminal justice system is overburdened. This is because crime in South Africa is currently at an all-time high, resulting in a clogged court system. Due to this overburdened system, the entire criminal justice system is hampered, and cases take longer to resolve. The impact of these undue delays on crime victims, firstly is that justice delayed is justice denied and society resorts to commit vigilantism as they have lost faith in the criminal justice system. Secondly, there has been a perception from the society that the criminal justice system is biased and favors the rights of offenders or accused persons. In Rodrigues v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Other 2019 (2) SACR 251 (GJ), the court when dealing with undue delays for the first time, rights and interests of crime victims were considered even though the matter took more than 40 years. This judgment revealed the importance of the realisation of speedy trial rights for crime victims. Using the qualitative research method, the literature in this article indicates that the enactment of the right to a speedy trial for crime victims can be beneficial to all parties involved in criminal proceedings to curb undue delays in criminal proceedings. This article outlines the causes of undue delays in criminal proceedings, the impact that these delays have on specific crime victims and argues for the implementation and enforcement of the right to a speedy trial for crime victims in South Africa.

Problems in Fulfilling the Rights of Crime Victims Due to Misconceptions of Restitution Terminology

Restitution rights are problematic in fulfilling the rights of victims of crime, mainly due to misconceptions about restitution terminology. This research aims to explore and analyze the misconceptions of restitution terminology by the society and its impact on the fulfillment of the rights of victims of crime using the analysis of Social Construction Theory. This research uses an empirical juridical approach by utilizing primary data in the form questionnaires distributed to community service participants and the focused discussion process in Community Service activities and secondary data in the form of primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. The findings of this study indicate that the misconception of restitution terminology is formed through the social construction of legal norms on the wrong meaning of restitution terminology These misconceptions take the form of restitution being understood as peace, restitution is the same as compensation and restitution results in the elimination of imprisonment for the perpetrator. These misconceptions have implications for the non-fulfillment of the rights of victims of crime, which will arrise in the difficulty in submitting requests for restitution, the victim's perception of justice is reduced and a negative impact on the victim's recovery process. This misconception will also lead to weak law enforcement against criminal offenders.

Restitution of Death-Causing Criminal Acts in Justice and Human Rights Perspectives

Restitution has become a representative of the development of the criminal justice system in Indonesia, with its foundation relying on the eligibility of the rights of crime victims. Such a practice is said to have made the criminal justice system in Indonesia more humane, particularly in terms of human rights. The provision of restitution to victims of criminal acts resulting in death has occurred in Indonesia for the first time. This is based on the presence of severe human rights violations in these criminal acts. This research employs a normative-empirical method, which involves examining the implementation, application, or enforcement of the prevailing laws and regulations in Indonesia in specific legal events within the community. The balance between fulfilling the rights of both the perpetrators and the victims in criminal acts in Indonesia is increasingly pursued over time, one of which is through restitution. Restitution can be one of the efforts made to fulfill victims' rights, including in cases of murder or violence that causes the victim's death. But, it is challenging to determine an appropriate nominal amount for fulfilling restitution for victims. There is a need for a deeper examination and evaluation of the losses suffered by victims of criminal acts who have lost their lives and their right to life. Thus, the provision of restitution as a means of achieving justice for victims will be better fulfilled.

Comparative analysis of the status of a victim of a criminal offence in Kazakhstan, Russia, and Germany

Relevance. The relevance of the study lies in the examination of the status of a victim of a crime, the protection and enforcement of their rights, the consideration of the victim institution in different countries, in particular in the Russian Federation, the Republic of Kazakhstan, and Germany. Purpose. The purpose of the research is to examine the features of the victim's status and conduct their legal analysis in various states, to study and ensure the interests and rights of the victim, which are violated during the pre-trial investigation and trial. Methodology. The methods by which the research of the given subject is conducted include dialectical, legal, formal legal, hermeneutic, logical-legal, structural-functional, analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, etc. Results. The results of this study include the establishment of a definition of the term victim. The essence and content of the status of the victim are determined. A list of legal regulations is provided, which forms the basis for regulating the victim institution in criminal proceedings. A legal analysis of the status of the victim in different countries, specifically Russia, Kazakhstan, and Germany, is conducted. The experiences of these countries highlight both the negative and positive aspects of the regulation of this institution. Conclusions. In the course of the study, a legal analysis and comparison of the common and distinctive features inherent in the victim institution in criminal proceedings were conducted. Recommendations on the effective protection and enforcement of the rights of victims were included. The provisions enshrined in this study are of practical value to citizens and all persons whose rights may be violated by a criminal act, as well as to state bodies whose powers are aimed at ensuring the protection of the rights of crime victims. Keywords: victim's rights; enforcement; criminal proceedings; procedures; interests

