Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Legal Fictions in Various Forms of Victim Participation

  • Published:
International Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Modern, Western schools of thought favoring reason put ‘fiction’ in bad light. However, fictions are unavoidable elements of the way we shape our everyday lives, our political and legal institutions, and the models we deploy in social science. Employing useful untruths in the setting of legal institutions (i.e., legal fictions) is inevitable. At the same time, noting this inevitability does not relieve us of the obligation to be aware of employed legal fictions and to regularly review their usefulness in the current framework. To this end, questions such as “what legal fictions do we actually employ,” “for whom are they useful?” and “what are the conditions for that usefulness?” should be discussed. This paper points to three legal fictions—retribution as punishment; the outcome as a return; and the adversarial nature of victim participation—and questions whether they are useful if viewed through a victimological lens.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In the interest of full disclosure, one of the authors of this paper was a member of this commission, even though he did not agree with the commission’s position on this point.

References

  • Adriaenssen, A., & Aertsen, I. (2015). Punitive attitudes: Towards an operationalization to measure individual punitivity in a multidimensional way. European Journal of Criminology, 12(1), 92–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477370814535376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amery, J. (1980). At the mind’s limits: Contemplations by a survivor of Auschwitz and its Realities. Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombe, G. E. M. (1958). Modern moral philosophy. Philosophy, 33, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antonsdóttir, H. F. (2018). ‘A witness in my own case’: Victim–survivors’ views on the criminal justice process in Iceland. Feminist Legal Studies, 26(3), 307–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-018-9386-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Appiah, K. A. (2017). As if: Idealization and ideals. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Balta, A. (2020). What’s law got to do with it? Assessing international courts' contribution to reparative justice for victims of mass atrocities through their reparations regimes. Dissertation Tilburg University.

  • Beloof, D. E. (2005). The third wave of crime victims’ rights: Standing, remedy, and review. BYU Law Review, 2, 256–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, T., Bosma, A. K., & Lens, K. M. E. (2018). Accommodating the expressive function of victim impact statements: The scope for victims’ voices in Dutch courtrooms. The British Journal of Criminology, 58(6), 1480–1498. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azy001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosma, A. K., & Groenhuijsen, M. S. (2023). Slachtofferrechten en -participatie in het strafproeces. In J. van Doorn, J. Brands, M. J. J. Kunst, E. R. Muller, A. Pemberton, & L. van Reemst (Eds.), Slachtoffers. Onderzoek, beleid en praktijk (pp. 469–491). Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosma, A. K., Groenhuijsen, M. S., & de Vries, M. (2021). Victims’ participation rights in the post-sentencing phase: The Netherlands in comparative perspective. New Journal of European Criminal Law, 12(2), 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844211008232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, J. M. (2015). Torture and dignity: An essay on moral injury. University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice and responsive regulation. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, K. (2013). Giving victims a voice: On the problems of introducing vicitm impact statements in German criminal procedure. German Law Journal, 14(9), 1889–1908.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brison, S. J. (2002). Aftermath: Violence and the remaking of the self. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brudholm, T. (2006). Revisiting resentments: Jean Améry and the dark side of forgiveness and reconciliation. Journal of Human Rights, 5, 7–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, K. (1983). Fuller on legal fictions. Law and Philosophy, 2(3), 339–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christie, N. (1986). The ideal victim. In E. A. Fattah (Ed.), From crime policy to victim policy (pp. 17–30). Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘Participation’: Models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsn010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cottingham, J. (1979). Varieties of retribution. The Philosophical Quarterly, 29, 238–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doak, J. (2008). Victims’ rights, human rights and criminal justice: Reconceiving the role of third parties. Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donner, J. H. et al (2021). Op verhaal komen: Naar een afgewogen, consistent en betaalbaar stelsel voor compensatie van slachtoffers van een strafbaar feit.

