Operating networks for victim support services

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

AcknowledgementsThe World Bank and the Multi Donor Trust Fund for Justice SectorSupport(MDTF-JSS),inpartnershipwithVictimSupportEurope(VSE),areimplementing a number of activities aimed at strengthening victimsupportservicesinSerbia.

The reportwaspreparedbyMs.Aleksandra Ivanković (VictimSupportEurope)andMr.LeventAltan(VictimSupportEurope).CountryexpertsJérômeBertinand Isabelle Sadowski, fromFédérationFranceVictimes(INAVEM) and Leena-Kaisa Åberg, from Rikosuhripäivystys Suomessa(VictimsupportFinland,RIKU)providedinformationonlegalregulationandpracticeintargetedcountries.

Ms.GeorgiaHarley(JusticeReformSpecialistandTaskTeamLeader)andMs.MarinaMatić Bošković (Justice Reform Expert) provided valuableguidanceandadvice.

CONTENTS

ExecutiveSummary..........................................................................................................11.Introduction.................................................................................................................42.Historyofdevelopmentofvictimsupportorganisations..............................................7

2.1.DevelopmentofRIKU–VictimSupportFinland...................................................82.2.DevelopmentofFederationFranceVictimes.......................................................9

3.Legalarrangementsforthefunctioningofnetworks..................................................124.Financesandfunding..................................................................................................15

4.1.Finland.................................................................................................................174.2.France..................................................................................................................22

5.Organisationalandgovernancestructure..................................................................255.1.Finland................................................................................................................27

Organisationalframework.....................................................................................27

Regionalpresence.................................................................................................28RIKUstaff...............................................................................................................30

Volunteers.............................................................................................................33

5.2.France.................................................................................................................34Membershipbase..................................................................................................34

FranceVictimesstaff.............................................................................................36

Governanceframework.........................................................................................36

Volunteers.............................................................................................................38

6.Evaluationandmonitoring.........................................................................................396.1.Finland................................................................................................................406.2.France.................................................................................................................41

7. Serviceprovision...................................................................................................457.1.Finland................................................................................................................467.2.France.................................................................................................................51

8. Externalrelations...................................................................................................568.1.Finland................................................................................................................578.2.France.................................................................................................................59

9. Conclusionsandrecommendations......................................................................629.1.Frameworkforprovidingvictimsupportservices..............................................629.2.Fundingandfinancialresponsibility...................................................................649.3.Serviceprovisionandqualitycontrol..................................................................659.4.Humanresources................................................................................................679.5.Externalrelations................................................................................................68

Operatingnetworksforvictimsupportservices

1

ExecutiveSummary

Thepresentreportislookingintotwoexamples–thoseofFinlandandFrance,ofhowtoorganisecomprehensivevictimsupportservicesatthenationallevel.BothcountrieswerechosenbasedonfindingsofpreviousresearchcarriedoutundertheMDTFJSS,Analysisofvictims’rightsandservices in Serbia and their alignmentwith EUDirective 2012/29/EU1.ThatresearchshowedinparticularthatSerbiahadsomelevelofexistinginfrastructureforthedeliveryofvictimservices.Thoughmanyofthesewerefocusedonspecificgroupsofvictims,anumberhadindicatedaninterest to widen the scope of their activities. At the same time, theSerbian State had indicated that where possible they wanted to useexistingresources,ratherthancreateanwhollynewsystem,whichwouldbeaninefficientandnon-inclusiveapproach.BothFranceandFinlandareexamplesoflongandwellestablishednationalservices,meetingcriteriain the EU Victims Directive which used existing infrastructures andorganisationstodeliveranationalsystem.

In Finland, a country with 5,5 million inhabitants, victim support isprovided by Rikosuhripäivystys (Victim Support Finland, RIKU). Theorganisationdisposeswithabudgetofnearly€4million,withwhich itemploys 50 staff members and supports the work of more than 400volunteers.

RIKUisnotalegalentityinitsownright,anditoperatesasaninformalnetworkofsixcoordinatingorganisations,fivecivilsocietyorganisations(CSOs)andtheFinnishLutheranChurch.TheparticipatingCSOslandtheirlegalpersonalitytoRIKU,toensureitsoperations.Thismeansthatatotalof 17 different legal entities give support through formally employingstaff and ensuring administrative support.While such a structure canseemcomplicated,itappearstobeworkingwellinFinland.Importantly,suchastructuresignificantlyreducesadministrativecostsofRIKUitself,asadministrativeandfinancialprocedures,forexample,aretakencare

1ReportisavalableattheMDTFJSSwebsitehttp://www.mdtfjss.org.rs/en/mdtf_activities/2016/-analysis-on-serbia-s-alignment-with-the-eu-directive-2012-29-#.WXctaoVOK3h


2

ofbythecoordinatingorganisations.Itmay,however,beassumed,thatthisincreasescostsofcoordinatingorganisations.

MostofthebudgetisobtainedfromtheMinistryofJustice.Thisbudgetis,forthetimebeing,directlynegotiatedbetweentheMinistryofJusticeand RIKU, even though plans are being made to make the financingcompetitive.SomeprojectsarefurtherfundedfromtheFinnishsystemof the State monopoly on gambling, where RIKU participates on acompetitivebasiswithotherprojectapplications.

RIKU has a governance structure, which ensures that its coordinatingpartners,aswellasMinistryofJustice,arerepresentedandparticipateinthedecision-makingprocess.

RIKU,incooperationwithcoordinatingpartners,andheavilyrelyingonahighnumberoftrainedvolunteers,providesservicesdirectlytovictimsontheentireterritoryofFinland.

At the same time, inFrance,a countryof66,8million inhabitants, thetotal budget for victim support is estimated at €50million and victimsupport is ensured through a total of 130 CSOs. These CSOs are allseparate legalentities, jointlycoveringtheentireterritoryofmainlandandoverseasFrance,andareunitedundertheumbrellaofFédérationFranceVictimes(VictimsFrance,previouslyknownasINAVEM),whichis also a separate legal entity. Theentirenetworkemploys1300 staff,whileFranceVictimesitself,inchargeofprovidingalimitedsetofservicesandcoordinatingthenetwork,employs20.

FundingforFranceVictimes,aswellasforthemembersoftheirnetwork,is ensured through various resources.Majority of annual funding (€26million) is provided through the Ministry of Justice, by means ofcompetitive funding. The remaining funding necessary is obtainedthroughvariousotherresourcesfromthecentralgovernment,regionalandlocalauthorities.

France Victimes has anelaborate governance structure, including theGeneral Assembly, Board of Directors and Scientific Council, whichensuresthatoperationsofthenetworkanditsmembersareconducted


3

inlinewiththerulesofgoodgovernance,aswellasinaccordancewithexternalStateregulationsandself-regulatoryinstruments.Forbecomingandremainingamemberofthenetwork,everyCSOisrequiredtosignupto and abide with a strict set of rules and expectations, whichstandardisethevictimsupportinFrance.

FranceVicitmesonlydirectlyprovidesthenationalhelplineservice,whilemember organisations provide other types of services to victims. Inaddition,theyalsoprovidetrainings,includingthefreeinductiontrainingcoursesforthestaffofmemberorganisations.

BothRIKUandFranceVictimesdevelopandmaintainclosecooperationwithnationalauthorities,inparticulartheMinistryofJustice.Inaddition,theyalsoworkondevelopingsynergiesat thenational,Europeanandinternational level, to ensure exchange of experience and influenceEuropeanandinternationalpolicies.


4

1. Introduction

1. Ensuring support for victims of crimes is indispensable toensuringtheeffectivenessoftheirfundamentalrightsingeneral,andaccess to criminal justice in particular. Given the high incidence ofvictimisationinEurope,thelikelihoodisthatatleastonceinalifetimeeachEuropeanwillfallvictimofacrime.

2. ProvidingsupporttovictimsofcrimeisinlinewithArticle47ofthe Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Crime is a particularlysevere violation of fundamental rights and consequently, criminal lawandcriminaljusticeendeavourtoprotectthemostsignificantaspectsofindividuals’fundamentalrights.EuropeanCourtofHumanRights(ECtHR)case lawalso supports thisapproach. In two landmarkdecisions,bothconcernedwith incidentsofsexualviolence, theECtHRsaidthatwhenessential aspects of human rights are at stake, effective deterrence isindispensable and can be achieved only by criminal law provisions.However, thepunishmentcriminal lawprescribeswill–at least in thelongrun–onlybecredibleif it isbackedbyeffectivelawenforcementmachineryandifstateauthoritiesdemonstratetheirresolvetocarryoutprovisions of the law. In parallel, victims should be afforded effectivevictimsupport.2

3. Meeting victims' needs before, during and after criminalproceedings may considerably mitigate negative consequences ofvictimisation. It can alsoprevent these consequences fromworseningduetobadtreatmentduringtheprocess.Ifvictimsreceiveappropriatesupportandprotection, theywill recovermorequicklybothphysicallyandemotionallyfromthecrime.3

2ECtHR,XandYv.TheNetherlands,No.8978/80,26March1985,para.27;M.C.v.Bulgaria,No.39272/98,4December2003,para.150;alsoValiulienėv.Lithuania,No.33234/07,26March2013,para.75,asperEUFundamentalRightsAgency,VictimsofcrimeintheEU:theextentandnatureofsupportforvictims,2014,availableat:http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/2014/victims-crime-eu-extent-and-nature-support-victims3Impactassessment


5

4. Victim support organisations provide an important socialfunction. Research shows that victims who have been in touch withvictimsupportserviceswerelessaffectedbytheaftermathofthecrime.4

5. Under the Stabilisation and Association Agreement with theEuropean Union, Serbia undertook an obligation to put into placecomprehensive,generalservices,whichwillensurethatallvictimsofallcrimes, regardless of where they are in Serbia, in line with therequirementsoftheEUDirective2012/29/EU.Inthatvein,theMDTFJSSentered into a partnership with the Serbian Government on the onehand,andVictimSupportEuropeontheother,tosupportandfacilitatetheprocessofsettingupofsuchcomprehensivevictimsupportservicesinSerbia.

6. Asthefirststepinthatprocess,in2016,MDTFJSSproducedthereport “Analysis of victims’ rights and services in Serbia and theiralignmentwithEUDirective2012/29/EU5.” The report identified fourbasicframeworksfordeliveringvictimsupport:1)Single,nationalState-fundedcivilsocietyorganisation(CSO),providingsupportservicesforallvictimsofcrime;2)SingleState-runvictimsupportservice(entityinitsownrightororganisationdeliveringotherservices);3)AnetworkofCSOscoordinatedbyasinglebodyreceivingStatefunding4)AnetworkofCSOscoordinated by a Steering committee funded through the State. Thereport also suggested that, given the specific situation in Serbia, theFrench model of support might be most viable. It suggested that a‘federation of organisations should be brought together under theumbrellaofasinglebody–whetherNGO,independentauthorityorstateentity. This would enable the network to establish its own nationalidentity (particularly important for increasing victim uptake), have astrongpartnershipwithgovernment,ensurethereisconsistencyandco-4Althoughthesamplesizeofthetargetgrouphadbeensmall,accordingtotheauthors,thedegreeofconsistencyintheresultssuggeststhatthepositiveimpactofvictimsupportservicesmaybeshowntobestatisticallysignificantinlarge-scaleanalyses.Maguire,MandC.Corbett(1987).Theeffectsofcrimeandtheworkofvictimsupportschemes.Gower:Oxford,pp169-170,asperMatrixreport5Fulltextofthereportisavailablehere:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/141201473857309462/pdf/108242-V1-WP-P121377-PUBLIC-ABSTRACT-SENT-VictimSupportServices.pdf


6

ordination at a national level, and ensure standards are appliednationally.’

7. As the second step in theprocess, theexistingvictimsupportservicesinSerbiaweremapped.Thereport“OverviewofexistingvictimsupportservicesinSerbia”6,whichisbeingpublishedin2017,foundthat,whileanequalnumberofstateandnon-stateactorsprovideservicesforvictims in Serbia, CSOs are providing a wider range of morecomprehensiveservices,tobroadergroupsofvictims.Inthepreparationofthereport,bothStateandnon-statestakeholderswereconsulted,andthereportsuggeststhatthebestresultsinprovidingservicesforvictimsinSerbiawouldbeachievedbyestablishingavictimsupportnetwork.

8. ThepresentreportlooksintohowtwoEuropeanvictimsupportnetworks function.The twoexamples thathadbeenselected,Finlandand France, basedon theprevious analysis and research, as themostrelevantforSerbiancontext7.Thetwonetworksareobservedfromtheaspect of their history, finances and governance, requirements forevaluation and monitoring, service provision and external relations.Finally,thereportsuggestsasetofconclusionsandrecommendations,whichflowfromtheresearchandthetextofthereport.

6Fulltextofthereportisavailablehere:http://www.mdtfjss.org.rs/en/mdtf_activities/2017/victims-access-to-support-services-in-serbia#.WXc4X4VOK3g7ThechoiceofcountrieswasbasedonresearchconductedforthereportonAnalysisofvictims’rightsandservicesinSerbiaandtheiralignmentwithEUDirective2012/29/EU,takingintoconsiderationlegaltraditionandtheneedtouse,tothelargestextentpossible,theexistingresourcesandexperienceinthefield.