Rights of Crimevictims: A Special Reference to Women and Children

Victims are the persons who are the sufferers of moral, physical or material damage as a result of crime. The term,’ victim’ also covers those who have close relationship with a person who died as a result of the crime.The basic principle of Torts states that there is no wrong without a remedy. The rule of lawadvocates that wrongs should not remain un redressed. Compensation is the basic right of the victim. It means amends for the loss sustained. Thus, compensation means the money or kind which is either directly given to the victim of crime or to those who have close relationship with the actual victim who have died as a result of the crime. The victims of crimehave some other rights like participation in the trial proceeding, right to appeal, right to protection etc. Inaddition to the common rights, lawhas provided some special rights to the women and children victims of crimesin considerationof their physical, mental condition and age.

A comparative study of the formation of doctrinal directions of the institution of legal protection of crime victims in the USA and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have a long history of forming and developing legal protection of the rights of crime victims, which is based on the recognition of state responsibility for the failure to protect society from crime and provision of comprehensive support to crime victims, including compensation, benefits, medical care, social services, support of specialized public organizations. At the same time, the norms of public law regulating state compensation for harm to victims of crime are important. In fact, a study of the leading legal institutions of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, which has accumulated positive regulatory and legal experience in ensuring the rights of crime victims and their legal protection, which can be perceived as legislative novelties in the Russian Federation, is indicative. The relevance of the topic is also conditioned by the social significance of the issue of legal protection of the rights of crime victims, as well as the legal reality that has developed in the Russian Federation in the field of legislative regulation of the status of victims of criminal offenses, which directly affects the right to compensation for harm caused to them.

Finding the Factors and Proposing the Solution for Preventing Secondary Victimization

This research aims to find the causal factors and solutions to prevent secondary victimization. Using a doctrinal legal research method with statutory and conceptual approaches, Indonesian regulations are analyzed regarding the rights of crime victims and secondary victimization. Books and scientific journals that specifically discussed crime victims, crime typologies, and secondary victimization were also analyzed. By using qualitative analysis, the study shows that victims of crime, particularly those who experience sexual violence, suffer more severe and prolonged trauma when interacting with law enforcement personnel in the criminal justice system. These personnel usually blame the victim rather than showing empathy. The patriarchal perspective of society also exacerbates the situation. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage and practice values pro towards crime victims by personnel of the criminal justice system. Moreover, victims need to be empowered in every decision-making process that directly impacts their psychological condition. Online trials via teleconference need to be used frequently, especially in cases of sexual violence or domestic violence. This research presents an in-depth and comprehensive review of the causal factors and strategies to prevent secondary victimization. The findings of this research provide valuable insights for policymakers and practitioners in the criminal justice system to improve their approach towards crime victims and secondary victimization.
 
