How the words of the judges can cause a second offense to the victim: the J.L. c. Italy May 27, 2021
Abstract. In the case of J.L. c. Italy of 27 May 2021, the ECHR comes for the first time to consider a violation of art. 8 of the Convention by a national authority in the motivation of a sentence, for the language and arguments used, in the face of a positive obligation on the part of States to protect the person from forms of secondary victimization. The sentence focuses on highlighting completely unjustified references to aspects of the applicant’s personal life contained in the decision of the Florence Court of Appeal, because they are not relevant to the examination of the credibility of the declarant and to ascertaining any consent to sexual acts object of the original accusation. This comment concludes with some observations on the unconscious recourse to the so-called implicit biases in judicial decisions and their repercussions in the argumentative process in the form of vices of motivation.
SUMMARY: 1. The accusation. – 2. Sentencing at first instance. – 3. The appeal. – 4. The condition of physical and mental inferiority. – 5. Consent to sexual acts and the possibility of revocation. – 6. The psychological interpretation and the stigmatization of private life. – 7. The appeal before the ECHR. – 8. The decision of the Court: the grounds of appeal not accepted. – 9. The decision of the Court: the grounds of appeal upheld. – 10. The decision of the Court: the persistent sexist stereotypes in Italy. – 11. Secondary victimization in the jurisprudence of the ECHR. – 12. Secondary victimization: evolution of a concept – 13. Secondary victimization in the J.L. c. Italy of 27 May 2021.– 14. Stereotypes and prejudices.
To read the Reflection, click on “open file”.
Quest'opera è distribuita con Licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale 4.0 Internazionale