7

2. Historyofdevelopmentofvictimsupportorganisations

9. Thedevelopmentofvictims’ rightsandpolicies inEuropeandthe US began its slow evolution in the 1950s and 60s, with actionsgainingpaceinthe70sand80s.Changewasstronglyinfluencedbyanumber of factors: the establishment of state victim compensationschemes,thedevelopmentofvictimology, largeincreasesincrimeandconcerns over the criminal justice system, the rise of the women'smovement – in particular focused on sexual crimes and domesticviolence,andthegrowthofvictimactivism

10. In the UK, the idea that the state should provide financialreimbursement to victims of crime for their losses was initiallypropoundedbyEnglishpenalreformerMargeryFryinthe1950s.Itwasfirst implemented inNew Zealand in 1963 andGreat Britain passed asimilar law shortly thereafter. Early compensation programs werewelfareprogramsprovidinghelptovictimsinneed8.

11. IntheUS,highcrimeratesledtotheformationofthePresident'sCommissiononLawEnforcementandtheAdministrationofJusticein1966, which conducted the first national victimization surveys. Thesurveysshowedthatvictimizationrateswerefarhigherthanshown inlawenforcementfiguresandthatmanynon-reportingvictimsactedoutof distrust of the justice system9. Increasing knowledge and theavailability of data undoubtedly supported advances in the victims’agendaonbothsidesoftheAtlantic.

12. Ataroundthesametime,victims’rightsbegantobeprogressedat the international level; in particular the UN Declaration of BasicPrinciplesofJusticeforVictimsofCrimeandAbuseofPowerwasadoptedin 1985. This was soon followed by the Council of EuropeRecommendationR(85)onthepositionofthevictimintheframeworkof

8https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/ncvrw/2005/pdf/historyofcrime.pdf9https://www.ncjrs.gov/ovc_archives/ncvrw/2005/pg4c.html


8

criminallawandprocedure,10withfurtherprotectionbeingestablishedthrough the evolution of human rights laws and a little laterwith EUvictimsrightslegislation.

13. With new knowledge, pressure and expectations, neworganisationsbegan tobesetup, focussedspecificallyonsupportingvictimsofcrime.Oftenstartingasorganisations focussedonwomen’sissues,establishedbylawenforcementandprobationpersonnel,orbyvictimsthemselves,eachcountryhasitsownparticularhistoryofvictimsupportbasedasmuchonspecificculturalnorms,legalsystemsandtheexistingNGOenvironment.

14. InEuropesomeoftheoldestvictimsupportorganisationssuchasWeisserRingGermanandVictimSupportEnglandandWalesweresetupinthemid-70sasaresultofincreasingawarenessoftheissuesand dissatisfaction with the treatment of victims. Similarly, FranceVictimeswassetupinthe80swithRIKUFinlandbeingestablishedalittlelater in the early 90s. Over the course of the next decades, bothorganisations have developed their network or federation of supportorganisationstobeamongstthemostsuccessfulinEuropetoday.

1.1.DevelopmentofRIKU–VictimSupportFinland

15. Bythebeginningof1990sthevictimsupportmovementgainedmomentuminFinland.Someservicesexistedalready,notablythroughorganisations already working with victims of crime, particularly withcertainspecificgroupsofvictims, forexamplewomen.Sinceageneralvictim supportorganisationhadbeenestablished in the late1980’s inSweden, it served as a model on which Rikosuhripäivystys (VictimSupportFinland,RIKU)wasestablished.

16. Anumberofcivil societyorganisations (CSOs)was involved intheprocessofsettingupRIKU.Asthemovementwasinitiallyverymuchfocused on issues of domestic violence, the Finnish Gender Equality

10https://polis.osce.org/node/4651


9

Council also had an active role in development of the framework. Inaddition,FinnishLutheranChurchalsotookpartintheinitialdiscussions.By1995,however,itwasagreedthatRIKUwillfocusonprovidingsupportto all victims, which discouraged the Gender Equality Council fromfurtherparticipation.ThisishowithappenedthatRIKUwasofficiallysetupbysixCSOsandtheLutheranChurch.AllbutoneCSOsarestillactingasimplementingpartners11.

17. RIKU is organised as a network of partner organisations.However,whileitisarecognisedandrecognisablebrandnameinFinland,providingimportantservices,itdoesnothaveseparatelegalpersonality.TheimplementingpartnersagreedthatcoordinationoftheRIKUnetworkwouldbediscussedeveryfiveyears,withtheaimtoswitchcoordinationfromonepartnertoanotherafteracertainperiodoftime,withoutfixinga schedule.Hence,during the first12yearsof itsexistence,RIKUwascoordinatedby theFinnishRedCrossand functionedunder their legalpersonality,whichwasfollowedbysevenyearsofexistenceundertheframework of the Finnish Federation of SettlementHouses. Finally, in2014itmovedontooperatewithintheFinnishAssociationforMentalHealth.

1.2.DevelopmentofFederationFranceVictimes

18. DevelopmentofthevictimsupportmovementinFrancestartedsomewhat earlier. Namely, already by the end of the 1970s theunderstandingthatvictimsofcrimesshouldreceivecompensationwasbeingdeveloped.

19. However, the approachof ensuring support to victims and tomake victim support a policy in its own right did not really gainmomentumuntiltheearly1980s.Itisatthattimethattheauthorities

11TheNGOpartnersaretheFederationofMotherandChildHomesandShelters(Ensi–jaturvakotienliitto),theMannerheim League forChildWelfare (Mannerheimin Lastensuojeluliitto), the FinnishAssociation forMentalHealth(SuomenMielenterveysseura),theFinnishRedCross(SuomenPunainenRisti)andtheFinnishFederation of Settlement Houses (Suomen Setlementtiliitto). Only the Feminist Association Unioni hassteppedoutoftheoriginalcoordination.


10

realisedthataresponsecomplementarytothatoftheStatewasessentialinordertoconsiderasmuchaspossibleneedsofvictimsofcrimes.

20. Itwasinthiscontextthatin1981,RobertBadinter,theMinisterof Justice,setupacommissiononthemattersofvictimsupportandappointed Professor PaulMilliez to chair itswork.The report of thecommissionwassubmitted in1982. Itsetout, interalia,aproposal tosupportthecreationofanetworkforvictimsupport.Themainideawastosetupvictimsupport that ispresent,availableandaccessible.Suchassistanceshouldnotbeinquisitiveorconstraining,butgeneralandopento all victims, without any discrimination or difference in access ortreatment.

21. Inordertoputinplacesuchproposals,in1982,theMinistryofJustice setupanoffice forprotectionofvictimsandprevention. Theofficestillexiststoday,underthenamelebureaudel'aideauxvictimeset de la politique associative (Office for Victim Support and RelatedPolicies,BAVPA).It isattachedtotheServicedel'accèsaudroitetàlajusticeetdel'aideauxvictimes(ServiceforAccesstoLawandJusticeandVictim Support, SADJAV). The office now has a mission to study,coordinateanddevelop,incooperationwithotheradministrativebodies,reforms and actions to take in the area of victim protection. Twoimportant tasks stillwithin the competence of the office arework onfurther improving the instruments for compensation and ensuringvictims’ participation in criminal proceedings on the one hand, andsupporting the development of victim support organisations, on theother.

22. Following this pioneeringwork of theMinistry of Justice, thefirstCSOsprovidingsupporttovictimsweresetupinOctober1982inRouen,ColmarandLyon.

23. In1983,theMinistryofJusticedesignatedabudgetlinereservedtosupportsuchinitiative.Overtheyears,victimsupportorganisations


11

weresetupineachoftheadministrativedepartmentsinmetropolitanFrance,aswellasoverseas.

24. The Institut National d’Aide aux Victimes et de Médiation(NationalInstituteforVictimSupportandMediation,INAVEM)wassetup as a national organisation in 1986, on the occasion of the firstmeetingofabout15alreadyexistingvictimsupportorganisations. Itsaimwastoensurefunctioningandcoordinationofanationalnetworkofvictimsupportorganisation.In2004INAVEMbecameafederationofitsmemberassociations,with130membersthroughouttheentireterritoryunderthesovereigntyoftheRepublicofFrance.

Figure1–FranceVictimes(INAVEM)network

25. In2016,INAVEMrebrandedandembracedanewidentity.ItisnowcalledFranceVictimes,anentitythatpursuesthesamegoalsasINAVEM, but also represents services that its members provide tovictims.ThenewconceptoftheorganisationmeansthatFranceVictimes


12

is a professional network of general victim support, but also for itspartners.

26. Currently the France Victimes network brings together 130victimsupportorganisationsacrossmetropolitanFranceandoverseas.

3. Legalarrangementsforthefunctioningofnetworks

27. Asmentionedabove,RIKUisnotaseparatelegalentity12.Thus,it needs to operate within the framework of a national coordinationorganisation,which,inaway,lendsitslegalpersonalitytoRIKU,toenableits functioning. For example, all funding is formally applied for andreportedto,onbehalfofRIKU,bythecurrentnationalcoordinator.Thishas,since2014,beentheFinnishAssociationforMentalHealth.

28. RIKU is set by virtue of an Agreement between the siximplementing partners. The agreement on appointing the nationalcoordinatoriscontainedinanannextothisagreement,whichisrevisedperiodically. The Agreement is approved by the authorisedrepresentatives of all the implementing partners, in line with theirstatutesandregulations.AmendmentstotheAgreementarepreparedbyRIKUSecretariatandapprovedbytheBoardofRIKUbeforesendingittothesignatories.

29. Thereisnospeciallegislationthatwouldregulatevictimsupportin Finland. The Criminal Investigations Act (Esitutkintalaki 805/2011;chapter4,section10)containstheonlyreferencetovictimservices,inobligingthepolicetorefervictimstovictimservicesindefinedsituations.

30. Ingeneral,CSOsinFinlandareregulatedbytheAssociationsAct(Yhdistyslaki503/1989),whichisapplicabletotheFinnishAssociation

12Thissituationinwhicharenownedorganisationoperatesfordecadeswithouthavingalegalpersonalityis,by allmeans, unique and should be seen as an exception. It does show, however, that for a network tofunction,administrativeand legal frameworksare less important if it ispossibletoprovideserviceswithinsomeoftheexistingstructures.


13

forMentalHealth,withinwhichRIKUiscurrentlyoperating.TheonlyoneofthesixRIKUpartnersthatisnotoperatingunderthislegislationisthe Finnish Lutheran Church, which functions under a separatelegislation,theChurchAct(Kirkkolaki1054/1993).

31. TheFinnishgovernmentwas innoway involved in settingupRIKU, which remains strongly rooted in the civil society movement.Nonetheless, RIKU has developed a strong partnership with theGovernment,andarepresentativefromtheMinistryofJusticesitsontheBoardofRIKU.

32. UnlikeRIKU,FranceVictimeswassetupasalegalentityfromitsinception. It is incorporated inaccordancewith theFrenchActon theRight of Association from1901. Every organisationmember of FranceVictimesisequallyincorporatedinaccordancewiththislegislation.

33. FranceVictimeshasitsownstatute,whichwasadoptedbyitsmembers and which regulates the principles of its functioning. TheStatutecanonlybechangedwiththeapprovaloftheGeneralAssembly,attheproposaloftheorganisation’sGoverningBoardoronefifthofitsmembersandwithvotesofatleasttwothirdspresentorrepresented.

34. Again, unlike RIKU, the development of France Victimes wasstronglyinfluencedbytheofficialcriminaljusticepolicies,whichwerelargelybuilt on strongpartnershipwith civil society.Many legislativeinitiatives,sincethe1970sinfluencedtheorganisationandoperationofFRANCEVICTIMESandtodayvictimsupport remainsapriority instatepoliciesinFrance.

35. Inthatvein,in1999theGovernmentorderedareportonvictimsupport,whichresultedinmorethanonehundredrecommendationsand proposals towards improving victim support, treatment ofcomplaints, information for victims and their accompaniment13. As aresultofthisreport,theGovernmentformulatedaninterministrialplan

13Marie-NoëlleLienemann,Pourunenouvellepolitiquepubliqued'aideauxvictimes(Towardsanewpublicpolicy on victim support), submitted to Lionel Jospin, the PrimeMinister on 26 mars 1999, available at:http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/rapports-publics/994000991/index.shtml


14

toworktogetherwiththeStateservices,localcommunitiesandtheCSOstowardsimprovementofthesituationofvictims.

36. In2000thisinitiativeresultedintheLawNo2000-516of15June2000ensuringprotectionofthepresumptionofinnocenceandvictims’rights.Thislegislationistheguidingdocumentontherightsofvictims.Itinstitutionalises victim support organisations. As a matter of fact, itintroducesArticle41(7)oftheCriminalProcedurecode,whichprovidesthat the public prosecutor can approach a victim support association,which has entered into an arrangement with the court of appeal, toensurethatthevictimreceivesadequatesupport.

Figure2–Operatingavictimsupportnetwork

Francevictimes• Set-upinfluencedbygovernmentalpolicies

• Legalentity• Strongformalstatuteinplace

• Nogovernmentalinvolvementinthegovernancestructure

• Legislativebasisforinvolvementinproceedings

RIKU,Finland• NoGovernmentinvolvementintheset-up

• Notalegalentity• Flexiblenon-statutorystructure

• ParticipationoftheGovernmentinthegovernancestructure


15

4. Financesandfunding

37. As explored in a separate report prepared by the MDTF JSS,fundingforvictimsupportservicescanbeensuredthroughanumberoffundingstreams14.Somefundingcanbeprovidedfromthegeneralstatebudget,whilealsospecificfundingstreamsreservedandringfencedtofinancevictimsupportservicescanalsobeputinplace,eitherbymeansofintroducingnewfundingschemesorredirectingtheexistingonestovictim support. In Finland, themajority of this funding has historicallycome from theStatemonopolyongamblingandgamesof chance,anincome stream which provides more than a billion euros a year isreturnedtosocietythroughfundingofdifferentsocialprojects.France,on the other hand, maintains an elaborate and generous system ofcompensation for victims, funding for which comes from a levy onpropertyinsurancecontracts.

