Victim Compensation and Offender Restitution in the Federal Republic of Germany—a Western-European Comparative Perspective

In the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as in most other Western European countries, the growing emphasis in victimology during the last 15 years has led to several legal schemes for victim compensation. The German Victim Compensation Act of 1976 provides compensation for violent acts within the framework of a social security system with periodic payments, while most of the other West-European countries grant lump sums from a special compensation fund. The German legislation, however, has given the victim a relatively weak position. The problems are aggravated because of the restrictive, and concerning the Federal states—different, application of the law. Victim compensation as a restitutional sanction within the penal law doesn't play an important role. Furthermore, the financial situation of most offenders is so bad, that the civil claims of the victim for damages cannot be compensated. In Germany, however, remarkable efforts are made by the debt relief programs for offenders, which allow victim compensation on the one hand and offender rehabilitation on the other. This balancing of victim-offender interests seems very important for criminal policy in general. An extension of the legal provisions for victim compensation is considered necessary as is the wider application of restitutional sanctions whether instead of or combined with penal sanctions. Furthermore, help for victims should include social and psychological assistance programs, which are not yet developed in Europe to any great extent.     

过错被害人国家补偿问题刍议

我国已逐步展开被害人救助工作试点，虽然离完善的国家补偿制度距离尚远，但对制度设计的细节问题仍应提前研究。被害人补偿的正当性难以通过国家保护不力或社会风险分担予以说明，在规范语境下其正当性在于社会型国家的宪法目的设定。国家责任在补充性之外兼具福利性，因而补偿对象的关键特征为生活陷入困境，而不限于故意犯罪、暴力犯罪或身体伤害犯罪，补偿范围可分为保障性与补充性两部分，应以不同标准区别对待。过错被害人从事实与规范的角度可分为六种类型，对其补偿的扣减或拒绝，总体原则是保障性补偿须谨慎扣减，补充性补偿可灵活掌握，以务实的态度更好地实现国家补偿制度的目的。     

国家赔偿的归责原则与归责标准

按国家赔偿法的规定 ,国家赔偿的归责原则是违法归责原则。这个原则存在着自相矛盾、与刑事诉讼法规定不一致、过于严格限制受害人获得赔偿以及不能科学概括不同赔偿事项的特征等缺陷。在理论上 ,违法归责原则实际上把赔偿责任当成了评价责任和追究责任 ,而不是弥补责任。在事实上 ,它只是国家承担赔偿责任具体形式的归责标准之一。国家赔偿责任总的归责原则应当是受害人无过错或无负担损失的根据 ;国家承担赔偿责任具体形式的归责标准有违法标准、过错标准、结果标准、无过错标准及风险标准等五种标准形式。     

论我国刑事被害人国家补偿制度的构建

刑事被害人国家补偿制度体现了国家对刑事被害人这一弱势群体的人权保障,反映了一国的法治水平。本文就建立我国刑事被害人国家补偿制度的必要性和可行性进行了分析,提出了具体的构建设想。     

国家赔偿中精神损害抚慰金的适用问题——以《国家赔偿法》第35条后半段为分析对象

精神损害抚慰金的适用原则应当是赔偿法定、适当限制、平等对待以及区分类型,认定"造成严重后果"应根据生命权、健康权、身体权、人身自由权、名誉权等权利具体分析认定。在操作程序上,确定抚慰金数额可分为五个步骤。在适用对象方面,认定精神痛苦应以理性第三人标准与具体当事人标准有机统一,我国目前还不宜将精神损害赔偿的请求权人扩展到特定第三人,无感受能力之人的赔偿数额应低于正常受害人。     

Evaluating programs for men who batter: Problems and prospects

The uncertainty and controversy that surround batterer programs beg more systematic evaluation of program effectiveness. The current national surveys and limited evaluations of batterer programs point to several methodological improvements that include comparisons of program modalities, observation study of the group interaction, and more sensitive measures of abuse. Therefore, suggestions for future evaluations are posed, and continuing problematic areas, such as access to the victim, sensitized responses, selectivity of clients, and community context, are discussed.     

