Перевод доклада с рус. на англ. — Работа №2 — Портфолио фрилансера Марьяна Назаренко (maryanee)

The extract from the report of leader of right protection “Resistance” Olga Kostina at the conference of Victim Support Europe in Scotland on October 5-7, 2010 in Edinburgh

IMPUNITY MAKES FAVOR TO CRIMINALITY. WORKING WITH VICTIMS IS THE CRITERIA OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SOCIAL STRUCTURES.
The article 52 of Russian Federation constitution says that the rights of victims are protected by law. The state provides victims with the access to justice and loss compensation.
The victim is the key figure of criminal process having violated rights and legal interests. The protection of victims interests from criminal chases of persons and organizations is stipulated at Russian Federation Penal Code as primary task of criminal proceedings.
The Russian legal application practice during last ten years unfortunately puts victim into unequal position in comparison to suspect, accused and defendants, which gives the basis to speak about incomplete implementation and vagueness of the principle of equality of parties in criminal proceedings and competition principle. Not each victim becomes legal victim. The victim gets legal status only after the approval of enactment or definition by the appropriate person. Such situation occurred due to political and court reforms of 90-ies in 20 century. But currently the vector to justice humanization is designed to change the existing practice. I specifically underline that the reinforcement of victims rights should not limit the scope of opposite party rights
Currently the issue of crimes latency is very up-to-date for Russia as the victims mostly do not inform law enforcement departments about the facts of crimes. The latent delinquency makes approximately four to one i.e. -one registered crime corresponds to four unregistered ones. In accordance with the data of All Russian Scientific Research Institute of Russian MIA department nearly 60 % of crime victims prefer taking independent actions instead of addressing to the police.
Latency principal reasons:
- lack of trust to the police;
- low level of information about rights and required proceedings;
- the lack of desire of police departments to register notifications about crimes;
- fear about security;
- the absence of networks of professional organizations and information about existing organizations, which had been created for the help of crime victims;
- victim passivity, in most cases the lack of victim’s desire to spend time for legal proceedings, which might end with nothing.
In accordance with official statistical data police annually reviews more than 22 million of notifications, information about accidents, but only 10% of them end by criminal case launching.
Latent delinquency is one of the indices of illegal reaction to criminal actions. More than 10% of crimes are done by the people who used to be victims before. Social injustice and the absence of attention to victim problems cause new crimes. In accordance with the information provided by Russian Federation regional development ministry each third crime had been done by criminal and 67 units of Russian Federation have more than a half of the population thinking that they live at high level criminality regions.
The illegal influence of criminal elements to victims, witnesses and other persons prompting criminal proceedings has grown during last years. Such influence violates justice process, create obstacles when during evidence gaining by thus decreasing the level of crimes solving and making criminals to avoid responsibility. In accordance with the data provided by victims and witnesses more that 90% of respondents told that they would refuse to give statements in case of their life or health threat or give false statements despite approved punishment for providing false statements in case if they are not provided with the protection. In accordance with the information provided by the results of the survey conducted in 2006, 95 % of the respondents, judges, police employees and lawyers confirmed that had frequently faced during their professional practice with the statements changes by victims and witnesses. While only 0,2% of respondents approved the efficiency of security measures foreseen by Penal legislation.
In accordance with the data of Russia MIA Institute nearly 70% of Russian citizens feel unsecure from criminal offences. 15 % of respondents subjected to criminal offences during 2009. the most victim prone age group is 25-30 years having individual labor activity as their occupation. People having higher education become crime victims most of all. In general the citizens with middle income rarely become the victims of various criminal offences in comparison to the citizens with low income and rather high income. The country citizens become criminal offences victims in comparison to the city citizens. The social demography profiles of various crimes victims differ significantly.
The notion of “set-back victimeness” is quite widespread: lot of people become the victims of the same crimes many times. If to speak about more or less widespread crimes the index of set-back victimeness varies significantly: from 16% (robbery) to 44% ( prompting for bribe). Generally victims encounter with the attempt to refuse or hiding the crime notification registration.
Another important matter lies at the fact that the victim can’t be duly protected in frames of criminal case investigation from criminal influence.
Russia has already developed the range of legislation measures for victims and witnesses protection. The Federal law dated by August 2004 “About state protection of witnesses, victims and other participants of court proceedings” had been adopted. This law had laid the basis for state protection of stipulated citizens’ category. “ The rules concerning the application of some security measures, the rules of payment of single fees to victims, the rules on the protection of the information concerning the performance of state protection” had been adopted.
Only 3296 participants of court proceedings (5,5 % of forecasted level) has been covered by the actions of state program concerning the provision of the security to victims, witnesses and other participants of legal proceedings for 2006-2008. In most cases the following security provision measures had been applied: “ personal security, lodging and property security” and “provision of confidentiality of the information about protected person”. In most cases the witnesses required state protection (63,2%), victims required state protection rarely (23%). Accused and defendant require protection in 3,12 % of the cases
In 2008 MIA has created specific detached department- the department on the provision of the security of the persons subject to state protection and specific centre for the provision of the security of such persons with detached departments in regions. In 2008 Russian Federation general prosecutor department has prepared the report on the fulfillment of the legislation concerning the protection of rights of natural and legal persons suffered from crimes. In 2009 the state program concerning the provision of the security for victims, witnesses and other participants of court proceedings for 2009-2013 had been adopted
Though the measures of state protection especially those requiring significant money and efforts are still applied quite rarely. This thesis is also confirmed by New State program foreseeing the application of the aforementioned protection measures within 5 years of its action towards approximately 10 thousands of criminal proceedings participants. While the program itself stipulates that nearly 10 millions of persons act as victims and witnesses on especially heavy crimes, while annually each five gets threats concerning statement changes or statements’ refusal. This way the program foresees the application of the aforementioned measures to only 0,5% of total amount of clients, while the overall annual amount of heavy and especially heavy crimes makes from 25 to 30%.
It is worth to be noted that the absence of well designed mechanisms for work of authoritative representatives significantly decreases the efficiency of law “About victims state protection…”. Law doesn’t stipulate exact criteria for the adoption of the resolution concerning the application of security measures ( e.g. threats objectiveness or reality). Various problems occur during person relocation, appearance changes and during the implementation of other types of state protection. The policy employees in most cases have no idea on how to act in case of citizens application with the request of state protection provision. Frequently the police not knowing what to do transfer the person from one department to each other which delays the protection and threatens the person’s security. Criminal cases concerning the facts of threats notification are rarely launched which causes the refusal for state protection application. Moreover, the lack of information at the citizens concerning the application of state protection measures negatively influences citizens security and criminal cases investigation efficiency and success.

Марьяна Назаренко maryanee

Перевод доклада с рус. на англ. – №2