38. Asthereportfinds,aslongasafundingstreamensuresastableand sufficient funding for victim support services, it is a matter ofpoliticalpriorityandsocialconsensustodecidewhichapproachtotake.Anyapproach,however,shouldensurecompliancewiththerequirementoftheVictims’RightsDirectiveto‘ensurethatvictims,inaccordancewiththeirneeds,haveaccesstoconfidentialvictimsupportservices,freeofcharge,acting in the interestsof thevictimsbefore,duringand foranappropriatetimeaftercriminalproceedings’.

39. Both Finland and France dedicate significant budgets to theirrespectivenetworks,eitherthroughdirectnegotiationinFinlandorbymeansofcompetitiveawardsinFrance.Asarule,additionalfundingisensured also through projects. However, it needs to be noted thatfunding core victim support services through projects would bedangerous,asvictimsupportprovidersneedtobeabletorelyonsteadyfunding streams. Taking into consideration the need to ensure

14Reporton“Ensuringfundingforvictimsupportservices”describeshowdifferentsystems,includingtheFrenchandtheFinnish,ensurefundingforvictimsupport.FullreportisavailableontheMDTFJSSwebsite.


16

transparency and competition, when victim support services are notbeingprovidedbytheGovernment,itneedstobeensuredthatexternalserviceprovidershavealevelofstabilityandcertaintyinordertobeabletoprovideservicesinaconsistentandstructuredway.

40. Takenintoaccountthedifferencesinpopulationsizes,however,the cost per capita is very similar. Namely, in France, €50 million isallocatedtoatotalpopulationof66,81millionandinFinlandupto€4milliontoapopulationof5,5million.TheaveragebudgetpercapitainFrance is, therefore, app. €0,75 and in Finland €0,73. In order todetermineanadequatebudget forvictimsupport services inSerbia,aseparateimpactassessmentshouldbeprepared.

Figure3–FundingforvictimsupportservicesinFranceandinFinland

France

• Annualbudget:€50million• Percapitaspending:€0.75• CorefundingfromtheMinistryofJustice

• Membershipfees• Fundingforvictimcompensationfromcontributiononinsurancecontracts

• Projects(fromothersources)• Totalspending

Finland

• Annualbudget:€4million• Percapitaspending:€0.73• Until2016:fundingfromgamblingproceeds

• Since2016:grantfromtheMinistryofJustice

• Projects(fromgamblingincomeandothersources)


17

4.1. Finland

41. RIKUemploys50permanentstaffmembers,engagesmorethan400volunteers,anddisposeswithabudgetofnearly€4milliononapopulation of about 5,5 million inhabitants. Since it has never beenestablishedasalegalentity,therewerenocostsrequiredtosetuptheorganisation. However, to register the name, which was needed toensureRIKU’sbrand,didincursomecost.InformationforthetimewhenRIKUwasfirstsetupisnotavailable,andatpresentdaypricesthatcostwouldhavebeenbetween€225and€275.

42. For1994,whichwasthefirstyearofRIKU’saction,abudgetofFIM(Finnishmarkka)182,000,whichwouldconverttoaround€30,500today15.FIM82,000(approx.€13,700)wasraisedthroughafundraisingcampaign sponsored by a TV programme, while the remaining FIM100,000 (€16,800)were secured fromtheMinistryof Interior.Alreadythefollowingyear,thefinancesimprovedsignificantlyastheFinnishSlotMachineAssociationtookovertheRIKUfunding,andallocatedagrantofFIM670,000(€113,000),whichwascomplementedbyadditionalfundingfromtheMinistryofJustice,intheamountofFIM150,000(€25,200).Thetrendofbudgetgrowthhasbeensteadysince,andasignificantincreasein the budgetwas ensured in 2017,when the State funding for RIKU,through theMinistryof Justice,amounted to€3,7million. Inaddition,almost €500,000 was generated for project funding, mostly throughfunding fromtheFinnishSlotMachineAssociation16.Moreover,at thelocallevelanadditionalsumofatotalofupto€80,000isgeneratedfromthemunicipalitiestosupportlocalRIKUwork.

15TheFinnishMarkkaswasvaluedat5.94573totheEuro.16FormoredetailsonhowtheincomefromtheFinnishSlotMachinesAssociationisgeneratedandused,theMDTFJSSproducedin2017aseparatereportonfundingforvictimsupportorganisations.


18

Figure4–developmentofvictimsupportbudgetinFinland

43. Toprovidethecurrent levelofservices,RIKUneedsat least4millioneurosforbasicservicesinFinland,whichhasapopulationof5,5million. However, RIKU recognises that theremay bemany victims inneedwhoarenotbeingreachedbytheorganisation.Inaddition,projectfunding is needed to support development of new services. In thisestimation, a significant part of the work needs to be done byprofessionallyguidedvolunteers.

44. Themanagement costs of RIKU are difficult to estimate sincetheyarenotclearlyseparatedinthebudgeting.Theheadquarters’workclearly focuses more than the regions on the management of thenetwork. RIKU estimates that around 50%of total headquarters costsrelate to management of the network. However, it needs to beunderstood that the headquarters do not directly support victimsthemselves,anditisaverysmallsecretariat,whichneedstoensurethatregional offices have all the support they need. They work on thegovernance issues,developguidelinesand instructionsfortheregions,ensuring communications for the entire network and develop training

€0

€500,000

€1,000,000

€1,500,000

€2,000,000

€2,500,000

€3,000,000

€3,500,000

€4,000,000

€4,500,000

1994 1995 2014 2015 2016 2017

VictimSupportBudget


19

materials17.However,oneshouldkeepinmindthatalsothiswork,eventhoughindirectly,isdirectedforthesupportofthevictims.Theworkwithvictims would not be possible without a well-functioning operationalstructureandresourcesformarketingtheservices.

45. Inpracticalterms,RIKU’swork isspreadacrosssevenregions,andeachregionalRIKUbranchhastheirownbudget.GiventhatRIKUisnotalegalentityperse,theorganisationalstructureoftheimplementingpartnersisusedtoensureRIKU’swork.Asimplementingpartnershavetheirregionalmembersinthesevenregions,differentorganisationsthatare designated to coordinate operations in each of the regions areallocated different parts of budgets. RIKU’s national funding is beingtransferred to the regions according to so-called money transferagreements,whichregulatetheuseandreportingofthesefunds.

46. ThepreliminarydecisionoftheapprovedfundingfortheregionsismadebytheExecutiveDirectorofRIKUandapprovedbytheBoard.The regions prepare their budgets according to instructions from theheadquartersanddiscussionsintheManagementteam,whichconsistsoftheExecutiveDirector,theDevelopmentDirectorandthe7RegionalDirectors.TheregionscanpresentnewcostsaccordingtotheirneedsandthesesuggestionsarethenevaluatedbytheExecutiveDirector,whoisresponsibleforpreparingthenationalbudgetofRIKU.RIKU’sbudgetispresented to the Board so that it is divided into 8 main sections:headquartersand7regions.

17AsRIKUisnotrequiredtonotetheirtimespentondifferenttasks,itisdifficulttogiveanexactestimateoftheexactcosts.


20

Figure5–allocationofbudgetpernumberofinhabitantsandperregioninFinland

47. RIKU’sbasicwork–boththenetworkingandvictimservices–isfundedbytheState.Thishasbeenthesituationsince2017.SinceRIKUdoesnothavemembersofitsown,therearenomembershipfees.TheimplementingpartnersdonotpaycontributionstoRIKU.

48. ThefinancingstructureofRIKUhaschangedduringitshistory.Forsome20yearsthemainfunderhasbeentheFinnishSlotMachineAssociation.TheMinistryofJusticehasbeentheothermainfunderforalmostaslong,butwithasmallerproportionoffunding.

49. Asof2016theFinnishState,throughtheMinistryofJustice,tookovertheprimaryresponsibilityforfundingRIKU.Theyfeltthatthiswasnecessary since obligations in the EU Victims Directive are imposeddirectlyonStates.

50. Fundingcurrentlyappearsverystable.TheStateiscommittedtofinancing general victim services since this is a requirement of the

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

SouthFinland

EasternFinland

Lappland WesternFinland

SouthWesternFinland

NorthFinland

InnerFinland

2014 2015 2016 INHABITANTS NUMBEROFVICTIMS


21

Victims’ RightsDirective.However, political changes or competition inserviceprovision could change the situation. TheMinistryof Justice isalso considering whether to classify RIKU activities under Service ofGeneral Economic Interest rules.18 This would secure funding for amaximumof10yearsbutwouldalsorequireacompetitiveprocess.Thishasnotbeenthecasesofar,asRIKUnegotiatesfundingdirectlywiththeMinistryofJusticeandhasitsrepresentativeonitsBoard.

51. RIKU’sfinancialstructureisregulatedbylaws,instructionsofthefunders, by RIKU’s own financial regulation aswell as the rules andregulations of the different coordinating NGOs. Spending on theregionallevel isauthorisedbytheRegionalDirectors,whomustreportspending to headquarters/ the Executive Director. The regionalcoordinationorganisationisresponsibleforcontrolsattheregionallevel.At the national level and in the headquarters, the Executive Directorauthorizesspendingandthenationalcoordinationorganisationcarriesoutcontrols.RIKU’sBoardapprovestheoverallyearlyspendingofRIKUthoughformallytheBoardoftheFinnishAssociationforMentalHealth(thenationalcoordinationorganisation)isresponsible.

52. Thereisanannualfinancialaudit,whichismadeatthenational,regional and local levels. Auditing systems are regulated in Finnishlegislation.Accordingtolaw,theauditorshavetobeindependent.Theauditingisreportedtofunders,whoinadditionhavedifferentsystemsofcheckingthefinancesandrequiringaudits.

18Servicesofgeneraleconomicinterest(SGEI)areeconomicactivitiesthatpublicauthoritiesidentifyasbeingofparticularimportancetocitizensandthatwouldnotbesupplied(orwouldbesuppliedunderdifferentconditions)iftherewerenopublicintervention.TheyaresubjecttoEUcompetitionandfreemarketrules,aimedinparticularatpreventingstateaidfromdistortingcompetition;http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/overview/public_services_en.html


22

4.2. France

53. France Victimes, as a legal entity, employs a total of 20 staffmembers.12staffmembersareinchargeofmanagingvariousaspectsofthenetworkandexternalrelations,while8provideservicesthroughthenationalhelpline.

Figure6–FranceVictimesorganigram

54. InFrance,thereisnormallynocostwhatsoevertoestablishanassociation.Thesimplefactofdepositingthestatutewiththecompetentauthoritieswillsuffice.However,inordertobeabletoprovideservices,associations,naturally,needresources.ThefirstbudgetinFrancewhich


23

specificallyallocatedfundingforvictimsupportin1982,settheamountofFFR1million(equivalenttoaround€150,000today19)forsupporttovictims20.

Figure7–VictimSupportServicesbudgetinFranceovertheyears

55. In2017,theMinistryofJusticesetsasidearound€26millionforVictim Support. This amount is distributed locally to victim supportservices via the courts of appeal, as described below in more detail.Today,the130associations,whichemploy1,300professionalstaff,useservices of 1/3 volunteers and provide support to 300,000 victimsannually,estimatethattheyneedatotalof€50milliontoensuretheirservices. The budget is developed by each member association, andbased on this estimate the Ministry of Justice determines grants.FinancingbytheMinistryofJusticeforlocalorganisationsisimplementedthroughthecourtofappeals21andbeforeadecisiononfundingismade,a ‘management dialogue’ is convened. The amount of funding willdependonthetotalamountavailableforvictimsupport,whichisdefinedthroughthestatebudget.

19ThevalueoftheFrenchFrancwasfixedat1Euro=6.55957FrenchFrancs20Francehadapopulationofcloseto60millionin1982.21SeeMDTFJSSreport:Ensuringfundingforvictimsupportservices


24

56. Tomeetthegap,associationsaccessarangeoffundingsources,including;

- Other state budget lines, such as interministerial funds for theprevention of delinquency or funds from the Ministry for theequalitybetweenwomenandmen;

- Publicresourcesrelatedtocertainmandatoryactionspaidfromthejusticebudget(e.g.fundingfortheaccompanimentofminors)

- Publicresourcesfromdepartments,municipalitiesandregions- Otherownresources,suchasmembershipfees,chargestoprivate

enterprises,provisionoftraining,donationsetc.

57. Morerecently,victimsurchargeswereintroducedinFrance.Thiswasmadeinanattempttoensureadditionalfundingforvictimsupportservices. However, as mentioned above, the implementation of thelegislation is still not fully in place, hence any evaluations would bepremature.

58. EverymemberofFRANCEVICTIMESis independent,maintainsitsownbudgetandintroducestheirownrequestsforfundingwiththefunders. France Victime’s members are separate legal personalities,associationsestablished independentlyand inaccordancewithspecificneeds of the geographic area they operate in. Apart from themembership criteria and standards described further in this report,FranceVictimesisnotparticipatinginthemanagementprocessorserviceprovisionbyitsmembers.

