Overview of existing victim support services in Serbia - EN · “Overview of existing victim support services in Serbia” was executed in February and March 2017 by VDS, under the

Acknowledgements

The World Bank and the Multi Donor Trust Fund for Justice Sector

Support (MDTF-JSS), in partnership with Victim Support Europe are

implementing a number of activities aimed at strengthening victim

supportservicesinSerbia.Thepresentreportisresultofthatpartnership

andincooperationwiththeVictimologySocietyofSerbia–VDS.

“OverviewofexistingvictimsupportservicesinSerbia”wasexecutedin

February and March 2017 by VDS, under the guidance and with the

support of theWorld Bank team composed ofGeorgiaHarley (Justice

Reform Specialist and Task Team Leader) and Marina Matić Bošković

(JusticeReformExpert) andVSE’s teamcomposedof LeventAltan,An

Verelst,AleksandraIvankovićandSanjinBužo.

The report, based on a survey and stakeholder consultations, was

preparedbytheresearchteamofVDS:DrSanjaĆopić,JasminaNikolić

andBejanŠaćiri,withthesupportandundersupervisionofprof.DrVesna

Nikolić-Ristanović, VDS Director. Special thanks toMilica Luković, VDS

intern,whoprovidedassistancetotheresearchteamincollectingdata

andpreparingthedatabase.

Wewouldliketothankallvictimsupportservicesfortheirengagement

inthesurveyandtheworkshop.Theirparticipationwasinstrumentalin

mapping the victim support services in Serbia and developing the

database.

ContentsEXECUTIVESUMMARY........................................................................................1

1. SURVEYRESULTS.........................................................................................7

1.1. Assistanceandsupporttovictims.......................................................7

1.1.1. Targetgroup......................................................................................11

1.1.2. Structureofservicesbygeographicalarea.......................................18

1.1.3. Workinghours...................................................................................19

1.1.4. Gettinginformation...........................................................................19

1.1.5. Typesofservicesofferedtovictims..................................................21

1.1.6. Communicationchannels..................................................................23

1.1.7. Servicefee.........................................................................................25

1.2. Capacityofserviceproviders.............................................................26

1.2.1. Datagatheringandprotectionofvictims..........................................26

1.2.2. Servicesprovidedin2016.................................................................26

1.2.3. Humanresources..............................................................................28

1.2.4. Stafftraining......................................................................................29

1.3. Financialresources............................................................................29

1.4. Databaseofvictimsupportservices..................................................30

2. CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS...............................................33

1. Structureofserviceproviders...........................................................33

2. Structureofservices..........................................................................34

3. Geographicalcoverage......................................................................35

4. Outreach............................................................................................36

5. Information.......................................................................................38

6. Referral..............................................................................................39

7. Communication.................................................................................40

8. Volunteersandpaidstaff..................................................................41

9. Stafftraining......................................................................................42

10. Financing...........................................................................................43

11. Datacollectionandrecording...........................................................43

12. Overallconclusions............................................................................44

ANNEXES...........................................................................................................49

AnnexI–Researchmethodology..................................................................49

AnnexII–Exampleofasheet(fiche)ofvictimsupportserviceinthe

databaseofvictimsupportservices..............................................................52

AnnexIII–Exampleofasheet(fiche)ofvictimsupportserviceinthe

electronicversionofthedatabaseofvictimsupportservices......................53

AnnexIV–Listofparticipantsattheworkshop............................................54

AnnexV–Workshopagenda........................................................................55

AnnexVI–SURVEYQUESTIONNAIRE............................................................56

Overviewofexistingvictimsupportserv ices in Serb ia

1

EXECUTIVESUMMARY

As a part of its negotiations on the accession to the EU, Serbia has

prioritised the implementation of the EU Directive of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on establishing

minimumstandardsontherights,supportandprotectionofvictimsof

crime(Victims’RightsDirective).Oneofthecornerstonerequirementsof

theDirectiveistoensurethatvictims“haveaccesstoconfidentialvictim

support services, free of charge, acting in the interests of the victims

before,duringandforanappropriatetimeaftercriminalproceedings.”

ThisreportexamineswhatexistingservicesthereareinSerbia,andwhat

needs to bedone to ensure that all victimsof all crimes in the entire

territoryoftheRepublicofSerbiacanaccesssuchservices.

The research is based both on a surveywhich consulted all identified

existingserviceproviders,andonanin-personconsultationwithasample

of service providers, conducted through a workshop. A total of 73

organisationstookpartinthesurvey,whileinformationonafurther36

were included in the database of victim support services based on

additionalresearch.Tenofthoseparticipatinginthesurveyalsotookpart

intheworkshoptoverifyresultsanddiscussfindings.Thereportindicates

thefollowing:

ThemajorityofservicesforvictimsofcrimesinSerbiahavesofarbeen

provided by civil society organisations (CSOs). Two main groups of

servicesareprovidedbytheState:supportforvictims(injuredparties)

andwitnesses during criminal proceedings, and shelters for victims of

violence(inparticular,womenandchildrenvictimsofdomesticviolence

andhumantrafficking).Theformerareoperatedbytheservicesinthe

prosecutors’ offices and courts and Units for the Protection of Child

Victims andWitnesses, and are limited to victims who act as injured

partiesand/orwitnessesincriminalproceedings.Theylastonlywhilethe

criminal proceedings are ongoing. Shelters for victims of violence are


2

operated by State social work centres. These services support certain

groupsofvictimsandprovideonlyalimitednumberofservices.

There isa limitednumberofgeneralservices thatareavailableforallvictims of all crimes in Serbia. Services provided to victims are often

specific and focused on specific profiles of victims: women with

disabilities as victims of violence, victims of gender-based violence,

victimsofspecifictypesofcrimes(e.g.humantrafficking).This levelof

specialisation is important and welcome in catering for the needs of

victims with specific vulnerabilities. Nonetheless, there is a risk that

numerous victims who don’t fall within these categories will not be

providedwiththesupporttheyneed.

Eventakingintoaccountthoseserviceproviderswhohavenottakenpart

inthesurvey(notablyservicesoperatedintheprosecutor’sofficesand

courts,andsheltersoperatedbysocialworkcentres),servicesareclearly

limitedintheirgeographicalscope,withmostbeinglocallyavailable.

ThehighestnumberofservicesareavailableinBelgrade,whileinother

regionstheavailabilityofservicesvaries.Someregions,notablythefar

South(Pirot),EasternSerbia(Zaječar),thefarNorth(Subotica),aswellas

thewesternpartsofthecountryshowaworryingabsenceofanyservices.

Somegroupsofvictimswillhaveamuchgreateraccessthanothersto

assistance and support in Serbia.Assistance and support areprimarily

available to victims of different forms of violence, including domestic

violence, sexual violence and human trafficking, but less available to

victims of e.g. hate crime or different forms of property crimes. In

addition, around one third of victim support services support only

women.Thismeansthatevenwherethereareservicesavailable,many

victimsruntheriskofnotreceivingservices,astheydon’tfallwithina

specificcategory.

Anumberofservicesprovideassistanceandsupporttofamilymembersof a victim, indicating that family members as indirect victims are


3

recognisedbyatleastsomeservices,asisalsorequiredbytheVictims’

RightsDirective.OverallitcanbeseenthatmanyvictimsinSerbiaareatriskofhavingnoaccesstoanytypeofservice.

Thesefindingsindicatethatwhilstarangeofservicesexist,expansionofthoseservicesisneededtoensureaccessforallvictimsofcrime,across

the entire territory of Serbia. With a broad network of civil society

services already in place, greater accessibility is likely to be most

efficientlyandeffectivelyachievedbycapitalisingon thoseservices. In

particular,fundingtoencouragethedevelopmentanddeliveryofgeneral

victim support services for all victims (both direct and indirect) of all

crimesinallpartsofSerbia,providedforaslongasitisnecessary,willbe

criticaltoachievefullcompliancewiththeVictims’RightsDirective,and

tomeettheneedsofSerbia’scitizens.

Atthesametime,someimportantstateservicesareconditionalonthe

administrative seats of courts, while services provided by CSOs are

scatteredaroundthecountrymostlyinahaphazardway,dependingon

wheretherewerewillingenthusiaststostartprovidingthem.Withthisin

mind,greaterco-ordinationbetweenservices–includingbetweenState

andCSOswillalsomaximisethebenefitsofeachservice.

Victims often receive information on available services through theinternetorthemedia.Nonetheless,giventhatasignificantproportionof

theSerbianpopulationdoesnothaveaccesstotheinternet,alternative

sourcesofinformationneedtobeusedandfurtherdeveloped.

Assistance and support are mainly provided through directcommunication. Face-to-face contact and telephone are still thepreferredcommunicationchannelsofvictims.However,itappearsthat

providing assistance and support through e-mails, internet and social

networksisbecomingincreasinglyimportant.

Ingeneral,assistanceandsupportprovidedbyvictimsupportservicesis

freeofcharge.ThefundingforsuchfreeservicescomesfromtheState


4

budgetforthestateservices,andfromprojectsforservicesprovidedby

CSOs and the state. In addition, CSO services are often provided on a

voluntarybasis.

Human resources of victim support services differ though in general

assistance and support are provided by both professional staff

(employees)andvolunteers.CSOsrelyonvoluntaryworktoagreaterextentincomparisontostateagenciesandinstitutions.Thus,volunteers

representanimportantassetofCSOs,helpingincreasetheefficiencyof

theirservicesandaswellasretaininglocalcommitmentandfocus.

A significant percentage of employees and/or volunteers receives

training to provide support. However, a large number of those who

providesupportforvictims,inparticularvolunteers,donotreceiveany

specifictraining.TheVictims’RightsDirectiveplacesaspecificfocuson

the training of those who come into contact with victims. Although

trainingofsupportworkersisnotobligatoryunderEUlaw(sinceinmost

countriessupportorganisationsarenotdirectlyunderthecontrolofthe

State), the Directive does require that States encourage training of

supportstaffandvolunteers.

The provision of support to victims can be highly beneficial when

provided to a high level of quality, but can be very damaging when

provided by inexperienced or untrained personnel. Given the risks to

victimsofpoorqualitysupport,itisrecommendedthatasystemofboth

practicalandtheoretical,basicandspecialisttrainingbeestablishedfor

allpersonsworkingwithvictims.Compulsorytrainingislikelytohavethe

greatestbenefitsandensureabaselevelofqualitysupportthatmeets

minimumstandardsanddoesnoharm.Atthesametimeitwillensure

similarstandardsofservicesregardlessofthetypeofvictimisationorthe

placewheretheserviceisprovided.

Work of CSOs on providing support to victims in Serbia is heavily

dependent on projects and donations mostly from foreign sources,


5

withoutstableandsustainablesourcesoffinancing.Thiscannegativelyaffectthequalityandpermanenceofservices.

There isnosystematicapproachforreferringvictimsfrompoliceandprosecutionauthoritiestovictimsupportorganisations.Equally,thereisatotallackofanymethodologyorothertoolstohelpthosewhoarein

contactwithvictimstoensurereferrals.Victimsaremainlyreferredto

victimsupportbysocialwelfareservicesandCSOsbutthesereferralsare

irregularandincidental.Developingconsistentreferralmechanismswill

be an essential component in ensuring that victims access support

services.

ServiceprovidersinSerbiaoffervictimsvarioustypesofassistanceand

support,including:information,emotionalsupport(empowerment)and

referral.However,whileprovidinginformationtovictimsisaservicethatmost providers offer, this information is rarely comprehensive and

providingavictimwithalltheyneedtoknowtorecoverfromtheimpact

ofvictimisation.Thismayaffectotheraspectsofserviceprovision,aswith

incompleteinformation,recoveryandempowermentareimpededwhilst

referralmaybeinadequateorincomplete.

