Secondary victimisation, procedural injustices, and machismo: the experiences of women who access Brazil’s not-so-specialised domestic violence courts

IF 1.1 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Fernanda Fonseca Rosenblatt, Marília Montenegro Pessoa de Mello, Carolina Salazar L’Armée Queiroga de Medeiros
{"title":"Secondary victimisation, procedural injustices, and machismo: the experiences of women who access Brazil’s not-so-specialised domestic violence courts","authors":"Fernanda Fonseca Rosenblatt, Marília Montenegro Pessoa de Mello, Carolina Salazar L’Armée Queiroga de Medeiros","doi":"10.1080/01924036.2022.2157456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In 2006, Brazil’s domestic violence legislation came into force and, among other innovations, established specialised courts to deal with criminal offences committed against women in the domestic context. This legislation has been referred to by United Nations (UN) entities as a global model, particularly for the creation of such courts, which are structured to work within a multidisciplinary approach and in tandem with a network of services to support and protect victims against further violence. More recently, though, UN Women has acknowledged some limitations in their workings, particularly linked to the lack of coordination between agencies and of trained personnel. This article is aimed at supporting and illustrating such concerns. It draws on a larger empirical study to showcase how victims’ experiences of secondary victimisation are linked to judges’ focus on the criminal aspects of the Maria da Penha Law and to their lack of expertise in gender issues.","PeriodicalId":45887,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01924036.2022.2157456","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT In 2006, Brazil’s domestic violence legislation came into force and, among other innovations, established specialised courts to deal with criminal offences committed against women in the domestic context. This legislation has been referred to by United Nations (UN) entities as a global model, particularly for the creation of such courts, which are structured to work within a multidisciplinary approach and in tandem with a network of services to support and protect victims against further violence. More recently, though, UN Women has acknowledged some limitations in their workings, particularly linked to the lack of coordination between agencies and of trained personnel. This article is aimed at supporting and illustrating such concerns. It draws on a larger empirical study to showcase how victims’ experiences of secondary victimisation are linked to judges’ focus on the criminal aspects of the Maria da Penha Law and to their lack of expertise in gender issues.
二次受害、程序不公和大男子主义:巴西不太专业的家庭暴力法庭上的女性经历
摘要2006年,巴西的家庭暴力立法开始生效,除其他创新外,还设立了专门的法院来处理在家庭背景下对妇女犯下的刑事犯罪。这项立法被联合国实体称为全球模式,特别是建立此类法院的模式,这些法院的结构是在多学科的方法下工作,并与支持和保护受害者免受进一步暴力侵害的服务网络协同工作。然而,最近,妇女署承认其工作存在一些局限性,特别是与各机构之间缺乏协调和训练有素的人员有关。本文旨在支持和说明这些关切。它借鉴了一项更大的实证研究,展示了受害者的二次受害经历如何与法官对《玛丽亚·达佩尼亚法》刑事方面的关注以及他们在性别问题上缺乏专业知识联系在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
18
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信