59. Financial control is exercised in several ways. The GeneralAssembly approves financial reports, votes for budgets and in generaltakes note of financial operations of France Victimes. The Board ofDirectorstakesresponsibilitytonegotiate,proposeforadoptionoftheGeneral Assembly acquiring and disposal with property, acceptingdonations etc. The Bureau is responsible for decisions related toemploymentofstaff.Treasurerworksunderthecontroloftheexternalauditor. Treasurer is responsible for the organisation’s accountancysystemandmakes an annual presentationof accounts to theGeneralAssembly,upontheirclosure.


25

Figure8–FranceVictimesFinancialControlchart

5. Organisationalandgovernancestructure

60. Goodgovernanceisakeytofunctioningandstabilityofanycivilsociety organisation. This is particularly important for large, nationalorganisations,whichprovidedirectservicestovulnerablegroups.Thisiswhyitiscrucialtoputintoplacestronggovernancestructures,whichwillensureefficiency,transparencyandintegrity.

61. A governance structure needs to be based on a sharedresponsibility between the State and service providers and clearcompetenciesofeachactor.Behindgoodgovernancemustlieprinciplesthatareformallystructuredanddocumented.Whilethereisnorecipeforagoodgovernancestructure,someof itscharacteristicshavebeengenerallyrecognized.


26

62. The Corporate Governance Association of Ireland (CGAI), forexample,proposesasetoffollowingcriteria22tobefollowed.

Figure9–criteriaforgoodgovernance

63. In view of the above criteria, there are many approaches tosettingupgovernanceinorganisationsprovidingsupporttovictims.Acoupleofthoseapproachesarepresentedherewith.

22See,CGAI,IrishDevelopmentNGOsCodeofCorporateGovernance,availableat:http://www.dochas.ie/sites/default/files/CGAI_Governance_Code__FINAL_0.pdf


27

5.1. Finland

Organisationalframework

64. RIKUisnotaclassicmembershiporganisation.Namely,itdoesnotoperateontheprincipleofdevelopingitsownmembershipbase,butratherreliesonthenetworkofitsimplementingpartners,whoare,forthe most part, membership organisations. RIKU, however, has noinfluenceonthemembershipbaseofitsfounders,butworkscloselywiththem in the implementation of its core activities, namely support tovictims,throughthesevenregions.

65. RIKUhasaveryspecificorganisationalstructure(seeFigure2).Thus,RIKUispracticallymanagedbyseveralorganisationsontheregionalandlocallevel.Atthemoment,therearesevenregionalofficesand30servicepoints.Altogether,thereare17differentCSOscurrentlyinvolvedinthemanagementofRIKU.Amoneytransferagreementissignedwithalltheimplementingregionalorlocalcoordinationorganisations,makingfinancialarrangementsacrosstheboard.

66. RIKUismanagedbyaBoard-NationalSteeringGroup,theroleand functions of which are defined in the implementing partners’Agreement. As shown in the Figure 2, the Board consists ofrepresentatives from the implementing partners and the Ministry ofJustice.Inaddition,therearetwoexpertmembers,onefromthePoliceBoard and one from the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. TheExecutiveDirectoristherapporteurfortheBoardandtheDevelopmentDirectoristhesecretary.ThemaintaskoftheBoardistoguideRIKU’swork and approve the work plans and budgets as well as the annualreportsandfinancialstatementsofthepreviousyear.

67. Nonetheless,thefinallegalresponsibilityfortheworkofRIKUlieswiththeBoardoftheFinnishAssociationforMentalHealth(FAMH),whichislendsitslegalentitytoRIKU.TheExecutiveDirectorofFAMHisresponsibleforpresentingRIKU’sissuestoFAMH’sBoard.SheisalsotheVicePresidentofRIKU’sBoard.


28

Figure10–OrganigramofRIKU23

Regionalpresence

68. RIKUprovidestheirservicestovictimsthrough itspresence inthe regions. Apart from the Headquarters in Helsinki, RIKU is alsopresentinsevenregionalpoints.RIKU’sfieldworkisguidedbyseveralnational and regional/local agreements concerning both managementissuesandmoney-transfersaswellasvariousregulationsandguidelines.

69. RIKUdevelopsa setof standard, rulesandpolicies,whicharecompulsory for all its staff, regardless of implementing organisationthey are formally associated with. This way RIKUs management andworkingmethodsarekeptsimilarindifferentpartsoftheorganisation.23 In yellow –RIKU structures which operate independently under the legal patronage of the FinnishAssociationforMentalHealth.OthercoloursshowresponsibilityofdifferentorganisationsfordifferentpartsofRIKU’swork,throughthesevenregionsandtheHelsinkiHeadquarters.Atregionalandlocallevels,branchesofthefiveorganisationsinvolved,whichhavetheirseparatelegalpersonality,maybeinvolvedintheformalenablingofRIKUstaff toperformtheir tasks.Hence,a totalof17 legalentitiesare involved insupportingRIKU’swork.


29

Forexample,RIKUhasafinanceregulation,whichalltheimplementingNGOshaveagreedtofollow.TheworkwithclientsandthevolunteeringsystemsareguidedbyguidelinesandtheseissuesaredealtwithinRIKU’strainings.

Figure11–RIKUregionalpresence

70. RIKUhasalsoaregionalgovernancestructure.Allofthesevenregionshavetheirownsocalledregionalworkinggroups inwhich theregional sections of RIKU’s main national implementing partners arerepresented.TheRegionalDirectorsare therapporteurs/secretariesoftheseworkinggroups.

71. Theroleofregionalworkinggroupsistofollowandsupportthework of the regions. These working groups build an important


30

cooperation structure for the implementing partners at the regionallevel.Theyalsoapprovethebudgetandtheworkplanforthenextyearand approve the reports from the previous year. The seven RegionalDirectors, RIKU’s Executive Director and Development Director workintensively together forming the so called operational managementteam. The management team prepares and plans RIKU actions, isresponsibleoftheimplementationandfollow-upofRIKU’sdecisionsandhasaveryimportantroleinsupportingtheworkofthenineDirectorsoftheBoard.

RIKUstaff

72. To ensure its core work, RIKU secretariat employs 50 staffmembers. In addition, five staff members are employed to deliverprojects.Staffpositionsaredividedbetweenstaffinheadquarters,staffin the regionsandproject staff. Staffemployment forRIKU isensuredthroughthefoundingorganisationssincewithoutlegalpersonality,RIKUcannotemployitsownstaff.Itthereforereliesonpartnerstoformallydoso.StaffisledandprincipallymanagedbytheExecutiveDirector,whoisassistedbytheDevelopmentDirector,aswellasadirectorineachoftheregions.

73. RIKU’sBoardisresponsibleforselectingtheExecutiveDirector.Legally theExecutiveDirector is recruitedbythenationalcoordinationorganisation.Theemploymentprocedureofotherstaffmembersoftheheadquarters follows the regulations of the national coordinationorganisation. The line manager has a major role in the recruitmentprocess but all the employment decisions at the headquarters areformallymadebytheExecutiveDirectorofRIKUand,insomecases,bytheExecutiveDirectorofthenationalcoordinationorganisation.

74. Employment is based on competitive recruitment, but someelementarycriteriaaredeterminedforeachposition.Hence,councillorsand project planning officers should have a degree in social work orequivalent area. Regionalmanagers should have an academic degree,


31

preferably an advanced degree (Masters). The Executive Director,Development Director and Project Managers all need to have higheracademic degrees, while the communications officer needs to have arelevant academic degree and strong experience in communicationswork.

75. Regional Directors are recruited in cooperation with RIKU’sExecutive Director and the leadership of the regional coordinationorganisations. Inpractice,theinvolvementandinterestoftheregionalcoordination organisation in the recruitment process varies. ThecounsellorsarerecruitedincooperationwiththeRegionalDirectorandthe regional/local coordination organisation but the Regional Directorhasthemainrole.

76. Normally, RIKU’s recruitment announcements are public.However, some coordinating organisations have internal guidelinesaccordingtowhichopenpositionsshouldfirstbeinternallyadvertised.Nevertheless, it is not compulsory to hire a person from within theorganisation except in some situations where Finnish legislationprioritisesinternalrecruitmentofredundantstaff.

77. Thereisageneralnon-discriminationprinciplethatRIKUabidesby.Moreover,alltheemployersinvolvedinemployingstaffforRIKUhavetohavetoabidebyequalityprinciplesimposedbythelegislation.RIKUhasdataprotectionguidelinesandguidelinesonhowtocheckthenewvolunteers’criminalbackground.

78. Managementstructureintheregionsisalsospecific.EachofthesevenregionsisledbyaRegionalDirector.TheRegionalDirectorsarelinemanagerstocounsellorswhoworkwithclientsandsupervisevolunteers.Somecounsellorsbelongadministrativelytodifferentorganisationsthanthe regional coordination organisation, which manages the regionaloffice.Inthesesituations,thecounsellorhasalsoanothersupervisorwhoisusuallytheDirectorofthissmallerlocalcoordinationorganisation.

79. The Regional Directors have, in principle, two linemanagers.One is theExecutiveDirectorofRIKUand theotherone is theperson


32

responsiblefortheregionalcoordinationorganisation.Thereisadivisionoftasksbetweenthetwolinemanagers,withRIKUExecutiveDirectorofRIKU focusing more on content, while the manager of the regionalorganisation is mostly concerned with daily operations andadministrativesupervision.

Figure12–RIKUorganigram

80. Projectscanbecoordinatedbyeithertheheadquartersoroneof the regional offices. When the Headquarters are coordinating aproject, the responsibility is either on the Development Director or aProject Coordinator. When projects are managed by regional offices,usually the Regional Director is responsible for the project, and cansuperviseanyspecificprojectstaff24.

81. Thebiggestchallengeinthissystemlieswiththepositionofthestaffsincetheirlegalemployersaredifferent.Insomecases,theirrights

24SomeexamplesofprojectsmanagedbyRIKU:developmentofoutreachactivitiesandworkwithmigrantvictims;developmentofoutreachactivitiesandworkwithyoungvictims;developmentofvolunteeringworkwithvictimsofdomesticviolenceorprojectinvolvingvolunteerstosupportvictimsinthecourtproceedings.


33

vary according to the collective labour agreement applicable in theorganisationactingastheofficialemployerofthestaffmember.Salariesalso vary to some extent but RIKU’s salary guidelines are quite wellfollowedbythedifferentimplementingorganisations.

Volunteers

82. RIKU has over 400 volunteers who play an important role inimplementingservices25.Theyareresponsibleforhandlingcallstothehelp-line services and for parts of the chat services. Theirmainwork,however, is to provide face-to-face support services for victims.Counsellors at service points (RIKU’s local offices) are responsible forrecruiting,guidingandorganisingtrainingforvolunteers.

83. Volunteers are not involved in the governance structure.However, they are consulted in preparing RIKU’s strategies andassessmentsonvolunteering.

84. Volunteers do not need to have a specific professionalbackground.Themaincriteriaarethattheyareadults(ca25-70yearsofage when recruited) who have achieved a certain balance in life andwhose own personal situation is not in crisis. They should be open-mindedandrespectfulofallpersonswithoutanydistinction;theyshouldnothaveacriminalrecordandshouldbewellmotivatedandcommittedtovolunteeringinRIKU.

85. Therecruitmentofvolunteersisathreestageprocess.Inthefirststage, volunteers are invited, on a rolling basis, to send a writtenapplication.Invitationstoapplyarepublicisedthroughnewspapers,radioannouncements,aswellasusingtheexistingnetworkofcontacts.Ifthe25In2016,RIKUengagedatotalof426volunteers,whoworkedanestimated22300hoursduringtheyear.Thismakesca57hourspervolunteer.Thehourcalculationisnotmadesothatvolunteersregisteralltheirhours.Instead,thereisasystemwheretheirspecifictasks(whichtheyregister,e.g.courtsession,meetingtheclient)haveacalculatedaveragevaluethatisusedtocalculatetheoverallhours.Thisfigurealsoincludestimespentontrainingsandguidance.RIKUvolunteersmainlyworkassupportpersonstoindividualvictims.Theyaccompanyvictimstointerviewsbythepolice,courthearingsetc.Volunteersalsoanswerhelplinesandonlinechatservice.Alltheseaddtothehourstheywork.Thereisnominimumcommitmentrequirementforvolunteers.Eachofthemisacceptedanddoasmuchastheycan.


34

applicationissatisfactory,candidatesareinvitedforaninterview,duringwhichtheinterviewersevaluatetheirsuitabilityforthedifficultworkwiththevictims.

86. Inthethirdstage,volunteersaretrainedtoworkwithvictimsofcrimes.Atthetrainingstage,theinstructorsalsoevaluatetraineesandmaydeterminethatapersonisnotthebestcandidateforthiswork(e.g.they lack empathy, their communications skills are not satisfactory,behaviouralissuesarenotedetc.).Thetrainingtakesbetween40and60hours.

87. In Finland, there is a strong tradition of volunteering. RIKUsvolunteeringisamongthemoredemandingvolunteertasks.Itfunctionswellduetogoodtrainingandongoinggroupcounsellingsessions.Alsothedirectsupportofthepaidstaffinhighlyimportant.

88. Onaverage,avolunteerremainscommitted forseveralyears.Whilerecordsondurationofvolunteeringarenotbeingkept,someofthevolunteershavebeenwiththeorganisationformorethan10years.

5.2. France

Membershipbase

89. Frenchnetworkforvictimsupportoperatesthroughtwomainchannels. Through the federation, the head of the network, whichmaintainsthetelephonesupportandgeneralservices,andthrough130localassociationsrepresentedthroughouttheentireFrenchterritory.

