Can reparation schemes be ranked? A proposal

• In Event: Rethinking Justice for Victims of Structural Harm and Exploitation

Abstract

It is well known and widely accepted that victim reparation schemes require a case-specific study and the greatest possible adaptation to the needs expressed by the victims. From this perspective, one could argue that a reparation scheme cannot be evidence-based. But have all reparation schemes respected victims' rights so far? Are there minimum requirements that all reparation schemes must meet?
Through an in-depth study of three reparation schemes in three countries as diverse as Canada, Australia, and Ireland—analyzed in light of the good and bad practices identified in previous research—my presentation proposes a scoring system to evaluate reparation schemes. This evaluation, which can obviously be conducted once the program has been implemented, is also—and this is the most relevant aspect—a valuable tool for program design. It allows, prior to implementation, for ensuring that programs are oriented toward providing victims with the most satisfactory response to their needs and, consequently, toward respecting their rights as accurately as possible.

Author

• Laura Arantegui Arràez, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya