Submission
Privacy Policy
Code of Ethics
Newsletter

The EU Victims Rights Directive: A Milestone or Stepping Stone?

The EU Victims’ Rights Directive has been lauded as a landmark achievement in the protection of victim’s rights, setting minimum standards to harmonize victim support across the member states. But its implementation raises questions about whether it represents a milestone or merely a step toward a more comprehensive and effective framework. Despite its aspirations, persistent challenges in its application reveal significant gaps that require deeper reflection and the development of more consistent solutions. These challenges are further underscored by dynamic social and legal developments at the European level, which emphasize the protection of victims’ rights as a pillar of the EU’s justice and equality policy. Recognizing the threat that crime poses to both society and individual rights, the EU has put in place measures to ensure that victims receive adequate protection, respect and support, although the path to fully realizing these goals remains complex and evolving.

The legal basis for actions to protect the rights of crime victims is enshrined in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), particularly in Article 82(2). Based on this provision, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union adopted directive 2012/29/EU, which establishes minimum standards for the rights, support, and protection of victims of crime. This Directive, a pivotal step in implementing the TFEU provisions, aims to ensure that all victims, regardless of where the incident occurs within the EU, have access to harmonized and effective mechanisms for the protection of their rights.

The provisions of the Directive reflect the principle of territoriality and jurisdictional connection, which form the foundation for the application of law within the EU. Under this principle, the Directive applies to crimes committed within the EU and to criminal proceedings conducted within its borders. The extension of protection to victims of crimes committed outside the EU is limited solely to situations where there is a connection to criminal proceedings conducted within the EU.

The Directive has a broad subjective scope, encompassing both direct and indirect victims. It defines “victim” as, firstly “a natural person who has suffered harm, including physical, mental, moral, or emotional harm, or economic loss, directly caused by a criminal offense”. Secondly, it includes “family members of a person whose death was directly caused by a criminal offense and who have suffered harm as a result of that person’s death”. In line with the EU’s human-centric approach to the protection of victims’ rights, the Directive considers a family member to be anyone living in a stable and enduring cohabitation with the victim, irrespective of the nature of their relationship.

In this context, the principle of personal universalism, characteristic of human rights protection, broadens the scope of individuals whose rights should be safeguarded under the provisions implementing the Directive. The implementation of the Directive by Member States is a key element of its effectiveness, as the Directive itself, being an act of European Union law, obligates states to achieve specific objectives while allowing them discretion in the choice of means to achieve these goals. At the same time, in certain cases, the Directive can have direct vertical effect, enabling individuals to invoke its provisions before national courts when implementation is flawed or incomplete, in accordance with CJEU case law (e.g., cases 148/78 Ratti and 41/74 van Duyn). The implementation of these provisions should ensure non-discriminatory and individualized treatment of each victim, regardless of their citizenship or residence status. Particular care is afforded to children, whose rights must be realized in a manner adapted to their age and maturity, in line with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Similarly, persons with disabilities require the removal of barriers and the provision of full access to procedures. Victims of terrorism, due to the unique nature of the harm they have suffered, need support, social recognition, and protection of their dignity. This approach, when properly implemented in national legislation, enables Member States to fulfill the objectives of the Directive, contributing to the effective and fair protection of victims.

The Directive, aiming to ensure a balance between the protection of victims’ rights and the rights of offenders, accounts for both the need to prevent secondary victimization and the safeguarding of fundamental principles of criminal proceedings. The rights granted to victims must not infringe upon the protections afforded to individuals suspected or accused of committing a crime. The term “offender” as understood in the Directive, encompasses both persons convicted of a crime and those who are suspected or accused but have not yet been found guilty. In this context, the Directive fully adheres to the principle of the presumption of innocence, safeguarding the integrity of criminal proceedings and ensuring fair treatment for all parties involved.

At the same time, one of the key aspects of victim protection is the prevention of secondary victimization, which can occur when a victim experiences additional stress and trauma due to inappropriate treatment by individuals involved in the process, such as police officers, lawyers, or prosecutors. In such cases, shortcomings in the legal system can lead to further suffering for victims, rather than providing them with support. Furthermore, the Directive highlights the risk of re-victimization, where victims become targets of subsequent crimes due to their individual characteristics or social position. These challenges require particular attention from the legal system to effectively protect victims and ensure they receive support and security.