Thosethatdoprovideinformation,provideitonvictims’rightsandways

toexercisethem;onparticipationincriminalorothercourtproceedings;

aswellasinformationaboutotherrelevantspecialistsupportservices.

Thereport,forthefirsttime,providesaclearnationalpictureofvictim

supportprovisioninSerbia.Thisisanessentialfirststepinunderstanding

whatactionsarerequiredtoensuresupportisavailabletoallvictimsof

crimeonanationalbasis.

Thevaluabledatagathered through thismappingexercisewill alsobe

used to increase awareness and accessibility among victims, service

providersandlawenforcementtotheservicesthatalreadyexist.Survey

results have been turned into an up-to-date and detailed database of

servicesavailable.Thiswillbeusedtocreateaninteractive,user-friendly


6

mapofservicesthatwillhelpvictimsfindtheservicesmostrelevantto

themwhetherlocallyornationally.Themapwillbeavailableforuseby

victimsupport services, Stateorganisationsandotherentitiesworking

withvictimsofcrime.Thecollaborationsdevelopedthroughthisproject

willbefurtherdeepenedovertimewiththeaimofdevelopingamoreco-

ordinatedsystemofnationalsupportservicesincludingthroughefficient

referralmechanisms.

Throughthedevelopmentofanationalsupportservicedeliveryplan

maximisingtheuseofexistingservices,coupledwithclear,timebound

actionsandtheresourcestoimplementplans,Serbiahasthe

opportunitytodevelopahighlyeffectivesystemofsupport.That

systemwillbenefitasignificantproportionofthepopulationwhichhas

sufferedbothfromnewcrimesandfromhistoricalcrimesduringthe

conflict.Suchservicesacceleraterecoveryandhealing,helpingvictims

tofindtheirnewnormal,andtocontinuetobeactivemembersof

Serbia’ssocietyandeconomy.


7

1. SURVEYRESULTS

1.1. ASSISTANCEANDSUPPORTTOVICTIMS

1. 73 (93.6%) service providers that responded to the survey(‘serviceproviders’)outof78provideassistanceandsupporttovictims.

Figure3.Numberofservicesthatprovideassistanceandsupporttovictims

2. ThehighestnumberofvictimsupportserviceprovidersarefromBelgrade(25);Thetablebelowindicatesthedistributionofallservices.

Numberof

SupportServicesTownofService

25 Belgrade

6 NoviSad

73 (93,6%)

5 (6,4%)

Servicesthatprovide

assistanceandsupportto

victims

Servicesthatdidnot

providevictimsupport


8

5 Niš

4 Fromeachof:Kragujevac,LeskovacandSombor

2 Fromeachof:Zrenjanin,Vranje,KraljevoandŠabac

1 Fromeachof:NoviPazar,Užice,Vršac,Kruševac,

Kikinda,SremskaKamenica,Negotin,Smederevo,

Požarevac,Vranjskabanja,BačkaTopola,Vlasotince,

Pančevo,NoviBečej,Prokuplje,SmederevskaPalanka

andValjevo

3. Observing services available in regions: 25 victim supportservicesareontheterritoryoftheCityofBelgrade,18ontheterritoryof the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (North Serbia), 14 on the

territoryofSouthSerbia,13ontheterritoryofŠumadija(CentralSerbia)andWesternSerbia,and3ontheterritoryofEasternSerbia.

4. Atthesametime, itshouldbenotedthatthereare132socialwork centres, which have specific competencies, in accordancewith

relevantlegislation,andwhichcovertheentireterritoryofthecountry.These centres are not established specifically to offer victim supportservices.

5. However, as part of theirwork they do handle cases of child

abuse, forexamplewhere theymight takeanabusedchild (whetherthatamountstoacrimeornot)intofostercaretoprotectthemfromabuse.Inaddition,itispossibleforadultstoaccessserviceswherethereisadangerthattheywouldbecomeavictimortheyarealreadyvictimsofabuse,neglect,exploitationanddomesticviolence.

6. Nevertheless, it must be recalled that these centres are notfocusedonvictimsupportinthewaythatspecificsupportorganisationsare. Whilst recognising the availability of some level of service it is


9

important to manage the expectations of victims as to the type ofservicethatmaybeavailablefromthesecenters.Toavoiddilutionofthe methodology and confusion, these centres are therefore not

included in statistics about organisations offering victim support.However, details will be included in the interactive map to ensureeligiblevictimswhoneedtheservicesofsuchcentresareabletofindthemeasilythroughthemap.

7. Inaddition,somesocialworkcentresactuallyoperatespecificservices to support victims of family violence. Those centres areincludingbothinthethereportandthemap.


10

Map1.Geographicallocationofvictimsupportservices


11

8. Thismapsuggeststhatsomepartsofthecountrylackanytypeofvictimsupportservices.Inparticular,Pirotareainthesouth,Zaječarareaintheeast,SuboticainthenorthandSreminthewestofthecountry

sufferfromalackofservices.WhenitcomestoŠumadija(thecentralpart

ofSerbia)itcanbenoticedthattherearenovictimsupportservicesin

twoadministrativedistricts(PomoravskiandMoravički).

9. Regardingthestatutoryarrangementsoftherespondentsthat

provide services to victims, 40 are non-profit non-governmentalorganisations(CSOs),32arestateactors1andoneLegalClinicattheLawFaculty,UniversityUnion,Belgrade.

1.2. TARGETGROUP

10. Whilst47(64.4%)serviceprovidersstatedthattheservicestheyprovide are made available to all victims regardless of the form ofvictimisation,theirgender,age,nationalityorreligiousbeliefsorother

personal features, further analysis of answers indicated that thenumberismuchlower2.

11. Analysis suggests that there are only 17 (23.3%) serviceprovidersthatprovideservicestoallvictims,regardlessofgender,age,

typeofvictimisationorothercircumstance.26(35.6%)serviceprovidersrespondedfromtheoutsetthattheyprovidedassistanceandsupportto

certaingroupsofvictimsonly.

1In this context state actors is defined broadly - out of the 32, 26 respondents are units of state institutions, 3 are institutions financed by the local administration, 2 are state institutions, one is an independent state agency. 2When respondents gave their replies to questions related to age, gender or form of victimisation, it turned out that, while they consider themselves to be a general victim support service, they actually provide certain types of services to only certain types of victims.


12

Figure4.Generalandspecialistvictimsupportservices

12. Thisdoesnotmean,however,thatalloftheseserviceprovidersprovide all the needed assistance and support to victims.Out of 17general victim support services, 9 (52.9%)areHigherCourtOffices for

Assistance and Support to Witnesses and Injured Parties and the

InformationOfficesforInjuredPartiesandWitnessesattheHigherPublic

Prosecutor’s Offices. Support in courts and the prosecutor’s offices is

furtherlimitedastheyareofferedonlytothosevictimswhotakepartin

criminalproceedings.Assistanceandsupportareprovidedonlyforthe

durationofthoseproceedings.

13. Inadditiontothoseservices,assistanceandsupportareofferedtoallvictimsofallcrimesby8CSOs,whoprovidetheirservicestodirectandindirectvictimsduring,aswellasoutsideofcriminalproceedings.

Hence, the existence of services that provide support to all victims of

crimesinSerbia,whetherincriminalproceedingsornot,isverylimited.

14. 48 (65.8%) victim support services provide assistance andsupport to all persons regardless of their gender, while 25 (34.2%)

17 (23,3%)

56 (76,7%)

Generalvictim

supportservices

Specialistvictim

supportservices


13

support women exclusively. None of the service providers from the

sampleprovidesassistanceandsupporttomenonly3.

Figure5.Providingvictimsupportdependingonvictim’ssex/gender

15. Morethantwothirdsofserviceproviders(50or68.5%)provideassistance and support to victims regardless of their age, while 23(31.5%)provideassistanceandsupportonlytovictimsthatbelongtocertainagecategories,mostlyadults.

3WemayarguethatthesefindingsreflecttheprocessofdevelopmentofvictimsupportservicesinSerbia,

which“wasnotlinearandsystematic”(Lindgren,M.,Nikolić-Ristanović,V.(2011)CrimeVictims:InternationalandSerbianPerspective,Belgrade:OrganizationforSecurityandCooperationinEurope,MissiontoSerbia,

LawEnforcementDepartment:pp.44-46).Developmentofvictimsupportservicesinthe1990sand2000swas

stronglyinfluencedbythewomen’smovement,butalsobythedevelopmentofcivilsocietyingeneral,and

humanrightsorganisationsinparticular.FirstSOShotlines,sheltersandcounsellingservicesforwomenand

childrenwereestablished inthe1990sbywomen’sgroups’activists.Thiswasparticularly intensifiedafter

socialchangesin2000.Therefore,thefirstvictimsupportservicesinSerbiawerespecialistservicesforwomen

andchildrenvictimsofviolence.Thiswasfollowedwiththeestablishmentofotherspecialistservices,suchas

servicesfortortureandwarvictims,victimsofhumantrafficking,etc.After2000,thefirstvictimserviceswere

establishedwithinstateinstitutions,particularlywithinthesocialwelfaresystem,whichlargelyfollowedthe

generaltrendoffocusingonwomenandchildrenvictimsofviolence.Consequently,assuggestedbyLindgren

andNikolić-Ristanović, “theprevalenceof specialisedvictim servicesandorganisations contributed to the

increasedsocialvisibilityofcertainvictims,suchasfemalevictimsofdomesticviolence,childrenvictimsof

sexual abuse, victims of trafficking in women and children, and recently victims of work related abuse”.

However,astheycontinue,“othervictims,suchasvictimsofrobbery,burglary,streetviolence,menasvictims

etc.aremostlyleftinvisibleandunrecognised.”(Lindgren,Nikolić-Ristanović,2011:p.46).

48 (65,8%)

25 (34,2%)

Servicesthatprovide

assistanceandsupport

toallpersons

regardlessoftheir

sex/gender

Servicesthatprovide

assistanceandsupport

exclusivelytowomen


14

Figure6.Providingvictimsupportdependingonvictim’sage

16. 17 (54.8%) service providers indicated that they provideassistanceandsupporttoadults(personsover18),9(29.0%)provideassistance and support to adolescents - children between 14 and 18yearsofage,and5(16.1%)supportchildrenbelow14yearsofage.

Figure7.Providingvictimsupporttovictimsofcertainagecategories

17. Apart fromtheaboveconsiderationsofgenderandage,mostservices,46(63.1%),offerassistanceandsupporttovictimsregardless

50 (68,5%)

23 (31,5%)

Serviceprovidersthatprovide

assistanceandsupporttoall

victimsregardlessoftheirage

Serviceprovidersthatprovide

assistanceandsupportonlyto

victimsthatbelongtocertain

agecategories

17 (54,8%)

9 (29%)

5 (16,1%)

Serviceprovidersthat

provideassistanceand

supporttoadults(persons

over18)



supporttochildren

between14and18years

ofage



supporttochildrenbelow

14yearsofage


15

of their personal characteristics (such as ethnicity, refugee/migrantstatus, disability, gender identity or sexual orientation, or othercircumstance).Theremaining27(36.9%),however,offerassistanceand

support only to some categories of victims according to their specific

personalcharacteristics(largelyfocusedonmarginalisedgroups).

