This thesis examines how the criminal justice system, particularly during trials, can inflict additional harm on women survivors of violence. Secondary victimization, the harm victims experience when interacting with the justice system, remains a persistent barrier to justice despite international and European commitments to victim protection. Instruments such as the CEDAW General Recommendations, the Istanbul Convention, and the EU Victims’ Rights Directive have set clear standards to prevent re-victimization, yet their implementation in national systems is often undermined by entrenched stereotypes, victim blaming attitudes, and inadequate safeguards. The central research question is: How and why does secondary victimization of women survivors of gender-based violence persist in the Italian judicial system despite formal legislative alignment with international and European standards? The study focuses on Italy as a case study to explore the gap between law and practice. It traces the development of Italian criminal legislation and policies, including Italian national legislation, institutional reports from the Italian Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on Femicide and GREVIO, reports from feminist networks such as D.i.Re, and emblematic judgments from the European Court of Human Rights. Key factors contributing to secondary victimization include the judicial tendency to misinterpret gender-based violence as mere “family conflict,” the pervasive use of gender stereotypes and victim blaming narratives that undermine a victim’s credibility, and procedural deficiencies that re-traumatize survivors. The findings show that legislative reforms alone are insufficient to eradicate secondary victimization. A deeper cultural and operational shift is required, based on mandatory and continuous training for justice professionals, stronger coordination between civil and criminal courts, and the adoption of a genuinely victim-centred approach free from gender bias.
This thesis examines how the criminal justice system, particularly during trials, can inflict additional harm on women survivors of violence. Secondary victimization, the harm victims experience when interacting with the justice system, remains a persistent barrier to justice despite international and European commitments to victim protection. Instruments such as the CEDAW General Recommendations, the Istanbul Convention, and the EU Victims’ Rights Directive have set clear standards to prevent re-victimization, yet their implementation in national systems is often undermined by entrenched stereotypes, victim blaming attitudes, and inadequate safeguards. The central research question is: How and why does secondary victimization of women survivors of gender-based violence persist in the Italian judicial system despite formal legislative alignment with international and European standards? The study focuses on Italy as a case study to explore the gap between law and practice. It traces the development of Italian criminal legislation and policies, including Italian national legislation, institutional reports from the Italian Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on Femicide and GREVIO, reports from feminist networks such as D.i.Re, and emblematic judgments from the European Court of Human Rights. Key factors contributing to secondary victimization include the judicial tendency to misinterpret gender-based violence as mere “family conflict,” the pervasive use of gender stereotypes and victim blaming narratives that undermine a victim’s credibility, and procedural deficiencies that re-traumatize survivors. The findings show that legislative reforms alone are insufficient to eradicate secondary victimization. A deeper cultural and operational shift is required, based on mandatory and continuous training for justice professionals, stronger coordination between civil and criminal courts, and the adoption of a genuinely victim-centred approach free from gender bias.
GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND SECONDARY VICTIMIZATION: THE ITALIAN CASE
SCALI, SOFIA
2024/2025
Abstract
This thesis examines how the criminal justice system, particularly during trials, can inflict additional harm on women survivors of violence. Secondary victimization, the harm victims experience when interacting with the justice system, remains a persistent barrier to justice despite international and European commitments to victim protection. Instruments such as the CEDAW General Recommendations, the Istanbul Convention, and the EU Victims’ Rights Directive have set clear standards to prevent re-victimization, yet their implementation in national systems is often undermined by entrenched stereotypes, victim blaming attitudes, and inadequate safeguards. The central research question is: How and why does secondary victimization of women survivors of gender-based violence persist in the Italian judicial system despite formal legislative alignment with international and European standards? The study focuses on Italy as a case study to explore the gap between law and practice. It traces the development of Italian criminal legislation and policies, including Italian national legislation, institutional reports from the Italian Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on Femicide and GREVIO, reports from feminist networks such as D.i.Re, and emblematic judgments from the European Court of Human Rights. Key factors contributing to secondary victimization include the judicial tendency to misinterpret gender-based violence as mere “family conflict,” the pervasive use of gender stereotypes and victim blaming narratives that undermine a victim’s credibility, and procedural deficiencies that re-traumatize survivors. The findings show that legislative reforms alone are insufficient to eradicate secondary victimization. A deeper cultural and operational shift is required, based on mandatory and continuous training for justice professionals, stronger coordination between civil and criminal courts, and the adoption of a genuinely victim-centred approach free from gender bias.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Scali_Sofia.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
1.36 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
1.36 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/98661