《超越信仰:马拉维的“确证规则”如何妨碍为性犯罪受害者伸张正义,并基于性别歧视妇女和女孩——呼吁立法改革》

Michelle Xiao Liu, Alexandra K. Creel Benton
{"title":"《超越信仰:马拉维的“确证规则”如何妨碍为性犯罪受害者伸张正义,并基于性别歧视妇女和女孩——呼吁立法改革》","authors":"Michelle Xiao Liu, Alexandra K. Creel Benton","doi":"10.52214/CJGL.V40I3.8650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \nSexual abuse against women and girls in Malawi is pervasive, and survivors face significant barriers in their quest for justice. One particular barrier—the “corroboration rule”—stands out as a discriminatory and onerous roadblock for women and girls who seek justice as victims of sex crimes. \nThe corroboration rule is a common law rule of evidence and criminal procedure that requires prosecutors trying sex offence cases to have independent evidence in addition to a victim’s testimony, even if that testimony is credible and shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the sex crime. This heightened evidentiary standard for victims of sex crimes is based on the stereotype that women and girls are apt to lie about being raped and that their word alone—no matter how clear, convincing, or credible—should not be enough to put a rapist behind bars. Because of the rule, too many women and girls in Malawi are not treated equally in the criminal justice system, and rarely are those who sexually abuse them brought to justice in court. This fosters a climate of impunity for rapists and sexual abusers. \n \n \n \nWhile many countries around the world used to require the corroboration rule in sexual offences, in the modern era, Malawi stands apart from the rest of the world as one of the few countries that still requires its use as a matter of common law. However, with a constitution that guarantees equality for women and girls and equal access to justice under the law, and as a State Party to treaties that guarantee the same, Malawi’s Parliament should abolish the corroboration rule. \n \n \n \n \n \n","PeriodicalId":84468,"journal":{"name":"Columbia journal of gender and law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Belief: How the \\\"Corroboration Rule\\\" in Malawi Obstructs Justice for Victims of Sex Crimes and Discriminates Against Women and Girls on the Basis of Sex—A Call for Legislative Change\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Xiao Liu, Alexandra K. Creel Benton\",\"doi\":\"10.52214/CJGL.V40I3.8650\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\nSexual abuse against women and girls in Malawi is pervasive, and survivors face significant barriers in their quest for justice. One particular barrier—the “corroboration rule”—stands out as a discriminatory and onerous roadblock for women and girls who seek justice as victims of sex crimes. \\nThe corroboration rule is a common law rule of evidence and criminal procedure that requires prosecutors trying sex offence cases to have independent evidence in addition to a victim’s testimony, even if that testimony is credible and shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the sex crime. This heightened evidentiary standard for victims of sex crimes is based on the stereotype that women and girls are apt to lie about being raped and that their word alone—no matter how clear, convincing, or credible—should not be enough to put a rapist behind bars. Because of the rule, too many women and girls in Malawi are not treated equally in the criminal justice system, and rarely are those who sexually abuse them brought to justice in court. This fosters a climate of impunity for rapists and sexual abusers. \\n \\n \\n \\nWhile many countries around the world used to require the corroboration rule in sexual offences, in the modern era, Malawi stands apart from the rest of the world as one of the few countries that still requires its use as a matter of common law. However, with a constitution that guarantees equality for women and girls and equal access to justice under the law, and as a State Party to treaties that guarantee the same, Malawi’s Parliament should abolish the corroboration rule. \\n \\n \\n \\n \\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":84468,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Columbia journal of gender and law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Columbia journal of gender and law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52214/CJGL.V40I3.8650\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia journal of gender and law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52214/CJGL.V40I3.8650","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

马拉维对妇女和女童的性虐待十分普遍,幸存者在寻求正义的过程中面临巨大障碍。其中一个特别的障碍——“确证规则”——对作为性犯罪受害者寻求正义的妇女和女孩来说是一个歧视性的、繁重的障碍。确证规则是一项普通法的证据和刑事诉讼规则,它要求检察官在审理性犯罪案件时,除了受害人的证词之外,还要有独立的证据,即使该证词是可信的,并且无可置疑地表明被告犯下了性犯罪。这种针对性犯罪受害者的更高证据标准是基于一种刻板印象,即妇女和女孩倾向于就自己被强奸的事撒谎,而且她们的话——无论多么清晰、有说服力或可信——都不足以将强奸犯关进监狱。由于这项规定,马拉维有太多的妇女和女孩在刑事司法系统中没有得到平等对待,对她们实施性虐待的人很少被送上法庭。这助长了对强奸犯和性虐待者不受惩罚的气氛。虽然世界上许多国家过去都要求在性犯罪中采用确证规则,但在现代,马拉维与世界其他国家不同,是少数几个仍然要求将其作为普通法事项使用的国家之一。然而,马拉维的宪法保障妇女和女童的平等权利和依法平等诉诸司法的机会,而且作为保证同样权利的条约的缔约国,马拉维议会应该废除确证规则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond Belief: How the "Corroboration Rule" in Malawi Obstructs Justice for Victims of Sex Crimes and Discriminates Against Women and Girls on the Basis of Sex—A Call for Legislative Change
Sexual abuse against women and girls in Malawi is pervasive, and survivors face significant barriers in their quest for justice. One particular barrier—the “corroboration rule”—stands out as a discriminatory and onerous roadblock for women and girls who seek justice as victims of sex crimes. The corroboration rule is a common law rule of evidence and criminal procedure that requires prosecutors trying sex offence cases to have independent evidence in addition to a victim’s testimony, even if that testimony is credible and shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the sex crime. This heightened evidentiary standard for victims of sex crimes is based on the stereotype that women and girls are apt to lie about being raped and that their word alone—no matter how clear, convincing, or credible—should not be enough to put a rapist behind bars. Because of the rule, too many women and girls in Malawi are not treated equally in the criminal justice system, and rarely are those who sexually abuse them brought to justice in court. This fosters a climate of impunity for rapists and sexual abusers. While many countries around the world used to require the corroboration rule in sexual offences, in the modern era, Malawi stands apart from the rest of the world as one of the few countries that still requires its use as a matter of common law. However, with a constitution that guarantees equality for women and girls and equal access to justice under the law, and as a State Party to treaties that guarantee the same, Malawi’s Parliament should abolish the corroboration rule.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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