Figure8.Providingvictimsupportdependingonvictim’spersonalfeaturesandothercharacteristics

18. Figure9showsthatwhereservicesareprovidedtoonlycertainspecific group of victims, these are often focused on particularlymarginalised and vulnerable group of victims. These include Roma,

personswithdisabilities,refugees,displacedpersons,migrantsorasylum

seekers,LGBTpersons,aswellastosomegroupsofvictimswhorequire

veryspecifictypesofsupport,suchassubstanceabusers.

46 (63,1%)

27 (36,9%)

0, 0% 0, 0%



supporttovictims

regardlessoftheir

personalfeaturesand

othercharacteristics



supportonlytosome

categoriesofvictims

accordingtotheir

personalfeaturesorother

characteristics


16

Figure9.Providingvictimsupporttocertaingroupsofvictims

19. Regarding the formof victimisation, the data showed that 20(27.4%) service providers offer assistance and support to all victimsregardless of the form of victimisation, while 53 (72.6%) of them

provide assistance and support only to victims of certain forms ofvictimisation.

Figure10.Providingvictimsupportdependingontheformofvictimisation

17 (22.9%)

13 (17.6%)

12 (16.2%) 2 (2.7%)

18 (24.3%)

12 (16.2%)

providingassistanceand

supporttomembersof

differentethnicgroups,

includingRomasupportingpersonswith

disabilities

supportingLGBTpersons

providingassistanceand

supporttopersonsthatface

problemswithalcoholor

drugabuse

20 (27,4%)

53 (72,6%)

Servicesthatprovide


allvictimsregardlessof

theformofvictimisation

Servicesthatprovide


victimsofcertainformsof

victimisation


17

20. Within the category of thosewho support only some victims,there are 18 specialist service providers for assisting and supporting

victimsofonlyoneparticularformofvictimisation.Outofthe18,nineprovide support to victims of domestic violence, three to victims of

humantrafficking,twotovictimsofworkplaceviolence,twotovictimsof

warcrimes,onetovictimsoftortureandonetovictimsofbullying.

21. Therearealsoserviceprovidersthatdonotsupportallvictims,butprovideassistanceandsupporttomorethanoneparticulargroupofvictims.Thedata inTable1suggests thatassistanceandsupport inSerbia are primarily available to victims of domestic violence, sexual

violenceandhumantrafficking.

Table1.Structureofvictimsthatareofferedassistanceandsupportbytheformofvictimisation

Whomtheassistanceandsupportareofferedto N %

Victimsofdomesticviolence 42 23.1%

Victimsofsexualviolence 33 18.1%

Victimsofhumantrafficking 25 13.7%

Victimsofstalking 19 10.4%

Victimsofbullying 19 10.4%

Victimsofworkplaceviolence 17 9.3%

Victimsofhatecrime 11 6.1%

Victimsofpropertycrime(burglary,breakingand

entering,theft,etc.)

5 2.7%

Victimsofotherformsofcrime 10 5.5%

22. The Victims’ Rights Directive defines a victim as: (i) a naturalpersonwhohassufferedharm,includingphysical,mentaloremotionalharmoreconomiclosswhichwasdirectlycausedbyacriminaloffence;and(ii)familymembersofapersonwhosedeathwasdirectlycausedby


18

a criminal offence and who have suffered harm as a result of thatperson'sdeath4.Furthermore, familymembers, regardlessofwhether

theyareconsideredavictimornot,‘shallhaveaccesstovictimsupport

servicesinaccordancewiththeirneedsandthedegreeofharmsuffered

asa resultof thecriminaloffencecommittedagainst thevictim’5.Yet,

only33(45.2%)supportservicesofferassistanceandsupporttofamily

members6ofapersonwhosedeathwasadirectconsequenceofacrime

or who suffered an injury or different other consequence of a crime.

Additionally, thereare fourmoreorganisationsthatprovideassistance

andsupporttofamilymembersofvictimswhosufferedaninjuryorother

consequenceofacrime.

23. Apart fromproviding support to victimsof crimes, 25 (34.2%)

serviceprovidersalsoofferassistanceandsupporttoothercitizens.Thisincludeswitnesses incourtproceedingswhoarenotvictims,prisoners

andformerprisoners,parentsofchildrenwithdisabilities,personswith

psycho-socialdisabilities,personswithHIV,youngsterswithbehavioural

problems,juvenileoffendersandothermarginalisedgroups.

1.2.1. STRUCTUREOFSERVICESBYGEOGRAPHICALAREA

24. Services are provided to victims, depending on their place ofresidence. Based on this criteria, service providers work with victims

from:theentireterritoryofSerbia(20victimsupportservices,or27.4%);

theterritoryoftheAutonomousProvinceofVojvodina(6victimsupport

services, or 8.2%); regionally – i.e. from the administrative district in

whichtheyarelocated(28services,or38.3%);andlocally–i.e.onlyfrom

4Article 2(1) of the Directive. 5Article 8(1) of the Directive. Article 2(2) defines family members as the spouse, the person who is living with the victim in a committed intimate relationship, in a joint household and on a stable and continuous basis, the relatives in direct line, the siblings and the dependants of the victim. 6 By family members, we assume those assisting and supporting a spouse, children, parents, brothers and sisters, other blood persons who live in direct victim’s household, other relatives, and victim’s dependents.


19

thecity/towninwhichtheserviceproviderislocated(11victimsupport

services,or15.1%).

Figure11.Structureofservicesbythegeographicalareainwhichtheyprovidevictimsupport

1.2.2. WORKINGHOURS

25. Almost two thirds of victim support service providers provide

assistanceandsupporttovictimsduringworkingdaysonly(47servicesor64.4%),while26(35.6%)assistvictimsalsoonweekends.Inaddition,12servicesareavailable24hoursaday,7daysaweek

7.

26. Onethirdofserviceproviders(24victimsupportservices–17

CSOsand7stateservices)havemobileteams,whichprovideassistancetovictimsoutsideoftheirofficialpremises.

1.2.3. GETTINGINFORMATION

27. Themostfrequentwaythatvictimsobtaininformationonvictimsupportservicesisthroughtheinternet–47(63.5%)answers,andvia

media-41(55.4%)answers.

7 8 of 12 are shelters for victims of violence.

Wholeterritory

ofSerbia

20(27.4%)

Territoryof

Vojvodina

6(8.2%)Local(onlya

place/town

inwhichthe

serviceis

situated11

(15.1%)

Region,i.e.

districtin

whichthe

serviceis

situated

28(38.3%)

Other

8(10.9)%


20

28. Data in Table 2 suggests that referrals (in particular those bysocialwelfareservicesandCSOs),aswellasprintedmaterials (madeavailable in police premises, social work centres, healthcare

institutions, courts, schools,etc.)playan important role in informingvictimsaboutexistingsupportservices.Otherreferralsarelessfrequent.

Table2.Howvictimsgettoknowaboutvictimsupportservices

Howdovictimsgettoknowaboutvictimsupport

services?

N %

Theyfoundinformationoninternet 47 63.5%

Theyknowaboutusthroughthemedia 41 55.4%

Oralrecommendationfromasocialworkcentreofother

socialwelfareservice

40 54.1%

OralrecommendationfromanCSO 38 51.4%

Printedmaterialavailableinotherorganisationsand

institutions(inthepolice,socialworkcentres,healthcare

institutions,courts,schools,etc.)

33 44.6%

Oralrecommendationfromthepolice 27 36.5%

Printedmaterialvictimsgetfromthecourt/prosecutor’s

office

20 27.0%

Oralrecommendationfromaprosecutor 18 24.3%

Oralrecommendationfromthehealthcareinstitution

(ambulance,hospital,etc.)

16 21.6%

Oralrecommendationfromajudge 13 17.6%

Oralrecommendationfromanattorneyatlaw 10 13.5%

Otherways 10 13.5%


21

1.2.4. TYPESOFSERVICESOFFEREDTOVICTIMS

29. Victims in Serbia receive different forms of assistance andsupport fromdifferentsources.Asseen inTable3, themost frequent

forms of assistance and support provided are information, emotional

supportandcounselling,aswellasreferralstorelevantspecialistvictim

support services. This is followed by providing assistance in getting in

touch with other institutions, legal advice, psychological support and

psychotherapy,preparationfortrial,accompanyingtocourtandsupport

throughouttheproceedings.

30. Accommodation for victims, inparticularwomenandchildrenvictimsofviolence,isofferedby14servicesfromthesurveysample8.Thisrepresentsonethirdoftheorganisationssupportingvictims

9.

31. Verylimitedsupportisprovidedinpreparationforandsupportduringrestorativeprocesses(e.g.inmediation).

8 These are mainly shelters which are affiliated with the social work centres or other services within the social welfare system (10 providers), while four shelters operate within CSOs. 9 Yet, according to some reports, with 257 places in 12 shelters, Serbia is still far from achieving the minimum standards defined by the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention in providing shelter to women victims of violence. See e.g. Women Against Violence (WAVE) Report 2015 on the role of specialist women’s support services in Europe, available at: http://fileserver.wave-network.org/researchreports/WAVE_Report_2015.pdf


22

Table3.Formsofassistanceandsupport

Formsofassistanceandsupport N %

Information 69 93.2%

Emotionalsupportandcounselling(empowerment,

understanding,trust)

61 82.4%

Referraltorelevantspecialistsupportservices 55 74.3%

Assistanceincontactwithotherinstitutions 49 66.2%

Legaladvice 47 63.5%

Psychologicalsupport(psychologicalcounselling)and

psychotherapy

46 62.2%

Preparationforthetrial 44 59.5%

Accompanyingavictimtothecourtandsupporting

him/heratthecourt

40 54.1%

Writingcomplaints,appealsandotherlegal

submissionsforavictim

35 47.3%

Riskassessment 28 37.8%

Legalrepresentationinthecourt 19 25.7%

Practicalassistance(e.g.fillingintheforms,

contactinginsurancecompany,etc.)

19 25.7%

Accommodation(shelter) 14 18.9%

Financialassistance(e.g.urgentmaterialassistance,

payingfortheday-carecentre,food,etc.)

11 14.9%

Medicalassistance 7 9.5%

Preparationforandsupportduringrestorative

processes(e.g.inmediation)

5 6.8%

Otherformsofassistanceandsupport 5 6.8%

32. Table 4 indicates that information is most often provided toinformvictimsof their rightsandhowtoexercise those rights (56or

75.7%).Almostasimportant(54or73%)isinformationonparticipation


23

incriminalorothercourtproceedingsandonother relevant specialist

supportservices.

Table4.Typesofinformationprovidedtovictimsbyvictimsupportservices

Informationprovidedtovictimsbyvictimsupport

services

N %

Informationontherightsofvictimsandwaysto

exercisethem

56 75.7%

Informationontheparticipationincriminalorother

courtproceedings

54 73%

Informationaboutotherrelevantspecialistsupport

services

54 73%

Informationrelatingtotheriskandpreventionof

secondaryandrepeatvictimisation

42 56.8%

Informationrelatingtothepossiblepsychological

reactionsandthedynamicsofahealingprocessinthe

aftermathofthecrime

36 48.6%

Informationrelatingpracticalissuesarisingfromthe

crime

35 47.3%

1.2.5. COMMUNICATIONCHANNELS

33. 69 (94.5%) service providers can be directly approached byvictims. In fourcases (6.8%)victimscancontact theserviceonlyupon

referralfromanotherorganisation10.