To ensure that victims of crime receive appropriate information, support, and protection, as well as the ability to actively participate in criminal proceedings, the Directive grants them a broad range of rights. These include the right to access information and support, the opportunity to participate in criminal proceedings, and the guarantee of protection tailored to the individual needs of each victim. Particular emphasis is placed on an individualized approach that takes into account the specific characteristics of victims, reflecting the Directive’s connection to the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and universal principles of human rights.

Member States are obligated to establish a system that ensures victims of crime are treated with respect, professionalism, and empathy, regardless of their race, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, residence status, or other characteristics. The non-discriminatory approach to victims, which forms the foundation of the provisions, reflects human rights values and emphasizes the need to protect the dignity of every person affected by crime.

A key solution within these provisions is the obligation to conduct an individual assessment of the needs of each crime victim. This approach takes into account not only the nature of the crime but also the specific characteristics of the victim and the circumstances of the incident. The assessment, conducted in accordance with national procedures, aims to identify the necessary protective measures that minimize the risk of secondary victimization, intimidation, or retaliation.

Although the current legislation, both EU law and the national laws of the Member States, do not contain an exhaustive list of characteristics to be taken into account during such an assessment, they emphasize the need to analyze aspects such as age, gender, sexual orientation, health status, disability, resident status or communication difficulties. Special attention should be given to victims of serious crimes, particularly those motivated by bias or discrimination, as well as individuals in close relationships with the offender.The aim is to ensure tailored protection and support for each victim, representing a significant step toward building a justice system grounded in respect, empathy, and human rights.

Victims who are identified as having specific protection needs are entitled to special measures aimed at enhancing their safety and comfort during court proceedings. These measures include the possibility of avoiding visual contact with the accused, even while giving testimony, through the use of communication technologies such as videoconferencing. Victims may also be interviewed without the need for their physical presence in the courtroom, allowing them to avoid the stress associated with direct contact with the accused.

To protect privacy, the provisions exclude questions about the victim’s private life that are unrelated to the crime. Additionally, hearings may be conducted in closed sessions, which enhances the sense of security and minimizes stress. Such measures are crucial for reducing the risk of secondary victimization and ensuring that victims receive appropriate support and respect for their dignity while seeking justice.

Directive 2012/29/EU significantly develops and supplements previous EU measures concerning the protection of crime victims’ rights, which were partially addressed in the Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA. The framework decision aimed to improve the situation of victims by introducing fundamental principles regarding their treatment, such as the right to information, participation in criminal proceedings, and minimizing psychological harm. However, these measures were more general in nature and did not incorporate an individualized approach to victims’ needs.

One of the challenges remains the full and effective implementation of its provisions in Member States. Although the Directive sets minimum standards of protection, Member States have significant discretion in their implementation, leading to a varied level of protection across the EU. An additional challenge is its relevance—since the adoption of the Directive in 2012, new threats have emerged, such as cybercrime, which generate new categories of victims. It is also worth questioning the effectiveness of privacy protection for victims in light of the development of digital technologies. An interesting scientific issue remains the analysis of the extent to which the provisions of the Directive can be applied directly in cases where national implementation is incomplete or flawed, particularly in the context of CJEU rulings. These open questions highlight the need for further research and potential legislative actions to ensure that the Directive effectively responds to contemporary challenges and the needs of victims.


Julia Starybrat is a law graduate who completed her studies in an accelerated program, finishing two years in one, at the Faculty of Law and Administration at Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw. During her studies, she was the President of the Scientific Circle of Criminal Proceedings and a member of the Didactic Committee of the Faculty. Since 2021, she has been working at the Institute of Justice in Warsaw as Assistant to the Head of the International Project “Integrated System for Preventing Domestic Violence” carried out in cooperation with the University of Stavanger. She has been involved in organizing several national and international conferences and has participated as a speaker in various academic events. She is the author of several scholarly articles and the scientific editor of the book “Selected Legal Aspects of Counteracting Domestic Violence. She is currently pursuing her PhD at the Ferenc Deák Doctoral School at the Faculty of Law, University of Miskolc, and works as a junior researcher at the Central European Academy in Budapest.