  • Duff, R. A. (2003). Restoration and retribution. In A. von Hirsch, J. V. Roberts, A. E. Bottoms, K. Roach, & M. Schiff (Eds.), Restorative justice and criminal justice competing or reconcilable paradigms? (pp. 43–60). Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, J. L. (2008). Accounting for victimization: Social constructionist perspectives. Sociology Compass, 2(5), 1601–1620. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00150.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebbesson, J. (2008). Law, power and language: Beware of metaphors. Scandinavian Studies in Law, 53, 259–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erez, E. (2004). Victim voice, impact statements and sentencing: Integrating restorative justice and therapeutic jurisprudence principles in adversarial proceedings. Criminal Law Bulletin—Boston, 40(5), 483–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erez, E., Jiang, J., & Laster, K. (2020). From cinderella to consumer: how crime victims can go to the ball. In J. Tapley & P. Davies (Eds.), Victimology. Research, policy and activism (pp. 321–357). New: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42288-2_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fassin, D. (2018). The will to punish. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Feenstra, R. (2016). Vergelding en vergoeding: enkele grepen uit de geschiedenis van de onrechtmatige daad. Wolter Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Focquaert, F., Caruso, G., Shaw, E., & Pereboom, D. (2019). Justice without retribution: Interdisciplinary perspectives, stakeholder views and practical implications. Neuroethics, 1, 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, L. L. (1930). Legal Fictions. Illinois Law Review, 25, 363–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2000). The culture of high crime societies; Some preconditions of recent ‘law and order’ policies. The British Journal of Criminology, 40(3), 347–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garvin, M. (2022). Giving meaning to the apostrophe in victim’s rights. Brooklyn Law Review, 87(4), 1109–1126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillis, J., & Beloof, D. (2001). The next step for maturing victim rights movement: Enforcing crime victim rights in the courts. McGeorge Law Review, 33, 689–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Göhler, J. (2019). Victim rights in civil law jurisdictions. In D. Brown, J. Turner, & B. Weisser (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of criminal process (pp. 276–289). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groenhuijsen, M. S. (2018). Van de regen in de drup: Van een kennisgestuurde slachtofferemancipatie in het strafrecht naar een ‘goede bedoelingen slachtofferpolitiek’ anno 2018. Delikt en Delinkwent, 48, 169–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hafer, C. L., & Begue, L. (2005). Experimental research on just-world theory. Problems, Developments and Future Challenges, Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 128–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hampton, J. (1991). Correcting harms versus righting wrongs: The goal of retribution. UCLA Law Review, 39, 1659–1702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartlief, T. (2023). Blanco regeringscheques voor strafrechters. NJB, 2023(1619), 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hebly, M. R., Lindenbergh, S. D., Visscher, L. T., & Desmet, P. T. M (2020). Compensatie en verhaal van schade door strafbare feiten. WODC.

  • Holder, R. L. (2017). Seeing the state: human rights violations of victims of crime and abuse of power. In L. Weber, E. Fishwick, & M. Marmo (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Criminology and Human Rights. Routledge.

  • Holder, R. L., & Englezos, E. (2024). Victim participation in criminal justice: A quantitative systematic and critical literature review. International Review of Vicitmology, 30(1), 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/02697580231151207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoving, R. A. (2018). Het slachtoffer op de reservebank. Over de knellende rol van het slachtoffer op de terechtzitting van een strafproces. Strafblad(6), 50–55.

  • Janaway, C. (2017). On the very idea of ‘justifying suffering’. Journal of Nietzsche Studies, 48(2), 152–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kool, R. S. B., & Verhage, G. (2014). The (political) pursuit of victim voice: (Comparative) observations on the Dutch draft on the adviesrecht. Utrecht Law Review, 10(4), 86–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laugerud, S (2020). “It’s all just a game”: How victims of rape invoke the game metaphor to add meaning and create agency in relation to legal trials. Feminist Legal studies, 257–275.