10 This only refers to Units for the Protection of Child Victims and Witnesses, which operate on the regional level within social welfare institutions. Those institutions are: Institution for children and youth “Dr Milorad Pavlović”, Sremska Kamenica; Centre for the protection of children and youth–Shelter for urgent protection of abused children Belgrade; Institution for children and youth “Duško Radović“, Niš and Centre for development of social protection services “Kneginja Ljubica“, Kragujevac. Child victims and witnesses are formally referred to the Units by the prosecutors’ office. Once the criminal procedure is initiated, the prosecutor first obtains an opinion/recommendation from the social work centre on the need to prepare a child for the procedure. Afterwards, the prosecutor refers a child to the Unit for the Protection of Child Victims and Witnesses by sending a formal inquiry to the Unit with all relevant documents, asking for their


24

34. Victimscanapproachallserviceprovidersforassistancethroughmore than one channel. Most victims reach out for help to service

providersthroughtelephonecontact(68,or93.1%).Additionally,victims

approachvictimsupportservicesbycomingdirectlytotheirpremises(57,

or 78.1%), by e-mail (57, or 78.1%), through a questionnaire on the

service provider’s website (8 or 10.9%), or through online chat (7, or

9.6%). 4 (5.5%). Services also use additional communication channels

(e.g.SMSorFacebookandsocialnetworks).

35. Oncetheyestablishcontactwithvictims,someserviceprovidersonly use one communication channel for providing support (16 or21.9%),whilemostcommunicatewithvictimsinseveraldifferentways(57participants,or78.1%).AsmaybeseeninFigure12,mostservices

provideassistanceandsupportthroughdirect(face-to-face)contactand

communicationwithavictim(69answers,or94.5%)andviatelephone

(57answers,or78.1%).

services of assistance and support and to prepare a child for an interview, for giving evidence in the procedure, etc.


25

Figure12.Waysofprovidingassistanceandsupporttovictims

36. 11 service providers provide victim assistance and supportthroughtheirinternetsiteand7ofthemalsohaveaquickexitbuttonpossibility.

1.2.6. SERVICEFEE

37. Most service providers offer their services free of charge.Fundingfortheseservicescomesfromvarioussources,asdescribedin

section1.3.Onlytwo(2.7%)serviceschargeforpsychologicalsupportand

psychotherapy, unless specific funding for such services is secured

throughprojects.

69 (94,5%) 57 (78,1%)

43 (58,9%)

22 (30,1%) 20 (27,4%) 11 (14,9%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


26

1.3. CAPACITYOFSERVICEPROVIDERS

1.3.1. DATAGATHERINGANDPROTECTIONOFVICTIMS

38. 68(91.9%)serviceproviderscollectandrecorddatarelatedtovictims who approach them with their support needs. All of theseservicesabidebydataprotection

11andnon-discriminationpolicies,and

allbuttwo(2.9%)alsoabidebyachildprotectionpolicy.

1.3.2. SERVICESPROVIDEDIN2016

39. There is a significant discrepancy in the number of victimssupportedbyeachserviceproviderin2016:rangingfromtwoto3,700victims.However,themajorityofproviderssupportedupto100victims

(Figure13).Acombinedtotalof20,708requestsforvictimsupportwere

received in 2016, or on average 284 persons per organisation12. This

compareswithanestimatedvictimpopulationofaround1millionpeople

per year (15% of the population) based on data estimates by the

European Commission.13Moreover, this does not take into account

victimsofpastcrimeswhoremaininneedofsupport.

40. 19,080(92.2%)oftheserequestswererespondedtoby57(78.1)respondents.Intotal,11,498women;7,343men;881childrenbetween

14and18yearsofageand973childrenbelowtheageof14received

assistanceandsupport.However,thisdataisincompleteanditneedsto

beinterpretedwithcaution,sincesomeservicesstatedthattheydonot

recorddatabygenderorage,theydonothavefinaldatafor2016orthey

11 In terms of data protection, it is important to note that a person in a victim support organisation which receives information may still be required to testify before a court, unless the person receiving the information is a professional covered by a duty to keep client confidentiality (e.g. medical professional or a priest). 12 Comparing this average with Figure 13, we can conclude that this average exceeds the capacity of the majority of service providers. 13EU Commission impact assessment SEC (2011) 580 final relating to a proposal for a Directive establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime (p5):http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52011SC0580


27

cannotprovidethedataduetootherreasons.Ifcomparedwithacountry

ofasimilarsize(Portugal),itcanbeseenthattheirmainvictimsupport

organisation alone supports on average 9,000 victims per year which

entailsaround35,000supportmeetingsorcontacts.Inaddition,thereis

avarietyofothersupportorganisationsinthecountry.

41. Somerespondentsdidnothavetheexactdataonthenumberofvictimstheyserviced.Also,thereisapossibilityofdataoverlapping,since

onevictimmayapproachmorethanoneprovider,andreceiveservices

fromonlyoneorseveralofthem.Moreover,wemustassumethatnotall

those who contacted services needed assistance or were eligible, or

particular respondentswere not in a position to provide themwith a

service(e.g.menseekinghelpfromawomen’sshelter,oranon-Roma

seekingassistancefromaRomaorganisation)andfailedtoreferthemto

adifferentservice,orvictimsfailedtofollowonthereferral.

Figure13.Numberofvictimsthatreceivedassistanceandsupportin2016

30 (52,6%)

14(24,6%)

5 (8,8%) 8 (14,1%)

providedsupport

forupto100

victims

providedsupport

for101-300victims

providedsupport

for301-500victims

providedsupport

formorethan500

victims


28

1.3.3. HUMANRESOURCES

42. 61 respondents (83.6%) employ professional staff, while 12(16.4%) do not. The total number of professional staff in these 61

providers is640.Thenumberofprofessionalstaffeachemployerhires

rangesfromoneto68.

43. As suggested by data in Table 5, the most common staffingnumbers are up to five employees (29 respondents --most of them

CSOs)14andbetween6-10employees(16respondents).Only8(13.1%)victim support services havemore than 20 employees (most of them

statefundedserviceproviders).

Table5.Numberofemployees(professionalstaff)

Numberofemployees N %

Upto5employees 29 47.5%

6-10employees 16 26.2%




Morethan50employees 3 4.9%

Total 61 100.0%

44. 45 (61.6%) service providers from the survey sample engagevolunteers in theirwork.Between them, these45providersengagea

totalof449volunteers–eachworkingwithbetweenoneand79persons

whoarenotpaid for thework theyoffer.However, volunteerwork is

usedmostlybyCSOs(35or77.8%).AsdatainTable6suggests,almost

halfofvictimsupportservicesencompassedbythesurveyhaveuptofive

volunteers,whileonlytwoservicesengagemorethan30.

14 Persons who are under a labour or service contract and who receive compensation for their work.


29

Table6.Numberofvolunteers

Numberofvolunteers N %

Upto5volunteers 22 48.9%

6-10volunteers 13 28.9%



Morethn30volunteers 2 4.4%

Total 45 100.0%

1.3.4. STAFFTRAINING

45. Employees in 59 (80.8%) and volunteers in 50 (68.5%) serviceproviders receivedat least sometraining toworkwithvictims.Some

attended specialised programs and seminars, as well as licensed

trainings, which were provided by expert trainers from Serbia and

abroad15.Thissuggeststhatinanimportantnumberoforganisationsstaff

whooffersupporttovictimshavenotbeentrained.

1.4. FINANCIALRESOURCES

46. The most common single source of funding is from foreigndonations – 30 (41.1%) service providers mostly depend on thesedonations.However,manyorganisationsalsoreceivefundingfromState

and local budgets (27 and 26 respondents respectively). 7 (9.6%)

providersdonothaveanysourceoffundingandtheirworkiscompletely

performedonavoluntarybasis.

15Autonomous Women Centre, VDS and Incest Trauma Centre stand out among Serbian CSOs that were repeatedly pointed out by respondents as deliverers of training and capacity building for victim support providers.


30

Figure14.Fundingsourcesforvictimsupportservices

47. CSOs’workonvictimsupportisfundedlargelyfromforeignanddomesticdonations,whileStateprovidersarefundedfromtheStateorlocalbudget.Forexample,28CSOsstatedthattheyreceivedonations

from abroad, while only two state institutions provided the same

response. What follows from the research is that some CSOs receive

financial support from the local government, which is usually not

sufficient and they have to further fundraise for their activities from

foreignanddomesticdonations,orwithinprojectactivities.

1.5. DATABASEOFVICTIMSUPPORTSERVICES

48. Havingconcludedthesurvey,thedatacollectedservedasabasisfor creating a comprehensive database of victim support servicesavailableinSerbia.

49. The database encompasses a total of 109 victim support

services.Ofthatnumber,73participatedinthesurvey,andthedatafor

theremaining36serviceproviderswereincludedbasedonthedatathey

27 (36,9%)

26(35,6%)

30 (41,1%) 18(24,7%)

5 (6,8%)

7 (9,6%) 9 (12,3%)

Statebudget

Localgovernment

Donationsfromabroad

Donationsfromthe

country

Membershipfees

Nofundingreceived/work

fullyvoluntary

Otherformsoffinancing


31

providedafterthesurveyended,eitherbyfillinginthequestionnaireor

through the telephone interview, or based on their publicly available

information.Inaddition,the136socialcentreswillalsobeincludedinthe

final interactiveonlinemap,withacarefulexplanationof the relevant

victim services they operate. Map 2 presents the geographical

distributionofvictimsupportservicesincludedinthedatabase.

50. Theaimis forthedatabasetobeausefultool forvictims, for

those who come into contact with them, as well as victim supportprofessionals and the general public. It will be searchable by severalcriteria(location,typeofservice,typeofvictimisation, forexample)to

enablevictimstoidentifythemostappropriateserviceforthem.

51. For that reason, the database will be transformed into aninteractive map which will be offered as a free resource to victimsupport providers, as well as any other interested institution ororganisation.Theseentitieswillbeaskedtoputthemapvisiblyontotheir

websitesandinvitevictimsandtheirsupporterstouseitasasourcefor

findingassistanceandservices.Forexample,themapmaybeplacedon

websitesofcourts,prosecutors’offices,police,medicalinstitutions,but

also of professional associations (nurses, doctors, lawyers) or other

entities(e.g.auto-motosociety,consumers’associationsetc.).

52. Inadditiontotheelectronicversion,aprintableversionofthedatabasewillbepreparedandbroadlydistributedinelectronicversion,withaninvitationtoeveryonetoofferfreeprintedcopiestovictimsortheir supporters who may so desire. It is hoped this will supportawareness raising and referral processes particularly from institutions

suchasthepoliceandprosecution.

53. Following a consultation with stakeholders at the workshop,VDShascommittedtomaintainingthedatabasetoensureitremainsalivinginstrument.Itwillthereforeberegularlysupplementedbynewand

developingservices,aswellascontainingthemostuptodateinformation

relevantfortheexistingservices.


32

Map2.GeographicaldistributionofvictimsupportservicesinSerbiaincludedinthedatabase


33

2. CONCLUSIONSANDRECOMMENDATIONS

54. Mapping the existing services was the first step in advancingtowards the full implementationof the requirements of theVictims’Rights Directive and ensuring adequate services to all victims of allcrimes on the entire territory of the Republic of Serbia. Experiencesuggests that this is a complex yet feasible task. Importantly, the

GovernmentoftheRepublicofSerbiahasexpressedtheirdedicationto

achievingthisgoalandinordertoattainit,thestateactors16andCSOs

havetoworktogether.

55. Thereareseveralimportantconclusionsthatcanbedrawnfrom

ourresearchthatcanbeusedtoguideSerbiatowardsachievingthegoalofprovidingvictimsupportservicesfullyinlinewiththeDirective.