90. Unlike in Finland, the French victim support organisation is alegallyestablishednetwork,whichrecruitsmembership. Itsmembersarealsoalllegallyestablishedassociations,allincorporatedinaccordancewiththe1901LawonAssociations.

91. TobecomeamemberofFranceVictimes,anorganisationneedsto accept general membership conditions. As such, members acceptFranceVictimes’ statutes,andagree to follow internal regulationsand


35

pay a membership fee. Once an application is submitted, there is anelaborate process before an organisation is accepted into fullmembership.

92. The Federation France Victimes has established an ethicalframeworkthattakesonthevaluesofassociativevictimsupportandAssistanceandassistancetovictims.Theseinternalregulationsareanimportantpartofthenetworkidentity,whichhelpsensureitsintegrityandreputation.Animportantpartoftheself-regulationofthenetworkistheCodeofEthics26andServicesChart27,whicheverymembermustsign-upto.Thenetworkthenfollowsupontheimplementationofthesecodes.

93. Ethicalconductconstitutesanimportantpartofthenetwork’soperation.Avictimwhohasconcernsabout theethicalconductofanassociationmay file a complaint to FranceVictimesor theMinistryofJustice. France Victimes also has an internal warning system, whichtriggersaprocedureofsupporttoorganisations,iftheyareexperiencingdifficultiesofanykind.

94. TheAssociationcanbesanctionedbytheFranceVitimesandtheMinistry, if thet havenot followed theethical principles. The formermayexcludetheassociationfromtheirmembership,whilethelattercansuspend their funding. So far, however, such sanctionshavenotbeennecessary.

95. The general principles of action applicable to victim supportassociationsarebasedonthisphilosophyofethicalconductandstrongself-regulation.Theseprinciplesareasfollows:

- Effectivereceptionofanyperson,withoutdiscriminationofanykind, provided that they consider themselves the victim of anattackontheirpersonorproperty,individuallyorcollectively;

- Freeservices;26AvailableinFrenchat:http://www.france-victimes.fr/index.php/docman/grand-public/26-code-de-deontologie-inavem27AvailableinFrenchat:http://www.adiav2000.org/ADIAV/media/telechargement/22_A_Charte-Inavem.PDF


36

- Confidentialityofinterviews;- Respectforthevictims’decision-makingautonomy;- Takingintoconsiderationanycomplaintfromthevictim;- Non-representation of victims at court (except for ad hoc

administrationmissions);- Prohibitionofreferringvictimstoadesignatedprofessionalinthe

commercialorservicesector.

96. Inaddition,acommonframeworkofminimuminterventionforallFranceVictimesassociationshasbeenestablished.Thisframeworkisputintoplacetoguaranteeuniformservicestovictimsthroughoutthecountry by all associations. Activities should be supported by aprofessional core team which includes at least one coordinator andseveralspecialistscomposedofatleastoneservicecoordinatoraswellasspecialistsinlawandpsychology.Theteamshouldalsohaveaspeciallytrainedstaffmemberwhoprovidesfirstcontactandwhoistrainedintheassessmentandmonitoringofvictims'difficulties.

97. Withintheseboundaries,everyFranceVictimes’memberhasitsowninternalregulationsandstructure.However,aseachmemberisalegalentityintheirownright,withtheirownspecificapproach,theywillnotbedescribedhere.

FranceVictimesstaff

98. FranceVictimes staff are involved in twomainwork streams.The secretariat ensures administrative work, such as management,coordinationofthenetwork,training,communications,accountancyetc.The other main stream of work is running the telephone platform08Victimes,anationalhotlinecreatedin2001.

Governanceframework

99. ThenetworkisadministeredbyaBoardofDirectorsofbetween18 and24members, representativesofmember associations,wherethey are employed or elected to a function. Directors perform their


37

functionsasvolunteers.TheBoardofDirectorsconvenesatleastthreetimesayear.TheFoundingPresidentofFranceVictimes,aswellastheoutgoing presidents during the three years after the end of theirmandate,arealsoinvitedtotakepartintheBoardmeetings,andhaveaconsultative vote. Similarly, the Board involves in its work, with aconsultativevote,theScientificCouncilofFranceVictimes.

100. TheBoardelects,byasecretballot,themembersoftheBureau,which is composed of: the President, two vice-Presidents, SecretaryGeneral, Treasurer and assistant-Treasurer. TheBureaumembers areelected for a term of three years, under the condition of reelection.PresidentrepresentstheFederationinallcivilmatters.

101. France Victimes also appoints a Scientific Council, whichpromotesvictims’issuesandcontributestowardsthepromotionoftheorganisationscoremessage.CurrentlytheCounciliscomposedofsevenmemberswhoareprofessionalsinthefieldsoflaw,psychiatry,sociologyetc.

Figure13–FranceVictimesgovernancestructurein2016/17


38

102. The Democratic nature of France Victimes is particularlyreflectedinitsGeneralAssembly,whichiscomposedofallitsmembers.TheAssemblymeetsonceayeartodiscusseventsfromthepreviousyearandtakethecourseofactionforthefuture.TheGeneralAssemblyalsohasthetaskofelectingmembersoftheBoardofDirectors.

103. The130membershaveasimilarstructure.Theymostlyhaveaprofessional secretariat, the number of staff depending on particularcircumstances.Atthemoment,about1,300professionalscontributetotheworkofthenetwork,outofwhichtwo-thirdsareemployed,whileone-third are volunteers. Regarding the employment of staff, FranceVictimesoritsmemberassociationadvertisevacanciesandhirestaffinatransparentmanner.Boththenetworkanditsmemberorganisationsareequalopportunityemployers.

Volunteers

104. Volunteers are often engaged to support associations inprovidingfirstresponse,ensureliaisonwiththesalariedstaffetc.UnlikeRIKU,FranceVictimesanditsmembersdonotrelysubstantiallyonthework of volunteers. The practices among different members of thenetworkvary,andwhilesomeoftheminsistontheprofessionalisationofallpositions,othersrelysignificantlyonthevolunteersupport.

105. The French Volunteering Organisation (l'association FranceBénévolat) introduced, in 2007, the volunteering passport. Thevolunteeringpassportallowstoitsholderstovalidatetheirvolunteeringworkintheirsearchforemployment28(e.g.theFrenchstateemploymentoffice or a future employer will accept such experience as workexperience)andcanberecognisedinpursuingrecognitionofexperienceforaqualification(ValidationdesAcquisdel'Expérience)29.

28Inpractice,volunteeringpassportrecordinformationnotunlikethosecontainedintheworkbooklet(radnaknjižica)inSerbia.29Thissystemallowspersonstoobtaindegreesthroughworkexperience,ratherthanthroughformaleducation.


39

106. Participation in the volunteering passport scheme is non-compulsory for either the volunteers or the host organisations.Nonetheless, French volunteers and civil society organisations areencouragedtouseit,andthereisastrongsupportfromthegovernmentandthecivilsocietysectorfortheinitiative.

107. France Victimes has developed guidelines to encouragevolunteeringinitsmemberorganisation.Nevertheless,theyhavelittlecontrol over how members actually engage volunteers and to whatextent.Somemembersengagevolunteersforspecifictasks,suchasforcertaintimelimitedjudicialactions,whilesomeothersengagevolunteersonamorepermanentbasis,toensurecertainsupportserviceswhicharetakingverylongtimebutarenotwell-paid(e.g.representationofaminorincourtproceedings,adhocmissionadministratorsetc.)

108. Regardless of the circumstances of their engagement,volunteers are expected to be available in the long-term and all arerequiredtoundergotraining.Trainingrequirementswilldependonthespecific objectives of volunteering, e.g. whether they are expected toworkdirectlywithvictimsornotetc.Nonetheless,allvolunteersneedtoreceive the basic training. This basic training consists of a 35-hourmodule, which includes sessions on history, ethics, listening skills,organisation of the judiciary, victims’ rights, social support, traumasensibilisationetc.).Basictrainingcanbefollowedbyinductioncourseorapprenticeshipwithanorganisation.

109. Incertaincases,volunteerswithspecificskillsetswillbesoughttoperformcertaintasks. Itshouldbenotedthat inrecentyearsmoreand more students apply for volunteering positions with the Frenchvictimsupportassociations.

6. Evaluationandmonitoring

110. Inordertokeepaccountofthequalityandefficiencyofservices,it is necessary to put into place an evaluation and/or monitoring


40

mechanism.Thisevaluationcanbedoneinternally,externally,orboth,and should ensure accountability of service providers to victims andjustifythesocialinvestmentintosuchservices.

6.1. Finland

111. RIKU’sevaluationprocessusesanumberoftoolstoinformtheSecretariatandtheBoardabouttheimpactofthework.Theprocessisnotcurrentlyorganisedthroughasinglecoherentsystem,however,butratherconsistsofcollectingthefollowingelements:

- statistics of clients in different services and in differentregions/localservicepoints;

- statisticsonreferralstoRIKU’sservices;- self-evaluationquestionnairescollectedfromvolunteers;- feed-backquestionnairescollectedfromclients;- possibilityforopenfeed-backonthewebpage;- staffandboardmeetingswhereworkisevaluated;- adhocexternalevaluations;30- evaluations conducted by funders - usually self-evaluation

systemsincludingstatistics;- yearly auditing of RIKU’s finances, which includes auditing

governance.

112. Evaluation is prepared and conducted by the DevelopmentDirector.FindingsarepreparedandpresentedtotheNationalSteeringgroupandtothefinancers.

113. The existing evaluation system is quite random and sporadic,andisnotwelldesignedtohaveanimpactontheworkwithvictims.Itcan,tosomeextent,helptoidentifysomeproblemsintheregions–forexample, a decreasing number of clients in a region that does notcorrespondtoadecreaseincriminality.Shouldsuchasituationoccur,it

30Forexample,in2017anation-wideevaluationwasmadeoftheprofessionallyguidedvolunteerservices,includingmystery-shoppingofthetelephoneservices.


41

wouldbeanalysedandmeasurestaken,eventhoughevaluation isnotaimedatactuallyidentifyingsuchproblemsordealingwiththem.

114. Putting in place a comprehensive evaluation system isconsideredtobeveryimportantinparticularforgoodgovernanceandas a tool for ensuring better services are provided. A comprehensivesystemofevaluationiscurrentlybeingdevelopedandshouldbeinplaceby2018.Atthispoint,itistooearlytosaywhatitsmainfeatureswillbe.

6.2. France

115. FederationFranceVictimesisunderanobligationtoprovideanevaluation service to its member associations. A specific service,operatingwithinthenetwork’ssecretariatisputintoplacetoensurethatthis task is performed. France Victimes operates a ‘networkmanagement’ service which consists of five staff members who areresponsiblefortheorganisationofagoodqualityvictimsupportserviceacrosstheentireterritoryofFrance.Suchvictimsupportserviceshouldbewithineasyreachofvictims,shouldrespectinternalregulations,assistmembers in theirmission, facilitate theirworkandprovide training totheirteams.

116. A member package is provided to candidate associations toinform them aboutmembership requirements. The package containsFranceVictimes’statutes,codeofethics,CharterofServices,minimumrequirementsforinterventionandafinalactivityreport.

117. Thefollowingdocumentsmustbesubmittedwithamembershipapplication:

- AmotivationletteraddressedtothePresidentofFranceVictimes,in particular expressing the adequacy of organisation’s activitywiththenetwork’sstandards;

- Thestatutesoftheorganisation,includingthecompositionoftheBoardofDirectorsorothergoverningbodies;

- Afinancialreportorabudget;- Itsapproachtoprovisionofvictimsservices;


42

- AnyotherdocumentthatmayhelpFranceVictimestounderstandtheorganisation’sactivitiesforvictims.

118. Every organisation which applies for membership in theFederation France Victimes is now subjective to an initial entryevaluation. The process of joining the membership happens in fourstages:

- The network management team receives requests formembership, ensures that they are complete, collects all thenecessary details about the operations of the candidateassociation and finally draws up a technical sheet for theadministrators.Dependingonthesituation,asitevisitmaybeputintoplace;

- A group of the Board members convenes a meeting with therepresentativesofthecandidateassociation.Thismeetingcanbeorganised in person, by telephone, or an exchange can beconvenedinwriting;

- Theapplication is then forwarded to theBoardofDirectors forconsiderationandavoteonmembership;

- Initial membership is conditional and valid for one year only,duringwhichtimetheassociationismonitored;

- Ifaftertheprobationyear,theBoardofDirectorsissatisfiedwiththe standards in the candidate organisation, it becomes a fullmemberofFederationFranceVictimes.


43

Figure14–BecomingamemberofFranceVictimes(flowchart)

119. Carefulscrutinyofperformancedoesnotstopwithacceptancetofullmembership.Thereareseveralways inwhichanalarmmaybetriggered,regardlessofthetypeofdifficultyanorganisationmayface–financial, political, structural or other. This alarmmay be triggered incasesoforganisational,financial,oranyotherdifficultiesanorganisationmayface.Itcanberaisedbyusers,organisationsthemselves,MinistryofJusticeorotheractors.

120. Onceaproblemisidentified,analertprocedureislaunched.Therole of the Federation is to help the association to overcome anydifficulties they are facing. In such cases, an individual assistance andevaluation mission is convened, through which representatives ofFederationFranceVictimesauditthemembershipoftheassociationinquestion.


44

121. Followingthemission,anauditreportiscompiledandprovidedto the responsible officers of the association in question. The reportcontainsrecommendationsforovercomingthecrisis.Dependingonthesituation,thereportmayalsobeforwardedtoStateauthorities,iftheyareinvolvedinfinancingtheassociation.