 Received: 4 June 2023 / Accepted: 5 August 2023 / Published: 5 September 2023

피해자 국선 변호사 역할과 과제

Article 12 Clause 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides for the assistance of lawyers. “Anyone who is arrested shall have the right to be assisted immediately by a lawyer.” When a criminal defendant is unable to seek an attorney for himself/herself, the State shall assign a lawyer as prescribed by law.｣ Criminals may, of course, be protected by the appointment of a lawyer when they are investigated by an investigative agency on the basis of the Constitution. Article 33 Clause 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act also specifies the assistance of counsel. The spirit of the constitution was reflected. ｢If it falls under certain conditions and is necessary to protect the rights of criminal offenders, a lawyer shall be selected as necessary. If the economically poor or the physically and mentally handicapped cannot appoint a lawyer, the state protects the defendant's rights in selecting a public defender.｣
 But what laws are the victims of crime protected by? Article 10 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea stipulates the “right to pursue happiness of all citizens.” Article 11 of the Constitution stipulates equal rights for all citizens. Clause 2 of Article 294-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act guarantees the right of victims to state. However, other than that, there are no other regulations protecting victims' rights. Thus, it received a lot of criticism. ｢① After a crime incident, secondary damage is inflicted. ② Victims of a crime shall not be directly involved in an investigation or trial. ③ All citizens are equal.｣ Due to these criticisms, the victim's lawyer system was introduced in 2012. The system of public defenders for victims has been in effect since March 6, 2012. Nevertheless, the system has not been properly established in criminal practice yet. Therefore, confusion has continued. This is because the scope and rights of lawyers for victims of crime and their status in litigation are unclear.
 Germany settled the issue of protecting victims of crime in 1998 by enacting new legislature. “Act on the Protection of Witnesses and the Improvement of Victims’ Protection when interrogating witnesses in criminal cases: The Witness Protection Act.” Germany clearly defined the rights of crime victims to counsel by the law. Since then, the law has been constantly revised. The rights of crime victims to counsel became victims' rights. Article 395 of the German Criminal Procedure Act stipulated the private prosecution system and the participation system in a public prosecution. Crime victims are equal litigants. It is a legal position recognized by the Criminal Procedure Act. According to the German Criminal Procedure Act, the protection of witnesses has been strengthened. You can exclude the accused and interrogate the witness. Also, it is possible to read a report and record a witness on a tape recorder.
 Japan has also introduced victim’s participation system. Victims and victims’ lawyers may appear at the trial date and ask the defendant for a witness. Opinions on the confirmation of facts or the application of laws may be stated in the trial. The protection of crime victims has been strengthened. This is the crime victim’s protection system in Germany and Japan.
 The spirit of the Constitution is urging more rights for crime victims. The Criminal Procedure Act should establish a stipulation for the protection of victims. The legal rights of the victim’s lawyer should also be clearly defined. Only then, can victim lawyers be more active for victims in the investigation and trial stages with legal grounds. The assistance of the investigative agency alone is not enough. You can refer to the German Criminal Procedure Act and the Japanese Criminal Procedure Act.

Fulfilling the Restitution Rights of Crime Victims: The Legal Practice in Indonesia

According to Articles 38D and 38G of the Republic of Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution, citizens have the right to a sense of safety from the state, including the right to be protected from crimes. In Indonesia, there is an annually increasing rate of crime, many of them being crimes against wealth. Unfortunately, victims seldom receive attention, including recovery from losses or restitution. This was normative legal research conducted on secondary data, including primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and other supporting legal materials. The data were collected through a literature review and were analyzed using the descriptive-qualitative method. Results showed that the restitution rights of crime victims are regulated in Indonesia's legal regulations (the 1945 Constitution, the Law on the Protection of Witnesses and Victims, the Law on Human Rights, the Law on Corruption, etc.). But these regulations are still incomplete and they are difficult to implement in legal practice. In Indonesia, the implementation of crime victims’ restitution rights has not been fulfilled. Many victims fail to obtain restitution from the perpetrators because they still lack knowledge of their restitution rights and the application procedures due to a lack of socialization from the law-enforcing apparatus and the government. Victims may file a civil case lawsuit to the District Court to fulfill their restitution rights. It can be done through a combined mechanism of a civil lawsuit in a criminal case or through a pure criminal court decision. In conclusion, Indonesian law has regulated victims’ restitution rights. Even so, the laws are still incomplete and they lack harmony. The fulfillment of victims’ restitution rights is not yet ideal and its procedures are too complicated.
 