1. STRUCTUREOFSERVICEPROVIDERS

56. ThemajorityofparticipantsinthesurveywereCSOs.However,taking into consideration the providers who failed to respond to the

survey, but which were included in the map, the number of public

servicesandthoseprovidedthroughthecivilsectoraremoreorlessthe

same. This has important implications for the future development of

servicessincefunding,standardsandpoliciesmustbeprogressedinboth

sectors.Moreover,co-ordinationofservicesisevenmoreessentialgiven

thesplitbetweenservices–inparticularbetweenthoseinandoutside

criminalproceedings.

57. Stateprovidersprovideveryspecificandfocusedservices,whichare limited toverynarrowlydeterminedusersand foravery limitedperiod of time.Namely, state services are provided to only twomain

groups: support to victims in their capacity as injured parties and/or

16 Understood as any form and any level of organisational involvement of the government: be it judiciary, administration, at the state, provincial, regional or local level.


34

witnessesduringcriminalproceedings,andprovidingsheltertowomen

and children victimsof violence. Very fewother services are available

throughthesechannels.

58. Incomparisonwithpublicsectorserviceproviders,CSOsprovideawiderrangeofserviceswhichareoftenspecialisedandtargetedtospecificvulnerablegroups.CSOsalsoprovideservicestoabroaderrangeof victims – direct victims as well as family members, and they also

respond to a broader scope of victims’ needs, through providing

counselling,housing, legalaidetc.Furthermore,moreoftenthanstate

actors,theyalsoprovideservicesoutsideoftheirpremises.Theseareall

importantfactors indeliveringserviceswhichbetteraccommodatethe

needsofvictims.Amoreinclusiveapproach,whereorganisationsactas

onestopshopsofferingawiderangeofservices,reducestheneedsfor

victims to attend different organisations, and therefore reduces the

burdenonvictims.

59. ItisclearthatbothCSOsandtheStateplayanimportantrolein

deliveringvictimsupportservices.Itwillbeimportanttosupportthese

servicesinthefuturetocapitaliseontheirexperienceandexpertiseand

toensure the continuityof current support capacity. Equally itwill be

important to co-ordinate effectively between the different service

providerstomaximiseefficiencyandreducerisksofduplication.

60. GiventhestrongfocusoftheStateoncriminalproceedingsandspecificgroups,itmaybemoreefficientandeffectivetoexpandgenericservices (support for all victimsof crime) throughCSOs. At the same

time,thetypeofservicesofferedbybothCSOsandtheStateshouldbe

increasedtofullymeetthediverseneedsofvictims.

2. STRUCTUREOFSERVICES

61. There are very few general victim support services in Serbia.Eventhoseservicesthataremadeavailabletoallvictims,regardlessof

their personal vulnerabilities or type of victimisation, are generally


35

limitedtovictimswithacertainformalstatus(injuredparties/witnesses

incriminalproceedings)andduringaverylimitedperiodoftime(forthe

durationofcriminalproceedings).

62. Whilethereisanumberofspecialisedservicesattendingtothespecific needs of certain vulnerable groups, there is still very fewproviders of services for child victims. Other vulnerable groups areprovidedwithservicesinanon-structuredandincidentalmanner

17.

63. It is essential that there are sufficient services available tovictimswithoutrestrictions.Withoutsuchservices,manyvictimsdonot

haveaccesstosupport.Moreover,providingsupportinthiswaycanhelp

avoidsomevictimsbeingpassedrepeatedlybetweenorganisations.

64. At the same time specialised services should continue to besupported and developed to cater for specific needs of particularlyvulnerablevictims.Suchservicescanbeprovidedbothingenericsupportorganisations and in specialist organisations. Only with a balanced

provision of both generic and specialised services, incorporating co-

ordinationandreferralbetweenthem,canitbeensuredthatallvictims

haveaccesstothetypeofservicestheyneed.

3. GEOGRAPHICALCOVERAGE

65. 20organizationsoffertheirservicestovictimsfromanypartofthecountry.However,thesupporttheyprovideissometimeslimitedby

thetypeofservice(forexample,limitedtolegalaidorprovidingashelter)

and the type of victimisation (for example, for victims of human

trafficking).EveniftheserviceisnominallyavailabletoanyoneinSerbia,

these providers have limited capacity - with only one office which is

usually in a big administrative centre. Limited budgets and staff also

17 E.g. while there are specific services available for persons with disabilities, there are only a few organisations which actually provide these services, and on a very limited geographical area.


36

reduce the possibility to maintain regular personal contact with each

victim.

66. Asaresult,significantpartsofSerbia,inparticularPirotdistrictinthesouth,Zaječardistrictintheeast,SuboticainthenorthandSreminthewest,seemtosufferfromacompleteabsenceof locallybasedservicesthatprovidesupportandassistancetovictimsofcrime.Inmany

areas, even when present, the only service actually provided is

informationandsupporttoinjuredpartiesandwitnessesprovidedbythe

newlyestablishedservicesinthehigherprosecutor’sofficesandcourts.

This effectively means that large numbers of victims are likely to be

deniedaccesstosupportinarangeofregions.

67. ItisnecessarytoestablishanapproachtovictimsupportservicesinSerbiatoensurethattheentireterritoryofthecountry iscoveredandthatallvictimshaveequalaccesstonecessarysupportservices.Thiswill require a co-ordinated and strategic approach to determinewhat

levelofserviceandcoverageisaminimumacceptedlevel,howthatlevel

ofservicecanbeassuredforallvictimsandhowofferingsupportthrough

a range of organisations can reduce the need to establish new

organisations.Forexample,iforganisationswerefundedtoexpandthe

scope of their services, this could quickly and relatively easily expand

distributionofservicesacrossthecountry.

68. Thewaythatservicesareofferedcanalsobevariedtomaximiseavailability. For example, telephone support lines, online support and

mobileofficescanincreaseaccess.

4. OUTREACH

69. Media remain an important outreach tool, through whichvictimslearnaboutexistingsupport.Moreover,theinternetisbecoming

an increasingly popular outreach channel through which victims get

information about their rights and services. Individual organisations

shouldcontinuetoprioritisetheseoutreacheffortsandexplorenewand


37

differentapproachestopublicityandawarenessraisingandinformation

campaigns including through social media, bill boards and electronic

advertisingonpublictransport,radioandtelevisionadverts,onlinetools

etc.

70. Opportunitiesmayexistfororganisationstojointogetherorforthe State to work with CSOs as part of this outreach. Moreover,

partnershipswithprivatesectororganisationsshouldbeexplored.Such

voluntary or reduced cost partnerships have been shown to be highly

effectiveinothercountriessuchasPortugal18.Animportantimpactcan

oftenbeachievedbetterthroughasustainedcampaignratherthanshort

orlocalcampaigns.TheStatetogetherwithCSOsshouldexploreafuture

longertermcampaigntoincreaseawarenessofservices.

71. Indevelopingoutreach,serviceprovidersmustkeepinmindthatmanyvictimsinSerbia, inparticularthoseinruralareas,donothaveaccesstotheinternet.Onlyaround54%ofthepopulationofSerbiahadaccesstointernetin2014

19accordingtotheUN,thoughestimatesshow

this is increasingyearonyear20.Furthermore, informationneedstobe

madeaccessibleforallvictims,inlinewiththeVictims’RightsDirective,

and adapted for victims with specific vulnerabilities (victims with

disabilities,childrenvictims,victimswhodonotspeakSerbianetc.).

72. Tothatend,arangeofmethodsshouldbeemployedtoreachouttovictims.Inadditiontomedia(electronicandprinted)andonline

resources,printedmaterialsshouldalsobedistributedinpolicestations,

courts, social work centres, medical institutions, schools etc.

Furthermore, information should bemade accessible for personswith

specificaccessibilityneeds(Braille’scode,easytoreadlanguage,foreign

18 For example, Victim Support Portugal regularly produces media campaigns in partnership with media companies that would not be affordable at full cost e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hT0qpsyXLUw. Similarly, they seek support from different organisations and foundations such as the Gulbenkian Foundation. 19http://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crName=Serbia 20 http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?q=internet+users+serbia&d=WDI&f=Indicator_Code%3aIT.NET.USER.P2%3bCountry_Code%3aSRB


38

languagesetc.)andindifferentforms–written,oral,video,interactive

onlinepresentations.

5. INFORMATION

73. Mostserviceprovidersworkwithvictimsthroughofferingtheminformation,emotional supportand referring themtoother relevant

services. This representsaminimumsupport that shouldbeprovided,

with the rightof victims to informationbeingoneof the fundamental

rightsoftheVictims’RightsDirective.

74. Not all organisations provide information, and those that do

very often provide limited information about only certain aspects ofvictim support. This means that victims rarely receive complete

information about their rights and the support they can receive. In

addition,thequalityofthisinformationremainsunknownandislargely

unstandardised.

75. Information isa fundamental rightofavictimofcrime,whichunderliestherealisationofanyotherrightandsupport.Therefore,itisnecessarytoensurethatanyvictimproviderhasthecapacitytoprovidevictimswithrelevant,correctanduptodateinformation.Information

content should as a minimum conform with content requirements

established in the Victims’ Rights Directive on accessing national

compensationschemesforcriminalinjuries,roleincriminalproceedings,

informationaboutspecialistsupportservices,advicerelatingtofinancial

andpracticalissuesarisingfromthecrime,advicerelatingtotheriskand

preventionofsecondaryandrepeatvictimisation.

76. Information material needs to be developed, to be madeavailable to victims or potential victims in police stations, hospitals,clinics,socialworkcentresandotherplaceswhereavictimislikelyto

comeseekassistance.Thisinformationmightbestbemanaged(butnot

necessarily delivered) by one single actor, who would be made

responsible for developing and delivering information in a uniform


39

accessiblemanner, respecting the requirements of the Victims’ Rights

Directive, human rights law and the specific vulnerabilities of victims

themselves. However, such an approach very much depends on the

national and local situation andwould require an inclusive process to

ensureallstakeholderswerepartofthedevelopmentprocess.Moreover,

theapproachwouldneedtoremainlightandflexibletoavoidinhibiting

thespeedydevelopmentofinformationmaterial.Forexample,guidance

andprinciples,togetherwithlongerterm(non-changing)contentmaybe

thebestfocusofcentralisedwork.

6. REFERRAL

77. Theresearchhasshownthatmostvictimsarereferredtovictimsupport services by social work centres and CSOs, withmuch fewernumbers referred to by justice authorities. However, there is nosystematicapproachtoreferral.

78. In order to overcome these problems, a range of actions arerequired ideally co-ordinated between the different organisations.Differentactionsmayalsoberequireddependingonwhetherreferralis

madebytheStateoraCSO.

79. In the first instance, all organisations in contact with victimsmustbeawareoftherangeofservicesavailablelocallyandnationally.Theinteractivemapdevelopedaspartofthisprojectcouldsupportthis

awareness. As a second step it is important for organisations and

individualstoknoweachother’sservicesingreaterdetailandtodevelop

agreatleveloftrustandconfidenceineachother.Insomecases,formal

agreementsmay strengthen that trustwhilst also helping to ensure a

consistentapproach.

80. Aspartoftheefforttoensureconsistencyinreferrals,guidelines

and obligations on staff with respect to referrals will be critical.Countries which introduced compulsory referral requirements on the


40

policehaveseenhigherlevelsofreferralbythoseorganisations.21Such

systems operate on an opt-out basis. Thismeans that information on

victimsisalwayssenttoapprovedvictimsupportprovidersbythepolice

unlessvictimsexpresslysaytheydon’twantthistohappen.Someargue

that suchanapproach isnot in conformitywithdataprotection rules.

However, these systems have been review by data protection

commissionersandthetransfermechanismsaresubjecttostrictsecurity

rules which usually requirement support organisations to strengthen

theirproceduresandsignedagreementswiththepolice.