论侵害生命之损害赔偿责任——解释论的视角

侵害生命的损害赔偿责任由受害人生命权侵害责任和近亲属身份权侵害责任组成。生命侵害于死亡不可逆转地将要发生时构成,仍有主体资格的受害人此时即取得了生命侵害之抚慰金请求权以及死亡赔偿金请求权,这些请求权于死亡实际发生时转由受害人的继承人继承。身份权侵害于受害人死亡时构成,近亲属取得抚慰金请求权以及继发的物质损害赔偿请求权。被抚养人的抚养利益以及继承人的继承利益,均通过继承规则来实现,而不采固有利益侵权构成之模式。我国生命侵害之赔偿实践中,精神利益被过度低估,导致最终的赔偿数额的高低主要取决于物质损害的大小,引发了“同命不同价”之批判。解释论上,可根据《侵权责任法》第16条及第22条之规定,在坚持物质损害赔偿差异化处理的同时,对精神损害作平等的评价,认可受害人生命侵害之抚慰金请求权,并大幅度提高受害人及其近亲属的抚慰金数额,来彰显生命的精神价值,实现人格平等的价值诉求。     

刑事被害人国家补偿的理论分析及制度构建——以刑事诉讼过程中的检察环节为视角

检察机关对犯罪嫌疑人作出不批准逮捕或者不起诉决定后,刑事案件诉讼程序即告终止,也就在法律上(而不是从事实上)排除了犯罪嫌疑人的存在,致使被害人无法通过诉讼程序获得赔偿。在检察环节,对刑事被害人进行国家补偿,既保障了被害人的人权,又可以促进社会的和谐稳定。     

美国刑事赔偿制度论要

因“主权豁免”原则的影响和基于财政负担等方面的考虑,美国联邦和各州的刑事赔偿立法与实践相对保守落后。在立法上刑事赔偿范围狭窄;获得刑事赔偿的法定条件非常严格;赔偿请求人须承担严格的证明责任;受害人可获得的赔偿金数额受到很多限制。在实践中,受害人获得刑事赔偿要经历一个非常漫长的过程。目前,美国刑事赔偿立法已经引起了许多州的重视,但刑事赔偿立法的完善仍有一段漫长的路要走。     

Cost effectiveness in victim-witness advocate programs: A case study

An existing victim and witness advocate program is described and evaluated in terms of costs, benefits, and operations. Quantitative and qualitative data indicate that the program is cost beneficial and is also socially beneficial to both the victims and witnesses and the criminal justice system. Proposed programmatic changes are recommended to further improve the programs.     

对刑事被害人国家补偿几个争论问题的探讨

我国刑事被害人国家补偿的理论研究和实践尝试在一些关键问题上争论较大，对这些争论进行归纳、分析后，认为：刑事被害人国家补偿制度应从被害人权益保护角度出发来设立，补充性原则不能绝对化；补偿对象和条件应主要根据被害后果和被害方生活困难的情况而定，以家庭为单位一次性货币补偿；在我国的监狱罪犯劳动收入分配体制下，国家财政理应成为被害人补偿资金的主要来源；补偿机构的确定要足以实现对不同阶段被害人补偿。     

我国大陆地区刑事被害人保护制度论纲

我国大陆地区刑事被害人保护措施虽长期存在,但并未形成专门且自成体系的制度。"有意"且专门的被害人保护制度得以初步成型的时间不过七、八年之久。刑事被害人保护制度的类型整体上可区分为程序性保护制度和实体性保护制度。程序性保护制度的具体内容体现为刑事被害人依法享有的诉讼权利。实体性保护制度的内容具体包括:刑事损害赔偿制度,犯罪赃物追缴、返还或退赔制度,刑事损害赔偿优先于犯罪罚没的制度,刑事被害人的社会保障制度,刑事被害人救济制度。程序性保护制度和实体性保护制度都取得了可喜成绩,但都还存在诸多缺陷和不足。相应地,应当通过针对性的弥补和完善措施,以使我国大陆地区形成更完备、合理且成熟的刑事被害人保护制度。     

