Final report on the monitoring of court practice on the position of juvenile victims of crime before the courts in the Republic of Serbia in 2020

Kolaković-Bojović, Milica (2022) Final report on the monitoring of court practice on the position of juvenile victims of crime before the courts in the Republic of Serbia in 2020. Institute of Criminological and Sociological Research, Belgrade.

Text ASTRA Monitoring report.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (523kB)

Abstract

This court practice monitoring covered 58 cases proceeded by 85% of higher and 76% of the total number of basic courts, where the decisions became final in 2020 against 64 defendants for crimes committed against 70 juveniles. The monitoring focused on the following crimes: Rape- Art. 178, Paras 3 and 4; Sexual Intercourse with a Helpless Person Art. 179, Paras 2 and 3; Sexual Intercourse with a Child- Art. 180; Sexual Intercourse through Abuse of Position- Art. 181; Pimping and Procuring-Art. 183; Showing, Procuring and Possessing Pornographic Material and Minor Person Pornography-Art. 185 Paras 2 and 3; Coercion into Marriage in Art. 187a; Cohabiting with a Minor in Art. 190; Neglecting and Abusing a Minor in Art. 193, Para 2; Trafficking in human beings Art. 388 and Trafficking of minors for the purpose of false adoption Art. 389 of the Criminal Code (CC). Monitoring established that over 50% of proceedings were conducted for the criminal offense of Cohabiting with a Minor (Art. 190 CC), followed by Neglecting and Abusing a Minor (Art. 193, Para 2 of CC) with 25% share, Sexual Intercourse with a Child (Art. 180) with 8% share, Showing, Procuring and Possessing Pornographic Material and Minor Person Pornography (Art. 185 Paras 2 and 3) with 7% share and rape under Art. 178, paras 3. and 4. with 4.9% share. All other crimes included in the analysis did not appear or were represented sporadically in the sample. The procedure was most often conducted against one defendant (91%) and the perpetrators were most often (82%) men, aged 35-60 and non-recidivists (86%). The previous connection between the perpetrator and the injured party did not exist only in 9% of cases. In 49% of cases, the perpetrator was the emotional partner of the injured party, and in 33% the parent. Detention was ordered for 17% of the defendants and mainly lasted until the start of the execution of the prison sentence. Female minors are injured in 90% of cases, most often aged 6-14 (29%) or 15 (24%), equally with residence in urban and rural areas. A half of injured minors were supported by a lawyer, mostly posted by the decision of a court (84%). As in 27.6% of cases a plea agreement was concluded, and in 20.7% a hearing for imposing a criminal sanction was held, the main trial was held in 52% of cases, and the injured party was present in 70% of cases. In 50% of cases, he/she was accompanied by a legal representative, and in 71.5% of cases with the support of family members, and in 47% of cases the injured party had professional support at the main trial (in 70% of cases with the support of psychologists and in 10% of cases support of a social worker from the Social Care Centre). In only one case, the injured party had the support / escort of the victim support service. In only three cases he/she was granted the status of a particularly sensitive witness. The main hearings were mostly (80%) public, and the court accepted all requests for exclusion of the public made by the public prosecutor. All public hearings were held without the presence of the media, and in only one case did the court find that media representatives tried to attend the hearing but were not allowed to do so because the main trial was not public. The injured party was not always questioned, and the predominant reason for that is the fact that in a large number of cases the defendant admitted to committing a crime, so the court ruled that only evidence relevant to sentencing be presented at the trial, without the defendant being questioned. In a small number of cases, these were injured persons who could not be examined due to age (4 persons) or mental condition (2 persons). 34% of juvenile victims were examined more than once. What is particularly worrying is that the victims of the most serious sexual violence have been questioned three or four times. In two cases, the examination was performed using video link. No objections to the manner of examination were recorded. Only 17% of the injured parties pointed out the property claim, which was determined in 17% of cases and awarded in only one case, while all other injured parties were referred to litigation. Convictions have been handed down in almost all cases. Regarding the imposed sanctions, a suspended sentence of 75% dominates, followed by imprisonment with 16%, and then in a negligible share a fine (in one case as the main and secondary punishment), community service- imposed only to one perpetrator. In terms of the security measures, a ban on approaching and communicating with the injured party predominates, while in one case a security measure of mandatory psychiatric treatment was imposed. An appeal was filed against 13.8% of the verdicts, and the first-instance verdict was upheld almost without exception.

Actions (login required)

View Item