81. Importantlysuchsystemsresultinhigherlevelsofserviceusagebyvictimssincethevictimsupportservicescontactvictimsdirectlyandexplain what they can offer. This ensures that victims have full

information and are empowered to make the best decision for

themselves.Thisismoreeffectivethanexpectingpoliceorotherjustice

practitionerstoproperlyexplaintovictimswhyaservicemaybeuseful

for them. Ifautomatic referral isnotusedandpoliceorotherservices

must explain what is available, training of practitioners will be an

essentialelementinthesuccessofthesystem.Nevertheless,experience

has shown that ultimately success is based on each individual

practitionersapproach.

82. Over time, it will be equally important to assure certainstandardsofservicetogiveserviceprovidersconfidenceinthereferred

organisations.Thisofcourseisnecessaryalsotoachievethebroadergoalofhighquality,consistentservices.

7. COMMUNICATION

83. The majority of providers contact victims directly/personally,face-to-face,oroverthephone.However,astherangeandeffectivenessof modern communication such as online web services and mobile

21 Information obtained anecdotally from Victim Support England, Victim Support Scotland and Victim Support Netherlands.


41

devicesdevelop,usingtheinternetandsocialnetworkstocommunicate

withvictimsisbecomingincreasinglyimportant.Suchapproachesoffer

the possibility to reach victims in more remote areas, those who are

unwillingorunabletotravel,andthosewhosimplydonotwishtohave

afacetofacemeeting.Forexample,initialfindingsofVictimSupportin

Finland and in Germany are showing that their online support

programmesareseeingincreasesinotherwisedifficulttoreachgroups

suchasyoungpeopleandmen.

84. Communicationwithvictimsneedstotakeaccountofchangesinthewaytheworldcommunicates.Developingonlinesupportservices(forexample chat) andusingmodern communicationplatform (Skype,

viber,Whatsapp),togetherwithlookingintousingmobileapplicationsfor

communicating with victims needs to be part of developing future

services for victims of crime in Serbia. Non-personal support such as

guides, tips, adviceon reactions,preventionof crimeetc., canalsobe

developed using different media forms. This again will increase the

accessibilityoftheinformationandsupportself-help.

8. VOLUNTEERSANDPAIDSTAFF

85. Differences in the number of paid staff between state

institutionsandCSOsshowthatCSOshavemorevolunteers.Volunteerstaff, including volunteers with professional experience, can provide

valuable services within any organisation. The importance of their

contributionshouldnotbeunderestimatedwithservicesbetterreflecting

localprioritiesandanunderstandingofthelocalsituation,andwithcosts

beingreduced.Atthesametime,successfulvolunteeringschemesmust

becarefullydeveloped.Properhumanresourcemanagement,rulesand

guidelinesmustbedevotedtorecruitment,trainingandqualityofstaff,

retention and job satisfaction. Without a careful approach to


42

volunteering,theirworkcanbeunstableandcanputthesustainabilityof

theserviceatriskinthelong-run22.

9. STAFFTRAINING

86. Itisofgreatconcernthat20%ofstaffofserviceprovicers,and30%oftheirvolunteersdonotreceiveanytraining.Basictrainingneeds

tobeprovidedtoallstaffandvolunteersworkingwithvictims,andthe

traininglevelneedstobeproportionatewiththeresponsibilityofwork

eachstaffmemberdoes.

87. Itisnecessarytoensurethatallpaidstaffandvolunteerswho

are in direct contact with victims (whether online, by phone or inperson) receive appropriate training to ensure their sensitisation onvictims’issuesandtodeveloptheirserviceprovisionskills.Bothgeneral(basic)andspecialisttraining,aswellasentryandongoingtrainingshould

beprovidedtoallstaffandvolunteersworkingwithvictims,asforeseen

in Article 25 of the Victims’ Rights Directive. Without such training,

supportservicesriskcausingfurtherharmtovictimsratherthanreducing

it. Ensuring this training should be the responsibility of each service

provider, but could also become a conditio sine qua non for theaccreditation of each service provider, which should become a

requirement for service providers23. However, the best approach for

Serbiawouldneedtobeconsideredcarefullytoensuretherighttraining

requirements are established which are approprioate for the type of

organisation,theircontactswithvictims,theytypesofvictimstheyarein

contactwithetc.

22 In this regard, Victim Support Europe is developing Standards for Accreditation for victim support services, which will become compulsory for VSEFull members, while governments and other organisations will be encouraged to sign up to them and ensure their broad enforcement. 23 VSE Standards for Accreditation will also cover to some extent standards with respect of staff training.


43

10. FINANCING

88. All CSOs, as well as some state providers of victim supportservicesareheavilydependentonprojectsandforeignfundingsources.The few state services that are funded from the budget are often

underfundedandfacedifficultiestoadequatelyprovideservices.Thishas

a significant impact on the ability of support organisations to offer

consistentservicesandtoimproveandexpandthoseservices.

89. In order to provide adequate and efficient services in asustainablemanner,itisnecessarytoensurestablesourcesoffunding

for victim supportproviders.The roleof the Statewill beparticularlyimportant in this regard, to develop necessary funding mechanisms

ideallywith ring fenced funding.To facilitate thedevelopmentof such

funding, the State should consider developing a victim services fund

which could be funded through a range of mechanisms. Approaches

around Europe, including victim surcharges (penalties on criminals),

takingfeesfromcompulsoryinsuranceschemes,andusingincomefrom

gamblingtaxesorconfiscatedcriminalassets.

90. Atthesametimesponsorship,donationsandmembershipsfees

should continue to be encouraged and organisations should besupportedindevelopingtheircapabilitytoapplyforsuchfunding.AsapartofpartnershipbetweentheWorldBankandVictimSupportEurope,

areportonfinancingmechanismsforvictimsupportservicesisprepared,

which showcases some approaches in ensuring stable and sufficient

fundingforvictimsupportservices.

11. DATACOLLECTIONANDRECORDING

91. The research suggests differences in recording data aboutvictimsassistedbyvictimsupportproviders.Someofthemcollectdata

and keep records about their clients but some do not. Some services

recorddataonservicesprovided,buttheydonotdisaggregatethedate

bye.g.victim’sgenderorage.Thereisapossibilityofdataoverlapping,


44

aswell.Therefore,thedataaboutthenumberofvictimsservicedbythe

victimsupportprovidersencompassedbytheresearchisincomplete,it

isnotreliableandneedstobeinterpretedwithcaution.

92. Theuseofdigitalcasemanagementsystemscanbeaneffectivewayofnotonlyobtainingrelevantdataonservicesbutofensuringthequality and continuity of services provided to victims. The ability tocollect,processandprotectsuchdataisnotonlyimportantforthequality

ofservicesbutwillhelporganisationstoestablishastrongevidencebase

fortheservicestheyareproviding.Thiscansupportfundraisingeffortsas

well as future policy developments. Any such system should be fully

compliantwithnationalandEuropeandataprotectionrules.

12. OVERALLCONCLUSIONS

93. Comprehensive,generalservices,whichensurethatallvictimsofallcrimes,regardlessofwheretheyare inSerbia,currentlydonot

exist.Settingupsuchservicesisnotonlyarequirementfortheaccession

to the European Union, but also is a responsibility Serbia has to its

citizens,inaccordancewiththerequirementsofhumanrightslaws.The

Serbiangovernmenthasaresponsibilitytoensurethatsuchservicesare

established, organised, coordinated and receive adequate and stable

fundingfortheiroperation.Experienceshowsthatnation-wideservices

provided by CSOs are able to competently provide services with

necessary responsiveness, adaptability and flexibility. However, they

needtobeabletocountonapartnershipwiththegovernmentandfree

to create synergies to ensure adequate services in amanner thatwill

ensureoptimaluseofhumanandfinancialresources.

94. TheprimaryaimofArticles8and9oftheEUVictimsDirectiveistoensurethatanypersonwhohasfallenvictimtocrimecanaccessinarelativelyeasymannerthetypeofsupportservicetheyhaveneedof.

Thoseservicescanbeprovidedinarangeofways–usuallycombining

facetofacemeetingswithdistancesupportsuchashelplines,onlinechat

andwebsites.


45

95. Supportneedsofvictimswillvaryaccordingtothecrimetheysufferandtheirownpersonalsituation.Inaddition,thewayvictimsmay

wish to access services, the barriers that may prevent victims from

comingforward,andthetypeofsupporttheymayrequiremustallbe

takenintoaccountwhendesigningordevelopinganationaldeliveryplan

forservices.

96. Nationalsupportservicesmustbringtogetherarangeofserviceproviders.Overall thismeans that thenational systemwhich tends to

best meet the needs of the national victim population is one which

combinesStateandCSOservices,combinessupportwithinandoutside

thecontextofcriminalproceedingsi.e.withouthavingtoreportacrime,

combines services for all victims and specialist services for specific

populationssuchasforcertaincrimes,andwhichensuressmoothreferral

betweenorganisationsaccordingtothevictim’sneeds.

97. Mostvictimstaketimetobuildtrustwithasupportworker.To

havetodothisseveraltimesinseveralorganisationscanreducepositive

outcomes. Therefore, as far as possible, a multiple range of services

shouldbeprovidedwithinanyoneorganisationtoreducetheneedfor

victimstoseekhelpfromavarietyoforganisations.

98. Toestablishnationalserviceswhichmeetallthesecriteriaisnoteasy and requires a proactive approach. In reality, Serbia’s supportservices-aswithothercountries–haveevolvedovermanyyears.The

typesandlocationofservicesthatexisttodayhavebeendrivenbylocal

andhistorical factors,by fundingpriorities– inparticular international

funding,accordingtopoliticalprioritiesandaccordingtopersonalaims

of individuals - many organisations are set up as a result of personal

experiencesofvictimisation.

99. Theresultofthisevolutionisapatchworkofservices.Acomplex

landscapewheresomevictimsinsomeareaswillreceiveabetterservice

than others, whilst some victims may effectively have no access to

supportatall.


46

100. ThechallengeforSerbiainthecomingyearsistotransformanevolved service infrastructure into a designed infrastructure wherethereisaconsistentlevelofmultipleservicesacrossthecountry.This

willrequirelongtermplanningandactiononthepartoftheStatewhilst

workingwithCSOstoincorporatetheirviewsandvisions.

101. Withabetterunderstandingofserviceprovisioninthecountry,theStateandCSOsshouldbegindiscussionsonhowtoensurethatgaps

inservicesarefilled.Acarefullydesignedplanfortheestablishmentof

offices,mobileservices,onlinesupportandhelplineswillhelpensurethat

a victim has relatively easy access to support even living in themost

remotepartsofthecountry.Suchaplanshouldaimatestablishingthe

right balance of unrestricted services for all victims and specialised

servicesforcertaingroups.Tooverlyfocusononeorothertypeofservice

resultsinvictimsbeingexcludedfromthesupporttheyneed.

102. Suchplanningwillenableatargetedapproachwhichmeansthatmoreservicesareprovidedinareaswithhighervictimpopulationsand

accordingtothesizeandneedsofeachvictimgroup.Thiswillallowforthemostcostefficientprovisionofservices.

103. Planning must also incorporate the development of stablefinancingofservices,whichislikelytoneedmechanismsforobtaining

new income to fund such services. This can be achieved through, forexample,additionalfinesonoffenders,useofconfiscatedcriminalassets,

ringfencingofaproportionofcompulsoryinsuranceincomeforservices

etc.