122. IncasesoffailuretorespectFranceVictimes’rules,inparticularthecodeofethics,aprocessfortheexpulsionfromthemembershipcanbeinitiatedbytheBoard.ThismayhappeniftheassociationrefusestocontributetothefunctioningoftheFederationduringtwoconsecutiveyearsorduetootherseriousreasons.Beforetheprocedureisinitiated,the President of the association in question is invited to discuss thesituationwiththeBoardofDirectors.

123. Currently,thenetworkisconsideringintroducingacertificationprocedureunderthelabel“Marianne”.Since2003theMarianneCharthasbeenwhichaimstoimprovethequalityofserviceinpublicservices.More than 2000 public organisations have signed up to the chart andabidebyitsstandards.

124. TheMarianne standards have increasingly become a point ofreference. It lays out 19 commitments concerning the reception andservice provided to users of public services. These standards allow anexternal recognition of quality, which can then be valued by anorganisation’spartnersandfunders.Thestandardsmaybeappliedtotheentire organisation or only to those parts which provide services toclients. An external evaluation which verifies compliance with thecommitmentsdefinedwithintheframeworkisrequiredtobeawardedaMarianne.

125. In February 2017, the Secretary of State for victim supportpublished a report on the implementation of public policy on victimsupport. The report suggests that the network of victim supportassociations,whichcarryoutapublicmission,shouldbestrengthened.Itproposesthatfollowingapproachesshouldbepiloted:


45

- anationalaccreditationprocedureadministeredbytheAccesstoRights and Justice and Victim Assistance Service (SADJAV),implementedgraduallyforaperiodoffiveyearsonadeclarativebasis;

- aconcertedelaborationofanational referencesystemofgoodpracticesinsupportofvictims.

126. Theproposal,ifacceptedassuggested,wouldrequirelegislativeintervention.ItiscurrentlybeingconsideredbytheGovernment.

7. Serviceprovision

127. Centralising victim support coordination does not necessarilymean that services are centrally provided. The entire philosophy ofvictim support services is laid on the foundation of local availability.However, in practical terms, the support will be provided by regionalbranchesofacentralentity(likeinFinland)orbyindependentmembersof a State-wide network (like in France). At the same time, for someservices,suchashelpline,localavailabilityisnotnecessaryandtheyarebetterprovidedatacentrallevel,toensurequalityandequalaccess.


46

Figure15–Overviewoftheservicesprovided

7.1. Finland

128. Inviewofitscomplexstructure,itistobeexpectedthatRIKUprovidesservicesonlythroughitsimplementingorganisations.Throughthesestructures,RIKUprovidesthefollowingservices:

- personalface-to-faceservice;- nationalhelpline;- legalaidhelpline;

- on-linechatservice;- webpageincludinglotofinformationdirectlyforthevictims.

129. In 2016, RIKU hasmaintained a total of 44,000 contactswithpotentialvictims.Itsupportedto8,400clients,throughprovidingthemaccesstodifferentservices,including3,600clientswhoreceiveddifferenttypes of face-to-face support. Most clients were victims of violentcrimes31andover80%ofallthemwerewomen.31Thedifferentcrimesweredistributedasfollows:Victimsofintimatepartnerviolenceanddomesticviolence32%;Victimsonsexualviolence(adultsandchildren)15%;Victimsofotherassaults11%;Casesrelatedtorestrainingorders8%;Victimsofharassmentandemotionalabuse16%;Victimsofpropertycrimes6%;Othercrimes12%

FranceVictimes(2014)

• 130membersofnetwork• Morethan800supportlocations

• 330,000individualssupported

• 270,000victimssupported• 26,000callsreceivedonthehelpline

RIKU,Finland(2016)

• 44,000contactstotal• 8,400individualclientssupported

• 3,600clientsreceivedface-to-facesupport

• Mostclientswerevictimsofviolentcrime

• 80%clientswerewomen


47

130. RIKUprovides itsservices inarangeofformatstomakethemaccessibletoallgroups, forexamplebytaking intoaccountdisabilityneeds.Theclientdoesnotneedtogivepersonalidentityinformationtoaccesstheservices.Iftheclientdecidestopursuecriminalproceedings,servicesaremadeavailablebeforethecriminalproceedings,duringthemandforareasonabletimeafter.Shouldtheclientprefernottopursuecriminalproceedings,servicesarestillavailablethem.

131. Equality isan importantprincipleofRIKEservices. Thismeansthat everyone, regardless of their personal characteristics, such asgender, sexual orientation, racial or ethnic origin, or any other statushaveaccesstoservicesonanequalbasis.ForthoseclientswhodonotspeakFinnish,interpretationisprovidedwhenneeded,atnocosttotheclient.

132. Normally, trainedvolunteersprovide themajorityof services.However, there are exceptions to this rule. For example, specialisedservices for victims of human trafficking are only provided by paid,qualifiedstaffmembers,unlessanevaluationdeterminestheneedsofthevictimtobestraightforward.

133. RIKUhasinplaceacase-managementsystem.Thissystemallowsthe staff to manage, in particular, cases where victims have morecomplexneeds,suchashomicide,aggravatedcasesofdomesticviolenceor cases involving trafficking inhumanbeings.Amore thorough case-management system is currently being developed to facilitate serviceprovisionstothebereavedfamilymembersofhomicidevictims.

134. Thecasemanagementsystemisnotsuchastoenablefollow-upof the quality of service. The current system contains the followinginformation:- nameofthevictim(alsojustfirstnamecanbeusedifthevictimsdoes

notwanttogivefullname);- agegroup;


48

- language:Finnish,Swedish,Other;- wasthevictimreferredtoRIKUandbywhom:police,shelter,social

services,healthservices,crisiscentreetc;- typeofcrime;- regionandservicepoint;- alsobasicinformationofthestageofthevictim’scriminalprocedure,

withoutanyspecific informationlikethecasenumber,nameoftheperpetrator etc. (this is only for the clients who are in a supportrelationship,notforone-timehelp-lineorchatclients).

135. In complex cases, RIKU will take over the role of servicecoordinator. It will make the necessary contacts with the authoritiesinvolved and make referrals to appropriate specialised services, ifneeded. RIKU may have a coordinating role in providing services,contactingauthoritiesandreferringtomorespecializedservices.

136. Specific safeguards are put into place to ensure adequatecommunicationconcerning individual clients. Confidentialityanddataprotectionarecornerstonesofvictimsupportwork.Referralisensuredviae-mailorbyphone.Therearestrictrulesonhowtoprotectclients’identities.Forexample,thenameandcontactoftheclientisonlysharedifnecessary,and ina separateemail fromthemessagedescribing thematter.Only restricted information canbewritten in emailmessages,andifthenameoftheclientmustbecommunicated,itisdoneinatleasttwo e-mails. One to describe the circumstances and another onecontainingtheircontactdetails.Toenforcerules,staffaretrainedondataprotection,therearestrictprotocolsinplaceexplaininghowinformationmaycommunicated,andmanagersareresponsibletosupervisethatthisisfollowedthrough.

137. All RIKU’s service points provide the same basic face-to-faceservice.RegionalDirectorsareresponsibleformakingsurethatthebasicserviceisprovidedtoaconsistentlevelinlinewithRIKU’sguidelines.Atthesametime,theavailabilityofspecialisedservices inthe localareascanaffectthecontentofRIKU’sservices.Forexample,ifthereisaservice


49

specialisinginassistingvictimsofsexualviolence,thenRIKUwillhaveadivision of tasks agreed with the specialised service provider. Alsoauthoritiesmay in some circumstances provide services for victims atdifferent levels which has an effect on the type and level of servicesprovidedbyRIKU.

138. Therecanbedifferencesinhowtheservicepointsandtheirstaffandvolunteersparticipateinnationalservicessuchasthehelp-lineandthechatservice.Forexample,allregionsmusthave1-2staffmembersparticipateintheimplementationofthenationalchatserviceaswellasafewvolunteers.

139. Some service points may also develop specialist forms ofservices. For example, two servicepointshavea staffmember taskedwithdevelopingRIKU’sservicesformigrantvictims.Thus,responsibilitiesinregionsmaybedivideddependingontheservicepoint.

140. ThetrainingsystemissimilarforRIKU’sstaffandvolunteers.Themainresponsibilityfortrainingnewstaffmemberslieswiththeregionaloffices.Trainingiscompulsoryforallstaffandvolunteers.Forvolunteers,thetrainingconsistsofaround70hoursofbasicandadvancedcourses,which includea listof themes thatneed tobedealtwith. Inaddition,volunteershavetoparticipateinregulargroupcounsellingsessions.Newstaffmembersusuallyparticipate inbasic trainingat the startof theircontract. Itmaybenecessaryinsomecasestopostponetrainingsincethe regions usually organise only 2-4 trainings cycles per year. Theheadquartersorganiseonlyoneyearly2-dayseminarforthewholestaffandinductiontrainingfornewstaffmembers.

141. RIKUhasdevelopedguidelinesontheprovisionofservicesandvolunteering.Theservicestandardsarebasedontheseguidelines.Thereareguidelinesonthedifferentservicemethods(e.g.help-line,legalhelp-line,chat)andmoregeneralguidelinesonitemssuchasdataprotectionandsecurity.Inaddition,RIKUhasmanyguidelines,whichgivedirectionsonRIKU’sviewsonissuesrelatedtocriminalproceedingsandmediation.


50

142. Theguidelinesconcerningthevolunteersdealwithissuessuchasrecruitment,checkingthecriminalrecordingofthenewvolunteers,training,endingthevolunteerrelation,aswellasmodelagreementsforthe volunteers. The standards are all developed and implemented byRIKUitself.

143. TheMinistryofJusticerequiresthatRIKU’sbasicservicesfulfilthe requirementsof articles 8 and9of theVictims’RightsDirective.However,theMinistrydoesnotinterfereindetailinthewaythatRIKUimplements its services, leaving it to self-regulate the quality of itsservices.Aspartofitsongoingdevelopmentofqualityservices,in2016,RIKUmadeitstelephonehelp-linesystemfreeofcostforallclients.

144. CurrentlyRIKUisworkingtodevelopservicesfortheSwedish-speaking minority in Finland. This is important for the equalimplementation of services taking into consideration that Finland isofficiallyabilingualcountry.

145. TheclearadvantageofprovidingservicesthroughanetworkisthatRIKUhasbeenabletodeliveritsservicesnation-wide.WhenRIKUstartedextendeditsservicestonewservicepointsinthe1990s,itwasmuch easier to start a service in close cooperation with a partnerorganisation.

146. Localservicepointsareusually locatedwithinthepremisesofanotherorganisation,whichisbeneficialforseveralreasons.Ithasbeenseenasmorebeneficialforthewellbeingofthestaffandfortheirsecurityas well as that of clients to be within a larger work environment.Moreover,sharingspacecontributestocost-effectivenessofoperations.

147. The network system also provides a local platform forcooperating on victims’ issues. It is easier to maintain good workingrelationswithorganisationsthatbelongtoRIKU’snationalnetwork.Thenetwork approach also supports synergies in advocacy efforts withnational,regionalandlocalpartners.


51

148. Therearefewmajorchallengesinthenetworkstructurewithinwith RIKU operates. Sometimes, there can be competition betweenorganisations if there is an overlap in the work of RIKU and partnerorganisations(forexamplechildrenorwomenvictimsofcrimes).Thiscanalso affect clients if the service of the partner organization has someoverlapwithRIKU’swork.

7.2. France

149. Whilstlocalmembersdeliverarangeofvictimsupportservices,since2001,theFederationFranceVictimeshasoperatedatelephoneplatform.Auniquenationalphonenumber isusedtoprovideefficientaccesstoserviceprovidersinthenetworkandothercompetentbodies.The platform now hosts several domains, namely, the 08Victimesplatform,partnershipwithMAIF32andSNCF33andthenationalnumberfor Aide aux victims (victims assistance). Apart from the telephoneplatform,FranceVictimesdoesnotprovidedirectservicestovictims.Thisisdonebythe130membersofthenetwork.Whenvictimsdoreachout,FranceVictimesmakessurethattheyarereferredtoaservicewhichisbestsuitedtotheirspecificsituation,whetheritistoanetworkmemberortoanothersupportprovider.

150. 08Victimes is the national hotline for victims of crimes. Theuniquenationalnumber0884284637(whichcorrespondsonthephonekeyboardtodialling08Victimes,hencethename)isavailabletoanyoneinFrance.Thehotlinehasarelativelystableinflowofcalls.

32MAIF,aninsurancecompany,andINAVEMenteredintoapartnershiptoensurepsychologicalsupporttovictimsoftrafficaccidentsandforinsuredcasesunderlifeinsurancepolicies.33SNCF,Frenchnationalrailroadcompany,enteredintoapartnershipwithINAVEMtoensuresupportfortheirstaffvictimsofviolenceorexposedtograveincidentsatwork.


52

Figure16–inflowofcallsto08Victimeshotline

151. In 2016, the hotline received more than 20,000 calls. AspresentedinFigure16,outofthesecalls,70%camefromdirectvictims,withtheremaining30%fromotherpersons.Womenrepresentedmorethan 60% of callers, while the largest number of calls was made bypersonsbetween21and30yearsofage.

Figure17–structureofclientsof08Victimeshotlinepertypeofvictim,genderandage

2445

140001502319257

36601

20423209961838016094

18717

242262594625421227622126420321

05000

10000150002000025000300003500040000


53

152. Structureof crimes complainedof in the calls received showsthat the majority of crimes victims suffered were offences againstpersons,asitstemsfromfigure18.