 Received: 17 April 2023 / Accepted: 12 June 2023 / Published: 5 July 2023

형사피해자와 범죄피해자의 구별필요성

The legal terms used by the Constitution and laws should have legal effect that distinguishes them from other concepts. However, various terms are used in various systems for the protection of crime victims and the laws on which they are based. Examples include crime victims, criminal victims, a victims of a crime, non-victims, and victim .
 Here is tried to examine how these concepts are used in cases decided by the Constitutional Court in relation to crime victims so far, and whether legal concepts can be distinguished based on this.
 First of all, it was premised that the characteristics of the Crime Victim Protection Act and the Criminal Procedure Act were different to guarantee the basic rights of crime victims. In other words, the Criminal Victim Protection Act believes that even if various systems are reorganized for crime victims to be involved in criminal procedures, it cannot be a direct criminal victim's right to participate in criminal procedures. Therefore, the Crime Victim Protection Act is a protection-oriented law in which the state intervenes in the entire process of recovering damage from the occurrence of criminal damage, including criminal procedures, and the Criminal Procedure Act is the basis for the rights of criminal victims.
 Next, the summary of the terms is as follows. First of all, criminal victims, defined by the Constitution as the subject of the right to state trial procedures, are limited to the subject of rights and obligations in criminal procedures and direct victims of crimes. As a result, the term victim under the Criminal Procedure Act was deleted and a plan was proposed to unify it by replacing it with a victim of a crime. In addition, crime victims were considered to include not only direct victims of crime (criminal victims) and spouses, immediate relatives and siblings, but also those affected by crime damage prevention and crime victim rescue activities according to the definition of the Crime Victim Protection Act. In addition, I would like to propose that all victims, including those other than the term non-victim as a complainant under the Criminal Procedure Act and those other than criminal victims (defined as victims of crimes under the current law), be unified as non-victims. As a result, in the Criminal Procedure Act, victims, etc. will be able to organize legal statements by simply listing them as “criminal victims and not-victims” without any additional regulations or explanations.

Isomorfisme Institusional LPSK dalam Penegakan Hak Rehabilitasi Psikososial Korban Tindak Pidana di Indonesia

This study explains how isomorphism develops in the Indonesian Witness and Victim Protection Agency (Lembaga Perlindungan Saksi dan Korban-LPSK) and contributes to stronger coordination among institutions in administering psychological services for crime victims in Indonesia. This study employs an organizational sociology approach with an isomorphism perspective to determine the robustness of institutions' roles and relationships in providing psychosocial care to crime victims. Using the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) in conjunction with Textual Network Analysis (TNA), this study discovered that coercive isomorphism in government organizations is the primary driving factor behind mimetic and normative isomorphism, whereas stereotyped isomorphism drives the private sector. Isomorphism emerges to give psychosocial services to victims of criminal crimes, namely as a result of reinforcement from Law Number 31 of 2014 on the Protection of Witnesses and Victims. This reinforcement prompted mimetic isomorphism in many forms of cooperation, and as a result, normatively, it is feasible to claim that LPSK has evolved into a professional institution in delivering psychological rights services to victims of criminal crimes. Furthermore, this study makes recommendations on the role of state institutions and cooperative institutions in satisfying the rights of crime victims in Indonesia, particularly psychosocial assistance.

Protecting the Rights of a Deceased Crime Victim Through Criminal Prosedure Means

The authors examine the problems of protecting the rights of crime victims in cases of their death. The analysis of court practice allowed the authors to identify two typical situations in which the necessity of ensuring the protection of rights arises: firstly, if the victim dies as a result of the crime and secondly, if the affected person, recognized as the victim, dies due to reasons unconnected with the crime. The authors note the insufficiency of the legal regulation in the first typical situation and the lack of normative regulation in the second one, which results in the diversity of court practice and hinders the protection of the rights of a deceased victim. Based on the conducted research, the authors developed a number of suggestions aimed at resolving the identified problems of protecting the rights of a deceased crime victim.

Rethinking Public Compensation to Crime Victims in Nigeria’s Jurisprudence: Justifications for State Compensation and A Comparative Analysis

As it stands today, Nigeria has no crime victims’ compensation or reparation schemes, and there are no laws throughout the thirty-six states of the Federation placing obligations or duties on governments, states or federal to pay compensation to crime victims who suffered crimes of violent nature. Although, crime victims have been instrumental in criminological discourse; they have been forgotten and neglected and therefore denied due recognition in Nigeria. The major research problems are the unavailability of state compensatory schemes for victims of crime in Nigeria. The second research problem is the lack of political will on the part of Nigerian government to enact into law the Bill before the Nigerian National Assembly since 2011 on the Remedies and Rights of crime victims. The purpose of the study is to hold the Nigerian government accountable like other nations of the world to fulfil its constitutional duties to the citizenry in terms of protecting innocent subjects from criminals. Several nations of the world have moved ahead with time in matters of crime victims’ compensations, Nigeria cannot afford to lag behind in such issue of international dimensions. In this connection, the article dissects the need for legislations in Nigeria’s jurisprudence with a view to making statutory provisions for Nigerian citizens who suffered criminal injuries such murder, rape, robbery, and carjacking etc as a result of crime. The paper further examined the genesis of crime victims’ compensation, and its justifications. The paper in addition beamed its search lens on foreign jurisdictions from a comparative point of view for the purposes of advancing legal arguments in support of crime victims’ compensation programmes in the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria. The research finds out that there is crime victim compensation provided by the state. The author adopted the desk top research methodology in the write-up.

