The victim is not to blame transfer

woman Schwander, which is why it comes only now to a law that regulates the handling of domestic violence ?
Domestic violence applies only in tort, since 2004, as an Official, so as a criminal Offence, the need to pursue the authorities ex officio. Nevertheless, the victim has the right to suspend a process, and the majority of criminal proceedings are also set. A very unsatisfactory Situation.

Why claim to be the victims of this law so often?
This has to do with the violence cycle. In the case of violent relationships, a clear pattern can be discerned: In the first Phase, voltage is built up, and it comes to small, the case of incidents, verbally or physically. Then the acute act of violence. And immediately, the so-called Honeymoon Phase begins: Instead of the Tatperson takes responsibility, she justifies their actions. It is often very affectionate, heaped upon the victim, for example with roses.

what are the implications?
women are about to pull back, not infrequently, from the women's house, to go home and want that the criminal proceedings will be suspended. Actually, you love your husband. After the Honeymoon Phase, but the violence the cycle begins again.

The new law allows the authorities, in such cases, the victim. This is advisable?
violence-affected people, going through several cycles, is not often said: "It was probably so bad, otherwise you wouldn't have gone back again!" What is important here is that the police and society have the Knowledge about the violence cycle, and the victim is not to blame transferred. But the Person clearly as a victim to see.

Should have the victim in one method, nevertheless, the last word?
I would argue in favour of two ways: Either domestic violence is classified as an official offence, the victim may suspend the proceedings – then the court has the last word. Or, the court finds that the victim, a wronged, and punishment. The latter is regularly in the interest of the victims.

"it is difficult For us, something as a mere coincidence."

What violence affected people?
There is not "the victim", i.e., there are different victim needs exist. Important to many but the above-mentioned public Declaration that you wronged and that you bear no blame. In the domestic sphere, many are in need of protection and support. You want to be listened to and taken seriously.

Why has it taken care of for a long time hardly to the needs of Victims?
The criminal law is clearly oriented offender, this is for historical reasons. Before there were States, there existed only the relation between Tatperson and victims. Whether has defended a victim, was of his position in society. With the law, the violence and criminal monopoly: The control and processing of a fact, handed over to the state. Focus was now on the two relationship of Tatperson and the state.

Is the mind?
Yes, the procedure needs to be objectified. This is not to say, however, that the victim should not be involved. However, this is not about criminal law, but through the victims assistance act and the code of criminal procedure.

Is the victim innocent?
The Person, which exceeds the limit to the criminal law, bears the responsibility. This is not to say that a victim may not behave clumsy. But as long as the Person does not exceed the criminal limit, it is simply not complicit.

However, there is the view that the victim was partly responsible.
This has firstly to do with the so-called deception of the effect of the retrospective: If we have certain information about an event, we estimate this as likely. So it is in the case of offences. We say: "Why you took this very Bus? You wouldn't be able to know what's happening." In retrospect, one is the wiser. Proceeding from it, appears to be a rape predictable: We think the victim would have had to reckon with the Robbery.

And secondly?
it is difficult For us, something as a mere coincidence. We have the feeling to have to determine our lives. As a result, the tendency is that we give ourselves a bad experience rather a bit of the blame. So, we give ourselves the impression that we had the fate of at least a little bit in the handle.

Why victims are often passive, weak, and even stupid devalued?
In our culture that is to be activated, the Acting, the busy superior to be positive. And a Tatperson fulfilled exactly: it is active, you are, you are considering. The victim, on the other hand, is the Person endured. It is small, makes something happen, maybe she is a little ill-considered. Thus, we do not want to be identified.

Has deteriorated the position of the victim?
no. It is important that we distinguish between current and potential Victims. For the current victims, i.e. people who are actually the victim of a Crime, has taken place in the last decades, improvements.

to what Extent?
The victims assistance act, which entered into force in 1993, is a big progress. This also had an impact on the criminal process: Current victims today during the procedure, more rights, such as on Information, consultation and protection.

And potential victims?
The criminal policy focused on potential victims, i.e. persons, the fear of becoming a victim of crime. And these crimes fear is always taken as an opportunity to toughen the criminal law. You see, how often in the last few years, the criminal law and exacerbated, has been revised. This is based on the fear of the people. I can't approve. Because current victims want no aggravation of the criminal law.

(editing Tamedia)

Created: 09.04.2019, 21:14 Uhr