‘Full’ Compensation Criteria: An Enquiry into Relative Merits

The principle of full compensation is said to restore the victim of an accident to the position he was in before the tort. The conventional pre-tort position of the victim is taken to be the one in which he bears no accident losses at all. Therefore, a negligent injurer is required to compensate his victim fully. In an interesting paper in this journal, Van Wijck and Winters (2001) have reinterpreted the pre-tort position of the victim, and proposed an alternative specification of liability for the purpose of compensation. We study the relative merits of the two compensation criteria. We show that while the alternative compensation criterion is indeed insightful from economic as well as legal point of view, at the same time it suffers from some serious limitations.     

不捕不诉案件被害人权利保障困境的思考

宽严相济刑事司法政策的推行，促使检察机关提高了不捕不诉案件的比例，对保护犯罪嫌疑人的合法权益具有积极意义。但令人遗憾的是，司法环节救助的空白，使刑事被害人的权利时常处于空置状态，某种程度上导致了被害人与检察机关的矛盾。因此，在保障犯罪嫌疑人合法权益的同时，不应忽视对被害人权利的保障。我国应探索建立不捕不诉案件被害人救助制度，明确救助原则、立法模式和救助主体、救助对象、救助条件等，从而完整地实现刑事诉讼对犯罪嫌疑人和被害人的平衡保护。     

Victim survey research: Implications for criminal justice planning

The historic use of offense reports by police agencies for decision making is examined in the light of another data source — victim surveys. Survey information data can be used to: (1) more reliably estimate the extent and distribution of crime in a community; (2) evaluate the effectiveness of innovative programs; (3) develop police-sponsored public education programs; (4) describe the characteristics of victims and high crime areas; (5) sensitize police to the needs of the victim; and (6) develop police training programs that include dealing with the victim.     

Secondary Iatrogenic Harm: Claims for Psychiatric Damage Following a Death Caused by Medical Error

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the feasibility of claims for psychiatric damage following the death of a family member, where that death has been caused by medical error. ¹ The relative's position is a subject of heightened interest since the exposure of the plight of the parents involved in the UK organ scandal, ² and in the case of an iatrogenic death it is, of course, the family who are essentially the focus of the law's attempts to provide redress. Whilst the cases of deceased patients' relatives seeking damages for mental harm are inherently problematic in light of the restrictive secondary victim criteria applicable to psychiatric damage claims, a close look at the rules which permeate this area of compensation reveals that denying compensation to the relative suffering psychiatric harm is difficult to sustain. ³     

过犹未及：保护被害人诉讼权利之反思

目前,虽然适度保护被害人诉讼权利确有必要,但是国内学界主流的学术观点过于强化了对被害人诉讼权利的保护。因为无论是从西方国家兴起的被害人权利保护运动之后的立法动态、刑事诉讼的本质及其基本法理,还是从立法与司法实践中的具体作法来看,对被害人诉讼权利的保护只能限定在物质补偿权与知情权等方面,否则就是过犹未及。     

过错被害人国家补偿问题刍议

我国已逐步展开被害人救助工作试点，虽然离完善的国家补偿制度距离尚远，但对制度设计的细节问题仍应提前研究。被害人补偿的正当性难以通过国家保护不力或社会风险分担予以说明，在规范语境下其正当性在于社会型国家的宪法目的设定。国家责任在补充性之外兼具福利性，因而补偿对象的关键特征为生活陷入困境，而不限于故意犯罪、暴力犯罪或身体伤害犯罪，补偿范围可分为保障性与补充性两部分，应以不同标准区别对待。过错被害人从事实与规范的角度可分为六种类型，对其补偿的扣减或拒绝，总体原则是保障性补偿须谨慎扣减，补充性补偿可灵活掌握，以务实的态度更好地实现国家补偿制度的目的。