104. Notonlymustthequantity,typeanddistributionofservicesbedeveloped,butthequalityofservicesmustalsobeproperlymanaged.Consistency of quality across the country and across different

organisationsisessentialtoavoidcausingfurtherharmtovictims.Aspart

of any development plan, standards should be established for victim

support serviceswhether in law or through requirements in financing

procedures.


47

105. Services should not operate in isolation but rather in co-ordinationwith each other.Whether delivered by CSOs or the State,

whetherinitiatedinthecontextofcriminalproceedingsornot,anational

support system should facilitate co-ordination and referral between

organisations.Thismeansthatorganisationsareawareofeachotherand

whatservicestheyprovide,andtowhom.Itmeansthattrustbetween

organisationsisestablishedandfosteredtoenableappropriatereferrals.

106. The quality of support must equally be ensured through theestablishmentofeffectivecasemanagementsystems,dataprotectionand data sharing arrangements, proper mechanisms for assessingvictims and their needs, and appropriate training of personnel.With

such systems, each victim’s needs can properly be determined and

informationaboutthecaserecordedinawaythatcanbeusedbyother

supportworkersorindeedorganisations–subjecttoruleswhichprotect

the interests of the victim. This helps ensure continuity in the service

provision and assists with any referral – including by ensuring that

important information is not lostwhichmay influencehowa victim is

helpedorthetypeofprotectiontheyreceiveincriminalproceedings.

107. Finally, any planning and implementation must incorporateongoingawarenessraising,monitoringandevaluation.Formostpeople,

itisnotcommontobefamiliarwithvictimsupportorthecriminaljustice

system.Itisthereforeimportanttohavecontinuousactivitiestoinform

thepopulationingeneralandindividualvictimsabouttheavailabilityand

relevanceofservices.Thisshouldbecoupledwithtargetedand/orlong

termcampaigns.

108. At the same time, organisations should incorporate internal

mechanismstoevaluatetheirperformance,theimpactoftheirserviceandwhethervictimsaresatisfiedwiththeirservice.Casemanagement

systemswillallowserviceprovidersnotonlytomanagesupportforeach

victimbutwillprovidevaluabledataonwhoisusingtheservice,forhow

longandforwhatpurposes.Suchdatashouldbeusedbyorganisations

for futureplanningandchangestoservices.Similarly, theStateshould


48

review the delivery of services and whether this is effectively and

efficientlymeetingthevictimpopulation’sneeds.

109. Through thedevelopmentofnational support servicedeliveryplan maximising the use of existing services, coupled with clear,timeboundactionsand the resources to implementplans,Serbiahastheopportunitytodevelopahighlyeffectivesystemofsupport.Thatsystemwillbenefitasignificantproportionofthepopulationwhichhas

suffered both from new crimes and from historical crimes during the

conflict.Suchservicesacceleraterecoveryandhealing,helpingvictimsto

findtheirnewnormal,andtocontinuetobeactivemembersofSerbia’s

societyandeconomy.


49

ANNEXES

ANNEXI–RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY

110. InordertoassisttheGovernmentofSerbiainsettingupvictim

support services, a necessary first stepwas to identify and describewhat services, provided by both state and non-state actors, alreadyexistedanddetermineifthereareanysignificantgapsinservices.Theresearch resulted in a full and comprehensive database of available

services.Thisdatabase isbeingconverted intoan interactivemapand

madeavailabletovictimsandthosewhoarelikelytocomeintocontact

withvictimstohelpthemidentifyassistanceandsupport.

111. Two main methodological tools were used to conduct theresearch: survey by means of a questionnaire and stakeholder

consultations,bymeansofaworkshopwithasampleofrespondents.

112. Thesubjectofthesurveywastheexistingvictimsupportservicesin Serbia. The aim was to map all victim support services in Serbia,

provided by both state and non-state actors, and to collect basic

information about each service, including: the available forms of

assistanceandsupport;thetargetgroupsandthewaysinwhichvictims

cangetproperassistanceandsupport.

113. The survey was conducted through an online questionnaire

focusedon:thetypeofassistanceandsupportprovided;whichtypesof

victimsaresupported;howvictimsareinformedaboutservices;howthe

serviceisprovided;howvictimsgetintouchwiththeservice;theuseof

paid and volunteer staff and what kind of training they receive; and,

finally, how services are financed. The data was collected from 13th

Februaryto12thMarch2017.

114. Recipients of the questionnaire were identified through deskresearch, an initial list generated byVDS using a number or existing


50

databases 24 , and suggestions from existing contacts. Based on thisinformation,136invitationsweresentouttopotentialparticipantsinthe

survey.Figure1givesmoredetailaboutthetypesofservicesthatwere

identifiedandinvitedtoparticipate

Figure1.Servicesinvitedtoparticipateinthesurvey

115. Basedoninformationreceivedfromtherespondents,fivemoreserviceswerecontacted.Outof thetotalnumberof141services that

were asked to fill in the questionnaire, 78 (55.3%) responded to the

survey25.

24 To this end, the following databases were used: VDS (available athttp://www.vds.org.rs), Network “Women against violence” (available at http://www.zeneprotivnasilja.net/), the Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights (YUCOM, available at: http://tripleacitizens.eu/regional-service-provider/) as well as the database of the Centre for Development of Non-Profit Sector (available at: http://www.crnps.org.rs/).

25Out of the remaining 63 service providers, 20 are still included in the victim support services database, based on the data they provided after the survey ended, either by filling in the questionnaire or through the telephone interview etc

78

14

5

27

4

2

3 3

000Non-profitandnon-

governmentalservicesthat

provideassistanceandsupport

tovictims

Shelters(stateandnon-state

run)

InformationOfficesforInjured

PartiesandWitnessesatthe

HigherPublicProsecutor’s

Office

HigherCourtOfficesfor

AssistanceandSupportto

WitnessesandInjuredParties


51

Figure2.Servicesthatresponded/didnotrespondtothesurvey

26

116. Findingsfromthesurveyweresubsequentlyverifiedthroughaworkshopwhere stakeholders, a sample of victim support providers

whoparticipatedinthesurvey,wereaskedtoverifyandsupplementthe findings and suggest improvements and ways forward. Theparticipantsweregivenanopportunitytocommentonfindingsandlook

intowaystodevelopservices inthefuture.Thelistofparticipantsand

thediscussionagendaareavailableinAnnexesIIIandIVtothisreport.

26The 63 organisations that did not respond to the survey did so for the following main reasons: they have not received an official instruction from the relevant ministry (Ministry of Justice or Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs) on time to fill in the questionnaire, the mission of these organisations was not linked to the subject of the survey and victims are do not constitute their target group. Others did not provide reasons for not completing the form.

78 (55,3%) 63 (45,7%)

Servicesthatresponded

tothesurvey

Servicesthatdidnot

respondtothesurvey


52

ANNEXII–EXAMPLEOFASHEET(FICHE)OFVICTIMSUPPORTSERVICEINTHEDATABASEOFVICTIM

SUPPORTSERVICES

Exampleofasheet(fiche)ofvictimsupportserviceintheprintableversionofthedatabaseofvictimsupportservices

Overviewofe

xistingvictim

supp

orts

ervice

sinSer

bia

ANNEX

III–

EXA

MPL

EOFASH

EET(FICHE)O

FVICT

IMSUPP

ORT

SER

VICE

INTHE

ELEC

TRONICVER

SIONOFTH

EDAT

ABAS

EOFVICT

IMSUPP

ORT

SER

VICE

S


54

ANNEXIV–LISTOFPARTICIPANTSATTHEWORKSHOP

Istraživanjeorganizacija/institucijakojeradesažrtvamauSrbiji

ViktimološkodruštvoSrbije

30.03.2017.

SPISAKUČESNIKA

1. BojanaTankosić,Dečijeselo,SremskaKamenica,Jedinicaza

zaštitudecežrtavailisvedoka

2. SanjinBužо,VSE

3. AleksandraIvanković,VSE

4. VređaMirko,Centarzazaštitužrtavatrgovineljudima

5. JovanaKrotićČelikić,Astra

6. SlavicaPeković,VišisuduBeogradu,PosebnoodeljenjeSIP

7. StefanRadojčić,Ženskaalternativa,Sombor

8. DraganaJeminović,SigurnakućaPančevo

9. IvanaMilosavljevićĐukić,Centarzazaštituodojčadi,decei

omladine

10. ReljaRadosavljević,Fondzahumanitarnopravo

11. MilkaMalešević,Izkruga,Beograd

12. JasminaNikolić,ViktimološkodruštvoSrbije

13. SanjaĆopić,ViktimološkodruštvoSrbije14. BejanŠaćiri,ViktimološkodruštvoSrbije


55

ANNEXV–WORKSHOPAGENDA

Istraživanjeorganizacija/institucijakojeradesažrtvama(Surveyofvictimsupportservices)

Radionica(Workshop),Belgrade,30.03.2017

• 14.00-14.30Predstavljanjeučesnika(Introductionofparticipants)

• 14.30-14.45Predstavljanjeciljevaprojektairadionice(Introducingaims

oftheprojectandtheworkshop)

• 14.45-15.15Predstavljanjerezultataistraživanja(Presentingsurvey

results)

• 15.15-15.45Predstavljanjeelemenatadirektorijuma

organizacija/institucijakojeradesažrtvama(Presentingelementsof

thedatabaseofvictimsupportservices)

• 15.45-16.00Pauza(Break)

• 16.00-17.00Diskusija(Discussion)

Questionsforthediscussion:

1. DosurveyresultsreflecttherealsituationinSerbia?

2. Whichservicesconsiderthemselvesasgeneralvictimsupportservices,

i.e.which services provide assistance to victimsof all formsof crime,

includingbothwomenandmen?

3. How do you interpret the data about the number of general victim

supportservices?

4. Should the database of victim support services include other services

regardlessofthefactthattheydidnotparticipateinthesurvey?

5. Howshouldthedatabaselooklikeinordertomeetvictims’needs,but

alsotheneedsofvictimsupportproviders?

6. Howcancooperationbetweenvictimsupportservicesbe improved in

ordertoenableproperandbettervictimsupport?

7. Whatisyouropinionaboutthefutureofvictimsupport?TheDirective

2012/29/EUencouragesMemberStatestoestablishnationalsystemof

victim support. Keeping that in mind, do you think that the national

systemofvictimsupportservicesshouldbeestablishedasanetworkof

servicesorsomeothermodel/strategywouldbemoreappropriate?


56

8. Istherereadinessofvictimsupportservicestoestablishnationalsystem

ofvictimsupportinthenearfuture?

ANNEXVI–SURVEYQUESTIONNAIRE

Oorganizaciji/instituciji

1. Nazivorganizacije/institucije:

2. Imeiprezimekoordinatorke/koordinatorailikontaktosobe(ovajpodatak

nećebitijavnodostupan):

3. Adresa:

5. Brojtelefonanakojižrtvemogudadobijupomoćipodršku:

6. E-mail:

7. Website:

8. Kadajeosnovanaorganizacija?

9. KojijepravnistatusVašeorganizacije?

• Udruženjegrađana(NVO)• Državnainstitucija• Državniorgan/deodržavnogorgana(jedinicadržavnogorgana)• Nezavisnotelo• Drugo___________________________


57

10. Kojajemisijaorganizacije/institucije?

11. Dalistesaglasnidasenaprediznetipodaciučinedostupnimjavnosti?

• Da,svi(prećinapitanjebr.12)• Da,samoneki

• Ne,svi(prećinapitanjebr.12)

11a.Naveditekojepodatkeneželitedaučinimodostupnimjavnosti:

Pomoćipodrškažrtvama

12. DaliVašaorganizacijapružapomoćipodrškužrtvama?

• Da(prećinapitanjebr.13)• Ne

12a.DalijeVašaorganizacijapružalapomoćžrtvama?