Figure18–structureofclientsof08Victimeshotlinepergroupofcrime

Offencesagainstpersons

Propertycrime

Trafficaccidents

Otherinfractions

Non-declared

71% 23% 5% 0,2% 0,8%

153. 17,4%callsconcernedrepeatedviolations.43,4%wereactsofviolence,ofwhich58,5%concernedpartnerviolence.5%callsconcernedabuseofconfidenceorfraud.

Figure19–structureofclientsof08VictimeshotlinepertypeofcrimeOffencesagainstpersons Propertycrimes

Murder,assassination 20,7% Simpletheft 10,9%Rapeandothersexualviolence

15% Aggravatedtheft 15,7%

Actsofviolence 35,2% Destruction,degradationofproperty

12,2%

ofwhichpartnerviolence 35,3% Abuseofconfidence 56,9%Homicide,involuntarymurder

6,4% Fraudulentuseofpaymentmethods

1,6%

Abandoningafamilymember

0,4% Other 2,7%

Failuretosurrenderachild

0,6%

Harassmentatworkplace 3%Medicalerrorsoraccidents

1,3%

Threat,injury 9,3%Other 8,1%

154. The hotline service employs a number of permanent staffmembers. This includes a manager and correspondents of different


54

profiles(lawyers,psychologists,socialworkersetc.)whoarealltrainedtoprovidesupporttovictims.Thehotlinecorrespondentsofferalistening,evaluation,informationandguidancerole.Theserviceisopenfrom9amto9pmeveryday.

155. Inadditiontothehotline,victimsaddressFranceVictimesalsoviaothermeansofcommunication. In2016,1,347personssubmittedwrittenrequests(e-mail,apostonFranceVictimeswebsite,postorsocialnetworks)forsupport.Thisnumberrepresentsanincreaseofmorethan180%incomparisonto2015.

Figure20–structureofwrittenrequestsforsupportbyFranceVictimes

156. Inthemajorityofthosecases,victimswerereferredtoaservicedeemed adequate for their specific situation. Figure 21 shows thestructureofsuchreferrals.

80%

11% 9% Directvictimsofcrimeor

relatedpersons

Inquiriesinrelationtocivilproceedings

Non-defined


55

Figure21–structureofreferralsbasedonwrittenrequestsforsupport

157. One of the main missions of the federation is to provide aguaranteeofequalityoftreatmentforallthevictims.Supportistobeprovidedtoall,regardlessoftheirplaceofresidence.Theobjectiveisthateach victim receives the same level of quality professional support,regardlessofwherethesupportissoughtandreceived.

158. TrainingisanimportantelementofFranceVictimes’work.Itisprovidedintheformofinductiontrainingandcontinuedtrainingintheareaoflegalaidandpsychologicalsupport.

159. To ensure higher professionalism of staff and volunteers thatmightbeinvolvedinprovidingservicestovictims,theFederationhasbeenorganising training sessions since1993.Training isorganisedonvictims’ rights, psychological support and, more generally, on theorganisationalissuesofvictimsupportproviders.Trainingisprovidedforafee,withpreferentialratesprovidedtomembers.

160. Free,one-weektrainingmodulesareprovidedtoallnewstaffofvictim support organisations. This training is crucial for ensuring thenecessary inductionintotheissuesandprofessionalpracticesofvictimsupport,andultimatelybetter-qualityservices.

72%

18%

6% 4% Referraltoavictimsupportassociation

Referraltoothersupportorganisation

Otherreferral

Noreferral


56

161. Incasesofcollectivevictimisation, suchas terroristattacksormass-accidents, the Federation mobilises its local associations.Associationsaremobiliseddependingontheplaceofresidenceofvictimsor their families in order to enable professionals to directly approachvictims.

162. Atruechangeinapproachbyassociationsistakingplaceincasesofmass-victimisation.At thebeginningof1980s the serviceproviderswouldwaitforvictimstospontaneouslyseekassistanceandsupport.Thisassumedthatavictimwassufficientlywell-informedtobeinapositiontoenterintocontactwithaserviceprovider.

163. Nowadays,however,theapproachthatserviceproviderstakeismoreproactive.Theyreachouttovictims-serviceprovidersarethosewho make the first step and get in contact with the victim, suggestsupport and accompaniment immediately and in the long run. Thisapproachisinlinewithdomesticlegislation.Namely,basedonArticle41oftheCriminalProcedureCode,judicialauthoritiesmandateassociationsand sharewith themcontactdetails of victims, so that victims canbeapproachedandreceivesupport.

8. Externalrelations

164. Victimsupportorganisationsneedtodeveloprelationshipswithnationaland international, governmentalandcivil society structures.Theserelationshipsareanimportantelementofadequateprovisionofservices,optimaluseofresources,referralandgoodpractices.

165. Atthenational level, it is important todeveloprelationswiththerelevantactorsatalllevels.Thisiscrucial,ontheonehand,toensurefrom support of the authorities for the work of victim supportorganisations.Ontheotherhand,thiscooperationiscrucialinexercisinginfluenceonnational legislationandpoliciesandapplyingpressureonpolicymakerstoimprovevictimsupportpolicies.Itisequallyimportanttoensurecooperationwithprovidersofservicesandsupportforother


57

vulnerable groups (women, children, personswith disabilities etc.), toensurethatanyoverlapsareusedforthebenefitofvulnerablevictimsandthatresourcesarecoordinatedandusedoptimally.

166. At the international level, victim support providers engage inbilateral and multilateral, European and international cooperationinitiatives.FranceVictimeswas,in1989,oneofthefoundingmembersofVictimSupportEurope(VSE),theEuropeannetworkofvictimsupportorganisations, while RIKU joined VSE in 1996, shortly after it wasestablished.BothorganisationsareactiveinthebilateralcooperationinEuropeandinternationally,andarebuildingpartnershipstobetterservevictims of crimes. Both RIKU and France Victimes also extensivelycooperate with other victim support organisations in Europe, oftenparticipatingwiththeminEuropeancooperationprojects.

8.1. Finland

167. RIKU works in cooperation with other networks and CSOs,especiallywiththosethatdealwithdifferentaspectsofvictims’issues.This is a wide concept which means that for example, human rightsorganisations are contactedwhich have been active in issues such aswomenvictims,hatecrimesandhumantrafficking.Inrecentyears,morecooperationhasstartedalsowithminoritygroupssuchaslocalmigrantcommunitiesandnetworksadvocatingfortherightsofundocumentedmigrants.

168. RIKU itself is not part of any broader network in Finland.However,sinceitsimplementingpartnersarelargeorganisationsliketheFinnish Red Cross, there is a natural network of humanitarian actorsaroundRIKU’swork.

169. RIKU has a good relationship with the Government andgovernmentalbodies.However,thisdoesnotmeanthatRIKUrefrainsfrombeingcriticaltowardsthepolicyanddecisionsoftheGovernmentand different authorities. For example, RIKU takes a stand on law


58

proposals, government policy papers and the implementation ofgovernmentalservices.

170. Onerecurringissueisthelowlevelofreferralsfromthepoliceto RIKU’s services. RIKU has openly criticised this situation but,nonetheless,continuestocloselycooperatewiththepolice.

171. RIKU’smainfunderistheGovernment,throughtheMinistryofJustice.However,itdoesnotfeelthatthispreventsRIKUfromtakingacriticalstandonanissue,whichitconsiderstobecrucialfortherightsofcrime victims.Many victims’ issues can be quite political such as thesituationofvictimsofhumantraffickingwherealsomigrationandlabourpoliciescomeintoplay.

172. RIKUhasregularmeetings,at leasttwoorthreetimesayear,with the Ministry of Justice, Department of Criminal Policy. Thesemeetings focus on financing issues and service provision. TheDepartmentisresponsiblefordevelopingFinland’svictims’policyaswellasworkpracticesofauthoritiesencounteringvictims.Thus,therehavebeen many committees and working groups in which RIKU hasparticipated as a member. RIKU also meets Ministers dealing withvictims’issues.AmeetingisusuallyarrangedwithatleasttheMinisterofJusticewhenthenewGovernmentassumesduty.

173. The Government does not have a direct influence on thestrategic routeofRIKU. Indirectly,however,Governmentpoliciesmayaffect RIKU’s work sincemany policy issues influence the situation ofcrimevictims.Theseincludesocialandhealthcare,labour,criminalandmigrationpolicies.

174. RIKUworksincooperationwithdifferentpartsofthejudiciary,prosecutionandlawenforcement.Thisisbothindevelopingservicesforvictimsandinindividualcases.Forexample,RIKUiscurrentlydevelopinga victim and witness service, to be implemented in courts. Trainedvolunteers,usuallystudents,arepresent incourthousesandavailablefor information and individual guidance for both the victims andwitnesses.Thisisbeingdevelopedincooperationwiththelocalcourts.


59

175. Withrespecttolawenforcement,cooperationisintensivesincetheroleofthepoliceiscrucialinbothprovidinginformationforvictims,in carrying out the pre-trial investigation and in referring victims toRIKU’s services. Sometimes RIKU is also directly in contact with theprosecutionif,forexample,thevictimhaswishesconcerningthecourtsessions.Somevictimsdonotwanttofacethesuspectinthecourtandthe prosecutor can be of help in these situations. In addition, RIKUparticipatesindifferentlocal,regionalornationalworkinggroupswherethesepartiescanbepresent.

176. Internationally, RIKU is an active member of Victim SupportEurope,aEuropeannetworkofnationalvictimsupportorganisations.RIKU’sExecutiveDirectorisamemberoftheBoardofDirectorsofVictimSupportEuropeandactivelyparticipatesincreatingEUpoliciesinrelationto support for victims. Moreover, RIKU takes part in the non-formalcooperationstructureofNordicvictimservices.Representativesofthoseservices meet annually for a two-day meeting. Furthermore, RIKU ismember of two international anti-trafficking networks. RIKU isparticipating,togetherwithFranceVictimes,inanEU-wideprojectwhichaims to evaluate the practical implementation of the Victims’ RightsDirectiveacrosstheMemberStates.

8.2. France

177. Withthegovernment,interactionsandexchangesareongoing,notablywiththeAccesstoJustice,JusticeandVictimAssistanceService(SADJAV)oftheMinistryofJustice.TheseareFranceVictime’spartnersofreference.Beyondthefinancialaspects,otheragreementsaremadewith other ministries and also involve daily exchanges, work andrelations:

- WiththeMinistryofAgriculture:anarrangement is inplace fortheMinistry'sstaff,toincludeeducationonhowtotreatinstancesofaggression,incivility,ortraumaticeventintheperformanceoftheirduties,orathome;


60

- WiththeMinistryofOverseas:cooperationisfosteredtoensuresupportforFrenchnationals,victimsofoffencesabroadandtheirfamily members, to ensure reception, psychological support,informationonrightsandsocialaccompanimentonthespot;

- WiththeMinistryofEducation:forteachingstaffandvictimsofviolence at schools, to guarantee the establishment ofpsychologicalsupport,counsellingofvictimsincourtproceedings,informationabouttheirrights, formattingclaims,orreferralstospecialisedservicesandothervictimsupportservicesneeded;

- Morerecently,withtheForeignMinistry,intheframeworkofthesetting up of a support system for persons, victims of forceddisplacementfromoverseastothemetropolitanFrance,whoarenowgivenpermissiontotracetheirorigins34.

178. A network of victim support associations such as FranceVictimes,guidedby theglobal careofvictim,mustbeable tocreatepartnershipsandsynergies.FranceVictimes,aswellasitsmembersarealways open to cooperationwith other associations, business and theadministration,tothebenefitofthevictim.Atthenationallevel,FranceVictimesisparticipatinginanumberofinitiativeswhichmakesurethatvictimsofcrimesreceivetheservicetheyneed.Theyalsocooperateattheinternationallevel.

179. Atthenational level, there isthe jointtelephoneplatformforvictim referral. The platform encompasses more than 500 possibleinstitutionsorassociationstowhichavictimcanbereferred.Thismaybecomplementary to a connection with a victim service provider orexclusivewhentheclient’srequestdoesnotfallwithinthescopeofworkof the victim support. The correspondents of the France Victimestelephoneplatformhaveanexcellentknowledgeofthisdatabase.Thisdatabase is also a real added value in terms of resources forprofessionals.

180. Inaddition,agreementsaremadewithothernetworkstobetter34Formoreinformation,seeforexample:http://www.la-croix.com/France/Laffaire-Reunionnais-Creuse-seclaire-2017-02-16-1200825303


61

guarantee relationships and services in specific fields. SucharrangementsareputintoplacewithotherCSOnetworks,forexample,withthenetworktocombatdiscriminationandracism,thenetworkofassociations of persons with disabilities, and the association ofmediators. Furthermore, partnerships are developed with legalprofessionals such as attorneys, through the Convention with theNationalBarCouncilortheyounglawyers’union.

181. Finally, 24 organisations providing hotline assistance havejoined into the Collective of Social Telephony and Health (CollectiveTeSS)sinceMarch2012.ThemainaimsoftheCollectivearetopromotesupport provided by social telephony and to provide assistance at adistance,toimprovethequalityoftheserviceandtodriveforwardpublicpolicies.TheTeSSCollectivehassetupaspecifictrainingprogrammeforthelisteningprofessions,whichhostsseveralsessionseachyear.Everyyear, it also organizes the Day of Listening and Social and HealthyTelephony.

