Chapter VI Investigation prosecution procedural law and protective measures | Article 56 Measures of protection | Riga Revision 1.0
Complete analysis using 8-Point Evaluation Framework with systematic gender asymmetry review.
ORIGINAL TEXT (Istanbul Convention, adopted May 11, 2011)
1 Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to protect the rights and interests of victims, including their special needs as witnesses, at all stages of investigations and judicial proceedings, in particular by:
a providing for their protection, as well as that of their families and witnesses, from intimidation, retaliation and repeat victimisation;
b ensuring that victims are informed, at least in cases where the victims and the family might be in danger, when the perpetrator escapes or is released temporarily or definitively;
c informing them, under the conditions provided for by internal law, of their rights and the services at their disposal and the follow-up given to their complaint, the charges, the general progress of the investigation or proceedings, and their role therein, as well as the outcome of their case;
d enabling victims, in
a manner consistent with the procedural rules of internal law, to be heard, to supply evidence and have their views, needs and concerns presented, directly or through an intermediary, and considered;
e providing victims with appropriate support services so that their rights and interests are duly presented and taken into account;
f ensuring that measures may be adopted to protect the privacy and the image of the victim;
g ensuring that contact between victims and perpetrators within court and law enforcement agency premises is avoided where possible;
h providing victims with independent and competent interpreters when victims are parties to proceedings or when they are supplying evidence;
i enabling victims to testify, according to the rules provided by their internal law, in the courtroom without being present or at least without the presence of the alleged perpetrator, notably through the use of appropriate communication technologies, where available.
2 A child victim and child witness of violence against women and domestic violence shall be afforded, where appropriate, special protection measures taking into account the best interests of the child.
[Source: CETS No. 210, Article 56]
8-POINT EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
Evaluation Criteria: This article is assessed using the following 8 criteria with proper citation of sources:
All analyses must include:
- Academic sources (peer-reviewed journals, legal scholarship)
- Primary sources (legal documents, official reports, case law)
- Diverse perspectives (multiple ideological and cultural frameworks)
- Implementation data from multiple jurisdictions
- Expert opinions from various stakeholder groups
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION
Score: 0 (Negative-only scoring: each issue = -1 point)
v1.05 includes systematic gender asymmetry review
Issues Identified:
No significant textual issues identified in initial review.
PROPOSED REVISIONS
Revision principles: Clarity, consistency, cultural sensitivity, sovereignty respect, victim protection, exploitability reduction
Option A: [Gender-symmetric revision with rationale and sources]
Option B: [Alternative approach with rationale and sources]
Option C: [Minimalist revision with rationale and sources]
Each option includes: Legal precedents, implementation feasibility, cultural impact assessment, stakeholder perspectives
Consider views from: Victim advocacy groups, legal scholars, cultural/religious communities, implementation practitioners, state sovereignty advocates, human rights organizations, gender equality advocates, and others affected by this article.
About Riga Revision 1.0: Comprehensive article-by-article critique using the 8-Point Evaluation Framework, rigorous technical documentation standards, and multi-stakeholder perspectives. This is a FIRST DRAFT prepared with AI assistance. Version 2.0 and beyond will be prepared by human experts.
Resources: Evaluation Framework | 8 C’s of Technical Writing | All Articles
Disclaimer: This analysis represents critical examination from multiple perspectives and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and qualified legal professionals.
Responses