• Da• Ne

12b.DokadajeVašaorganizacijapružalapomoćipodrškužrtvamaizbogčega

Vašaorganizacijavišenepružapomoćipodrškužrtvama?

12c.Ukolikoimatesaznanjaoorganizacijama/institucijamauVašemmestu,opštini,

okrugu,zakojeznatedapružajupodrškužrtvama,asakojimasarađujete,i

koje je, po Vašem mišljenju, značajno obuhvatiti ovim istraživanjem,

navedite njihovo ime i kontakt podatke kako bismo mogli da ih

kontaktiramo:

(prećinakrajanketeukolikoVašaorganizacijanepružapomoćipodrškužrtvama)

13. OdkadaVašaorganizacijapružapomoćipodrškužrtvama(naveditegodinu)?

14. DabidobilepomoćipodrškužrtvesemoguobratitiVašojorganizaciji:


58

• Radnimdanima• Vikendom• Radnimdanimaivikendom

UpišiteVašeradnovreme:

14a.Daliorganizacijaimamobilnetimovekojiizlazenaterenipružajupomoći

podršku?

• Da• Ne(prećinapitanjebr.15)

Upišiteradnovrememobilnihtimova

15. DalisupomoćipodrškakojunudiVašaorganizacijanamenjenisvimžrtvamabez obzira na ono što im se dogodilo, pol, starost, nacionalnu ili verskupripadnostidrugaličnasvojstvažrtve(opštaslužbazažrtve)?

• Da• Ne

16. PomoćipodrškakojunudiVašaorganizacijadostupnaje:

• Svimosobamabezobziranapol/rod• Samoženama• Samomuškarcima

17. PomoćipodrškakojunudiVašaorganizacijadostupnaje(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori):

• Svimosobamabezobziranastarost• Osobamamlađimod14godina• Osobamaod14do18godina• Osobamastarijimod18godina

18. PomoćipodrškakojunudiVašaorganizacijadostupnaje(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori):

• Svimžrtvamabezobziranaličnasvojstvaidrugekarakteristike• Pripadnicimanacionalnihgrupa,uključujućiRome• Izbeglicama,internoraseljenimlicima,migrantima,tražiocimaazila• Osobamasinvaliditetom• Osobamakojeimajuproblemsalkoholom/narkomanijom• LGBT


59

• Drugo______________

18a.AkoVašaorganizacijapružapomoćipodrškupojedinimnacionalnim

grupama,naveditekojim:

19. KojimžrtvamasunamenjenipomoćipodrškakojupružaVašaorganizacija(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori)?

• Svimžrtvamabezobziraštaimsedogodilo• Žrtvamanasiljauporodici• Žrtvamatrgovineljudima• Žrtvamanasiljanaradnommestu

• Žrtvamaseksualnognasilja• Žrtvamaimovinskogkriminaliteta(provala,razbojništvo,krađai

slično)

• Žrtvamaproganjanja• Žrtvamazločinaizmržnje• Žrtvamaratnihzločina• Žrtvamavršnjačkognasilja• Drugo________________

20. Da liVašaorganizacijapružapomoć ipodrškunekimdrugimgrupamaporedžrtava (npr. učiniocima krivičnih dela, bivšim osuđenicima, beskućnicima,migrantimaisl.)?

21. DaliVašaorganizacijapružapomoćipodrškučlanovimaporodice(supružnici,osobekoježivesažrtvomuzajedniciuokviruzajedničkogdomaćinstva,srodnicipodirektnoj liniji,braća,sestre, iosobezakojeseosobastara),osobačija jesmrtdirektnoprouzrokovanakrivičnimdelom?

• Da• Ne

21a.DaliVašaorganizacijapružapomoćipodrškučlanovimaporodicežrtavakoje

supretrpelepovredeištetukrivičnimdelom?

• Da

• Ne22. KojigeografskiprostorpokrivaradVašeorganizacije:

• CeluteritorijuSrbije• Teritorijupokrajine(Vojvodina)• Lokalno(samomesto/gradukomejeorganizacija)• Region,odnosnookrugukomejeorganizacija• Drugo______________________


60

23. KakožrtvedolazedosaznanjazaVašuorganizaciju(naveditedočetiriključnanačinanakojižrtvedolazedosaznanjazaVašuorganizaciju)?

• Putemusmenepreporukeodstranepolicije• Putemusmenepreporukeodstranesudije• Putemusmenepreporukeodstranetužioca• Putemusmenepreporukeodstraneadvokata• Putem usmene preporuke od strane centra za socijalni rad ili neke

drugesocijalneslužbe• Putemusmenepreporukeodstranenevladineorganizacije

• Putem usmene preporuke od strane zdravstvene ustanove (domzdravlja,bolnicaislično)

• Našlisuinformacijunainternetu• Znajuzanasposredstvommedija• Preko informativnog materijala Vaše organizacije koji dobijaju iz

suda/tužilaštva

• Preko informativnogmaterijalaVašeorganizacije, koji je dostupanudrugimorganizacijamaiinstitucijama(policiji,centrimazasocijalnirad,zdravstvenimustanovama,sudovima,školamaislično)

• Drugo______________________24. ŽrtvemogudakontaktirajuVašuorganizaciju(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori):

• Direktno• Putemupućivanjaodstranedrugeorganizacije/institucije• Drugo_________________

24a.AkožrtvemogudirektnodakontaktirajuVašuorganizaciju,nakojinačin?

(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori)

• Putemtelefona• Dolaskomuprostorijeorganizacije• E-mail• Popunjavanjemformularanainternetstraniciorganizacije• Putemon-linekomunikacije(on-linechat)• Nemogudirektno• Drugo____________________

24b.UkolikoVasžrtvenekontaktirajudirektno,navediteprekokoje

organizacije/institucijemogudadođudoVas:


61

25. Kojeoblikepomoćiipodrškenuditežrtvama(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori)?

• Emocionalna podrška i savetovanje (osnaživanje, razumevanje,poverenje)

• Psihološkapodrška(psihološkosavetovanje)ipsihoterapija• Informacije• Pravnisaveti• Pisanjepodnesaka

• Zastupanjenasudu• Pripremazaprisustvovanjesuđenju• Odlazaksažrtvomnasudipodrškanasudu• Pomoćukontaktusadrugiminstitucijama• Priprema za učešće i podrška u restorativnim procesima (npr.

medijaciji)

• Upućivanjenadrugerelevantnespecijalizovaneslužbe• Praktična pomoć (npr. popunjavanje obrazaca, pozivanje

osiguravajućihdruštava)

• Finansijska pomoć (npr. urgentna materijalna pomoć, plaćanjeproduženogboravka,hrane)

• Medicinskapomoć• Smeštaj• Procenarizikazažrtvu• Drugo____________________

26. Ako Vaša organizacija pruža žrtvama informacije, navedite koju vrstuinformacijapruža(mogućisuvišestrukiodgovori):

• Informacije o mogućim psihološkim reakcijama i dinamici oporavkažrtvenakonpretrpljenogkrivičnogdela

• Informacijekojeseodnosinapravažrtavainačinnjihoverealizacije• Informacije vezane za učešće u krivičnom ili drugom sudskom

postupku

• Informacije u vezi sa praktičnimpitanjima koja proističu iz krivičnogdela

• Informacijeuvezi sa rizikom iprevencijomsekundarne iponovljeneviktimizacije

• Informacijeodrugimrelevantnimspecijalizovanimslužbama• Organizacijanepružainformaciježrtvama

• Drugo_____________________27. Na koji način Vaša organizacija pruža pomoć i podršku žrtvama (mogući su

višestrukiodgovori)?

• Telefonom


62

• Neposrednimkontaktomirazgovorom• Putempisama• Puteme-maila

• Prekointernetstraniceorganizacije• Putemsocijalnihmreža• Drugo__________________

27a.AkoVašaorganizacijapružapomoćipodrškužrtvamaprekointernetstranice,

nakojinačinsetočini?

• Popunjavanjemformularanainternetstraniciorganizacije

• Putemon-linekomunikacije(on-linechat)• Organizacijanepružapomoćipodrškužrtvamaprekointernetstranice

27b.Daliimatemogućnostbrzognapuštanjastraniceukolikopružatepomoći

podrškuonline?

• Da

• Ne• Nepružamoonlinepomoćipodršku

28. DalisuuslugebesplatnezaosobekojeVamseobratezapomoćipodršku?

• Da(prećinapitanjebr.29)• Ne

28a.Akoseuslugeplaćaju,navestiukojimslučajevima:

Evidencija/dokumentacijaožrtvama

Pitanjakojasledebićeobrađenasamozapotrebenaučno-istraživačkogradainećebitijavnodostupne.

29. Da li vodite evidenciju/dokumentaciju o žrtvama koje Vam se obraćaju zapomoć?


29a.Daliprimenjujetepolitikuzaštitepodatakaoličnosti?

• Da• Ne

29b.Daliprimenjujetepolitikuzaštiteinteresadece(do18godina)?


63

• Da• Ne

29c.Daliprimenjujetepolitikunediskriminacije?

• Da• Ne

30. KolikožrtavajekontaktiraloVašuorganizacijuu2016.godini?

31. KolikojeukupnožrtavadobilopomoćipodrškuodVašeorganizacijetokom2016.godine?

32. KolikoženažrtavajedobilopomoćipodrškuodVašeorganizacijetokom2016.godine?

33. KolikomuškaracajedobilopomoćipodrškuodVašeorganizacijetokom2016.godine?

34. Kolikodecedo14godinajedobilopomoćipodrškuodVašeorganizacijetokom2016.godine?

35. Kolikodeceod14do18godinajedobilopomoćipodrškuodVašeorganizacijetokom2016.godine?

Zaposleni/volonteriinačinfinansiranja

36. KolikoimatezaposlenihlicauVašojorganizaciji/instituciji(licakojasuangažovanapougovoruoraduilinekomdrugomugovorunaosnovukogadobijajunadoknaduzaraduorganizaciji?

37. KolikoimatevolonterauVašojorganizaciji/instituciji?

38. Dalisuzaposleniprošliobukuzaradsažrtvama?



64

38a.Kojuobukusuprošlizaposleni?

38b.Kojedržaoobukezazaposlene?

39. Dalisuvolonteriprošliobukuzaradsažrtvama?


39a.Kojuobukusuprošlivolonteri?

39b.Kojedržaoobukezavolontere?

40. KojijeizvorfinansiranjaVašeorganizacije(naveditedočetiriključnanačinafinansiranja)?

• Država(budžetskasredstva)• Lokalnasamouprava(481-dotacijenevladinimorganizacijama;472-

uslugesocijalnezaštite;drugiizvori)

• Donacijeizinostranstva• Donacijeuzemlji• Članarina• Nemafinansiranja/radjevolonterski• Drugo______________________

Ostalo

41. Naveditedrugeorganizacije/institucijeusvommestu,opštini,okrugu,zakojeznatedapružajupodrškužrtvama,asakojimasarađujete,ikojeje,poVašemmišljenju,značajnoobuhvatitiovimistraživanjem,kakobismomoglidaihkontaktiramo.Navedite,akoimate,njihovekontaktpodatke:

KRAJANKETE

Mnogovamhvalanaučešćuuanketi!

Akoželitedabudeteinformisaniorezultatimaoveankete,molimoVasdaostavite

svojeimeiemailadresu:

Navediteakoimatedodatnesugestijeikomentare:

Documents

Overview of existing victim support services in Serbia - EN · “Overview of existing victim support services in Serbia” was executed in February and March 2017 by VDS, under the