182. Internationally, FranceVictimes is a long standingmember ofVictimSupportEurope,andhasbilateralrelationsofcooperationwithmanyEuropeancountriesandCanadainparticular.Moreover,theyareinvolvedintheabovementionedprojectontranspositionoftheVictims’Rights Directive. France Victimes is also working with several otherEuropean organisations on a project of the European Parliament onneedsofvictimsofterrorism.

183. France Victimes cooperated with a number of Europeancountries in supporting cross-border victims. This was particularlyimportantinthewakeoftheterroristattacksinNovember2015,whenanumberofvictimswerenon-Frenchresidents.Similarly,theycooperatewithvictimsupportservicesandauthoritiesofothercountriestoprovidesupporttoFrenchresidentswhofallvictimofcrimesoutsideofFrance.RIKUalsoprovidesservicestoFinnishresidentswhohavebeenvictimisedabroad.


62

9. Conclusionsandrecommendations

9.1. Frameworkforprovidingvictimsupportservices

184. Theexamplespresentedinthisreportareonlytwooutofmany.FinlandandFrancewereselectedwiththeknowledgethatbothnetworksfunctionwithsignificantsuccess,overasignificantperiodoftimewithina centralised state and within a continental legal system. They wereselected for their different approaches to similar problems, within arelativelysimilarlegalenvironment.TheFinnishapproachisveryspecificforitsunorthodoxlegalstructureandtheseeminglyinformalapproachtosettingupanetworkofserviceproviders.InFrance,ontheotherhand,the system is very structured and membership requirements quiteelaborateanddemanding.185. Interestingly, RIKU is not a legal entity in its own right. This,however,doesnotpreventittomanagingoperationsusingtheresourcesandcooperationof17otherlegalentitiesnotonlytoensurethatvictimreceiveservicestheyneed,butalsotoinfluencepoliciesatnationalandEuropeanlevels.186. At the same time, the French system is a comprehensivenetwork with very well defined conditions for membership andconstantworkonqualityassurance.Inbothsystems,however,victimsaresupportedinaprofessionalandconsistentmanner.187. Understanding the legal environment and Serbian reality, anyfuturevictimsupportnetworkinSerbia,wouldlikeneedtobesetup

withinaformalframework.TheFinnish informalapproachmayseemattractiveintermsoftheeaseofsettingitup,andpotentialsavingsthatmay be generated with the minimum administration. Nonetheless, itneedstobeunderstoodthatthisapproachfunctionsinFinland,inlargepartdue to the fact that it involves six strong,alreadyexistingnation-wideorganisations,whohavebeencommittedtosupportingvictimsofcrimesforthepast20years.However,beinganinformalstructure,itmay


63

bevulnerabletochangesofpoliciesorpracticeswithinthecoordinatingorganisations, for example.Moreover, while it reduces administrativecostson thepartofRIKU, theparticipation in thenetworknecessarilyincreases the administrative cost of the coordinating organisations, asthisworkneedstobedonebysomeone.188. ItappearsfromthesystemsanalysedthattheGovernment,inparticular the Ministries of Justice, have been actively involved infacilitatingtheprovisionofvictimsupport.InFrance,theMinistryhasbeenmore involved in setting the ground for the establishment of acomprehensive victim support network and keeps working on itsstandardisation.InFinland,theMinistryofJusticeisactivelyinvolvedinthefunctioningofthevictimsupportnetwork.Notonlydoesitprovideacomprehensivebudgetforwell-fundedvictimsupport,butisalsodirectlyinvolvedthroughitsmembershipontheBoardofRIKU.Importantly,theMinistry’s participation in RIKU’s Board is not one of control andmanagement, but one of partnership and genuine involvement inaddressingtheneedsofvictimsofcrimes.189. Providingsupporttovictimsofcrimeisanimportanttaskofthejustice system of any country. Providing victim support in Serbia willrequireasignificantinvolvementandextensivecommitmentonthepartoftheMinistryofJustice,whichneedstocreateanenvironmentinwhichvictimscanreceivenecessarysupportofarequiredstandardofqualityandforaslongasthissupportisneeded.190. Regardless of whether victim support is provided through aseparatelegalentity,orwithinasemi-formalpartnership,governanceisanimportantelementofthestructure.BothorganisationsanalysedinthepresentreporthaveaBoardofDirectors,whoarenotpaidfortheirworkintheBoard,andwhobearresponsibilityforthefunctioningofthenetwork.191. Inorder toachievetransparentandresponsible runningofanorganisation,agovernancestructureneedstobesetup.WhensettingupavictimsupportsysteminSerbia,abodyshouldbesetup–governing


64

board,boardofdirectorsorsomeotherform,whichwillprovidestrategicguidance,leadershipandsupporttotheorganisation.Membersofsucha body would be expected to participate on a voluntary basis, eventhoughsomeoftheircostscanbepaid.

9.2. Fundingandfinancialresponsibility

192. In terms of budgeting, both Finland and France set asideimportantbudgetsforvictimsupport.InFrance,thetotalfundingfromalllevelsandsourcesoffundingamountsto€50million,whileinFinlanditsumsupto€4million.193. Regarding financing, Finland still applies a direct negotiationscheme,whiletheapproachinFranceisoneofcompetitivefunding.Itisimportanttonote,however,thatFinlandmayalsomovetocompetitivefunding,duetotherequirementsoftransparencyandopenmarket.194. In allocating funding to victim support organisations, several

factorsneed tobe considered. This is particularly relevant, since it isimportant to strike the balance between the necessity to ensurecontinuity of services on the one hand, and the quality and cost-effectiveness on the other. A detailed analysis of funding for victimsupport organisations is provided in the MDTF JSS report “Ensuringfundingforvictimsupportservices”.195. Financial safeguards are in place. Organisations are subject tonationalrequirementsforaudit,andtheircostsarecarefullyscrutinisedbyinternalandexternalcontrolmechanisms.196. Spendingneedstoberesponsibleandcontrolled.Itisofutmostimportance,fromtheaspectofthefunderaswellasfromtheperspectiveofserviceprovider,tohavestrictfinancialdiscipline.Systemsneedtobeput in place tomake sure that, regardless of the form throughwhichvictimsupportservicesarebeingprovided,thereisarigorouscontrolofandsystemicresponsibilityforanyexpenditure.


65

197. Funding for victim support services can come from varioussources.Itmaycomefromschemesspecificallydevelopedtofundsuchservices(e.g.victimsurcharge),generalsocialresponsibilityschemes(e.g.gambling) or from the general state budget. Whatever the source ofincome is,victimsupportservicesneedtohavea levelofstabilityandfundingforsuchservicesshouldberingfencedtoensuresufficientandconsistentincome.198. Whenlookingintoensuringfunding,victimsupportandvictims’associations should be consulted. In particular, when developing orimplementinganincomestream,anyparticularconsequencesofgetting(apartof)victimservicespaidbytheoffender,attentionshouldbegiventothevictims’perceptionofsuchschemesandpotentialrevictimisaitonavoided35.199. Asystemofmonitoringandevaluationofprojectresultsandastrictfinancialdisciplineandscrutinyshouldbeensured.Suchasystemwould provide that any investment into the victim support services isindeed directed towards ensuring that victims’ rights are respected,protectedandfulfilled.

9.3. Serviceprovisionandqualitycontrol

200. In Finland, there is an existing system of monitoring andevaluation that is undergoing revision andmodernisation. In France,there is a comprehensive system of screening for admission tomembership and constant supervision of existing members, in anattempt to ensure a standard of excellence among the membership.Moreover, there is an initiative from the Government to introduce aGovernmentalsystemofaccreditationforvictimsupportservices.

35ThisisparticularlyrelevantfortheimplementationofthesocalledprincipleofopportunityinSerbia.Namely,concernshavebeenexpressedregardingtheuseofthisprincipleinfamilyviolencecases.Thereisageneralperceptionofvictimsoffamilyviolencethatperpetrators(whoareoftenmenandbetterofffinanciallythantheirvictims)arebuyingoutofresponsibility.Usingsuchfundstosupportvictimsofviolencewouldbeaddinginsulttoinjury.


66

201. Both organisations directly provide services to victims. RIKUprovides, through their staff, volunteers and in synergy with itscoordinating organisations, all services to all victims of all crimes. InFrance,only thehotline service isprovideddirectlyby theFederation,whileotherservicesareprovidedbymemberorganisations.Nonetheless,bothorganisationsprovidereferraland informationtoallpersonsthataddressthem.

202. France is working on developing a proactive approach inproviding support to victims of terrorism and other collectivevictimisation. This is an important development in the field of victimsupport, showcasing how services evolve over time and how victimsupport organisations need to remain sensitive to the needs of theirusers,inordertoconstantlyimproveservices.

203. Bothorganisationsareworkingtoensureconsistent,accessibleandqualityservicesontheentireterritoryoftheirrespectivecountries.Tothisend,however,theyputinplacedifferentmechanisms.InFinland,an effort is beingmade to use the existing resources and to creatingsynergieswithotherorganisations,toensureconsistentservices,reduceduplication of work and minimise operational costs of running theservice.204. In France, a comprehensive network of 130 independentorganisations is set up. All of those organisations abide by the samequalityandperformancestandardsandcommittothesamephilosophytowork together toprovidesupport toall victimsofall crimeson theentireterritoryofFrance.205. AnyfuturestructurewhichaimstoensuresupporttovictimsofcrimesneedstohaveapresenceacrosstheentireterritoryofSerbia.Thismaybeachievedeither throughorganisations’ownstructures,orthroughaccreditingexistingorfutureorganisationstoprovidesupporttovictimsofcrimes.Itisrecommendedthat,ineithercase,forthepurposeofclarityandtransparency,anyvictimsupportorganisationexistsasa


67

separate legal entity, with clear structure, purpose and governanceresponsibilities.206. Any future victim support needs to ensure that generic andspecialist services are provided to all victims of all crimes.Access totheseservicesmustbemadeavailable fully incompliancewiththeEUVictims’RightsDirective,needsnottodependonanycriminalorotherprosecutionof theperpetrator,victims’ residenceorother status,andneedstobemadefreeofcharge.207. Victimsupportservicesmaybeprovideddirectlybythevictimsupportorganisation,orbymeansofreferraltootherorganisationsandinstitutions.Whenprovidingservicesthroughreferral,attentionneedstobepaidtothecapacityoftherecipientorganisation.208. When setting up a victim support service, strict standards foroperatingandprovidingservicestovictimsofcrimesneedtobesetatthecentrallevel,Inaddition,acontrolmechanismneedstobeputintoplace to ensure consistency and quality of services. These qualitystandardsshouldbeapplicableequally toservicesprovideddirectlyorthroughreferral.

9.4. Humanresources

209. Both organisations employ staff and rely on volunteer work.Whatcanbeobserved,however, is that inFinlandtheparticipationofvolunteers in providing services to victims is more significant than inFrance36.Bothorganisationsarecarefulabouttrainingofvolunteersandmaking sure thatwhether serviceproviders arepaid for theirworkorofferingitforfree,theserviceisalwaysoftherequiredlevelofquality.

210. VolunteeringisnotdeeplyrootedinSerbia.However,exploringavailable resources, suchas, forexample, theprincipleofopportunity,wheretheaccusedcanoptoutfromasentenceinexchangeforsocially36Thereislittleevidencetoindicatetheexactreasonforsuchadifference.WhatmaylayatthecoreisthatinFinlandsomeservicesarealsoprovidedthroughthechurch,whichtraditionallyreliesmoreonvolunteering,whereasinFrancethisrelationshipisabsent.


68

beneficial activity, can be taken into consideration to encouragevolunteeringwithvictimsupportorganisations.Atthesametime,Stateinitiatives and incentives can increase interest in volunteering. Theprivate sector can equally support such volunteering by applyingcorporate social responsibility principles. Victim support organisationsthemselvescanalsoincreasetheattractivenessofvolunteeringpositions,through for example, establishing certification, targeting studentsworking in relevant fields etc. To encourage volunteering, theGovernment, incooperationwiththecivilsocietysector,mayconsiderintroducingasystemsimilartotheFrenchVolunteerPassport.

9.5. Externalrelations

211. Victimsupportorganisationsdonotexistinavacuum.Buildingrelationships with other CSOs, as well as bilateral and multilateralinternationalcooperation,arepivotalindevelopingservices,exchangingpractices,andfinallyensuringbetterservicesforvictimsatasmallercost.Moreover, developing partnerships with ministries, police, judiciary,regionalandlocalauthorities,ensureinfluenceonpoliciesandpracticesand a general understanding of the importance of victim supportservices. International cooperation, by means of European andinternationalnetworks,ensuresthatinfluenceisspreadbeyondbordersandthatinternationalpoliciesareinformedbyandformedaccordingtotheneedsfromthefield.

212. WithSerbiaaimingtojointheEU,aswellasunderstandingitsdelicategeographicpositioninthemidstofthelargemigrationwave,theissuesofsupportforcross-bordervictimsisarelevantone.Thiswillbeanimportantissuetotackle,alsointhecontextoftheVictims’RightsDirective,theVictimCompensationDirectiveaswellastheDirectiveonCombattingTerrorism.

213. Any futurevictimsupport frameworkneeds toestablishgoodworkingrelationshipswithdomesticandinternationalstakeholders.Inparticular,making sure that cross-border victims receive support they


69

requirewillbeachallengethatwillrequireinternationalcooperationandgoodcommunicationwithotherEuropeanvictimsupportproviders,aswellasinstitutionsandauthoritiesinvolved.

Operating networks for victim support services

Documents

Transcript of Operating networks for victim support services