View of Enforcement of the Economic Rights of Crime Victims in Indonesia from the Perspective Pancasila

Objective: Enforcement of civil rights for criminal victims in Indonesia can be achived in three ways, that is a combination of compensation cases, lawsuits against the law, and requests for compensation for restitution and protection of witnesses and victims. However, these efforts can only be carried out if there is a request from the victim, if there is no request then this effort cannot be carried out. This resulted in a separate obstacle for the victims of crime to obtain compensation from the perpetrators of the crime. This condition shows that the value of justice in Pancasila has not yet been implemented at the criminal justice.
 Methodology: Using normative juridical research methods by seeking data sourced from regulations relating to the civil rights of crime victims.
 Findings: This research concludes several efforts and ways for victims of crime to receive compensation.

The rights of victims of crime as a manifestation of human rights

In the article, senior lecturer Yordanov analyzes the protection of the rights of crime victims by the police authorities. The injured person is not always aware of what rights and means he has when a crime has been committed to him in order to be able to defend himself fully. The rights of the victim of crime are part of human rights. This means that their rights must be seen in the context of the characteristics of human rights, therefore the fundamental characteristics of human rights also manifest in the rights of victims of crime.

The role of the Palestinian police in protecting victims of crimes: دور الشرطة الفلسطينية في حماية حقوق ضحايا الجريمة

This paper aimed to identify the role of the Palestinian police in protecting the rights of victims by informing the victims of their rights, and determining the victim's right to protection by the judicial police. The researchers used the descriptive and analytical approach based on legal texts related to the protection of the rights of crime victims. This research paper concluded with a set of results and the important results are protection the human rights is the only way to make the human responsive about his community, and the balance between the individual rights and freedoms, the country right, community interest and it’s security and stability is vital necessity. The evidence of Palestinian police Confirmed the rights of victims in protection, and their right of recognizing their roles and the procedures that must be followed in their issues. At the end the two researchers recommended that police officers, especially judicial officers and the General Investigation Department, should receive adequate training to make them aware of how to deal with victims of crime. And how to define the victim's needs, know the principles of providing appropriate and immediate aid, establish rules for listening to the victim's complaint, deal with it and help her, and the need to notify the victim of interest in his case, and to inform him that his presence at the police headquarters will bring him justice and fairness.

In Re: Courtney Wild

This petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court asks the Court to review the issue of whether the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) required federal prosecutors confer with victims of Jeffrey Epstein before concluding non-prosecution agreements (NPA) with him. The petition arises from a NPA federal prosecutors in Florida reached with Epstein—blocking not only his prosecution for federal sex crimes but also that of his co-conspirators. The prosecutors never conferred with the victims about the non-prosecution agreement. After years of litigation about the validity of the secret NPA, the case reached the Eleventh Circuit. The Circuit ruled in an en banc decision, 7-4, that the CVRA does not give victims the ability to enforce their rights in court until the Justice Department formally files federal charges. This certiorari petition argues that the important legal issue of whether the nation’s preeminent crime victims’ rights statute permits the government to secretly conclude pre-indictment NPAs with targets of federal investigations warrants immediate review. Because such arrangements are, by definition, secret, other circuits may never be able to speak to the legality of such resolutions. Leaving the issue to percolate means that the Justice Department will be free to dispense with victims’ rights and orchestrate clandestine deals without affording victims any rights under the CVRA. The Supreme Court may well face a now-or-never opportunity to review the important question of whether the CVRA permits such secrecy. In addition, the illegitimacy of the Justice Department’s practice of covertly and deceptively arranging non-prosecution deals is far too serious for the Supreme Court to wait to see what other circuits might say. The Eleventh Circuit’s decision guts victims’ rights under the CVRA. Such a dubious interpretation runs counter to the statute’s plain language, which Congress designed to create a comprehensive bill of rights for crime victims—with enforceable rights.