  • Lee, S., & Feeley, T. H. (2016). The identifiable victim effect: A meta-analytic review. Social Influence, 11(3), 199–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/15534510.2016.1216891

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippke, R. (2020). Retributivism and victim compensation. Social Theory and Practice, 46(2), 317–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manikis, M. (2017). Expanding Participation: Victims as Agents of Accountability in the Criminal Justice Process. Public Law, 63–80.

  • Marshall, S. S., & Duff, R. R. (1998). Criminalization and sharing wrongs. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 11(1), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehozay, Y. (2018). From offender rehabilitation to the aesthetic of the victim. Social & Legal Studies, 27(1), 97–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, W. A. (2006). An eye for an eye. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietzsche, F. (1887/1967). On the geneaology of morals (Trans. vertaling R.J. Hollingdale & W. Kaufman). Random House.

  • Pascoe, D., & Manikis, M. (2020). Making sense of the victim’s role in clemency decision making. International Review of Victimology, 26(1), 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758018805567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton, A. (2019). Time for a rethink: Victims and restorative justice. The International Journal of Restorative Justice, 2(1), 13–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pemberton, A., & Mulder, E. (2023). Bringing injustice back in: Secondary victimization as epistemic injustice. Criminology & Criminal Justice. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958231181345

  • Pemberton, A., Mulder, E., & Aarten, P. G. M. (2019). Stories of injustice: Towards a narrative victimology. European Journal of Criminology, 16(4), 391–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rock, P. (2002). On becoming a victim. In C. Hoyle & R. Young (Eds.), New visions of crime victims (pp. 1–22). Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rimé, B. (2009). Emotion elicits the social emotion: Theory and empirical review. Emotion Review, 1(1), 60–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shklar, J. N. (1964). Legalism: Law. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shklar, J. N. (1989). The liberalism of fear. In N. Rosenblum (Ed.), Liberalism and the moral life. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shklar, J. N. (1990). The faces of injustice. Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stauffer, J. (2015). Ethical loneliness: The injustice of not being heard. Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tankebe, J. (2013). Viewing things differently: The dimensions of public perceptions of police legitimacy. Criminology, 51(1), 103–135. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2012.00291.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaihinger, H. (1924). The Philosophy of ‘As If’: A system of the theoretical, practical and religious fictions of Mankind (translation C.K. Ogden).

  • Van de Ven, P. (2022). The role of social support in the aftermath of victimisation. Dissertation Tilburg University.

  • Van Noorloos, L. A. (2018). ‘Keeping up appearances’? De verschijningsplicht van de verdachte bij de terechtzitting en de uitspraak. TMSv. https://doi.org/10.5553/TMSv/2589-51092018001002006

  • Walker, N. (1999). Even more varieties of retribution. Philosophy, 74, 595–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walklate, S. (2006). Imagining the victim of crime. Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinrib, E. J. (2002). Corrective justice in a nutshell. The University of Toronto Law Journal, 52(4), 349–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wemmers, J. M. (2005). Victim policy transfer: Learning from each other. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research, 11(1), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10610-005-3624-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. E. (1984). Secondary victimization: Confronting public attitudes about rape. Victimology, 9(1), 66–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, B. (1993). Shame and necessity. University of California Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wolgast, E. (1987). The grammar of justice. Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. (2010). Punishment: Nonconsequentialism. Philosophy Compass, 5(6), 470–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zehr, H. (1990). Changing lenses: A new focus for crime and justice. Herald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zehr, H. (2002). The little book of restorative justice. Good Books.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcement (NSCR), Postbus 71304, 1008 BH, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Antony Pemberton & Alice Kirsten Bosma

  2. Leuven Institute of Criminology, KU Leuven, Louvain, Belgium

    Antony Pemberton

Authors
  1. Antony Pemberton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alice Kirsten Bosma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alice Kirsten Bosma.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pemberton, A., Bosma, A.K. Legal Fictions in Various Forms of Victim Participation. Int Criminol 4, 55–65 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43576-024-00115-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43576-024-00115-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation