At first, the interest in victimology was limited to the victim's participation in the causes of crime. For example, Mendelssohn tried to divide the victims into five types according to their responsibilities and faults in the process of crime establishment, namely, ① completely irresponsible victims; (2) Victims with less responsibility; (3) the victim who has the same responsibility as the perpetrator; (4) the victim who bears greater responsibility than the perpetrator; ⑤ The victim who bears the greatest responsibility, and lists various concrete examples. From the victim research in this theory of criminal cause, many related researches have appeared since then. These studies not only reveal the actual situation of crime, but also apply their results to the investigation of criminal responsibility and provide useful information for crime prevention.
"Crime victim" refers to a crime victim whose life, body and other personal and legal interests are endangered. On the occasion of being killed by a crime, the criminal's responsibility can be investigated from two aspects: criminal responsibility and civil responsibility. However, when criminal responsibility is investigated, because the state monopolizes criminal proceedings, the meaning and feelings of criminal victims are sometimes not reflected in the criminal procedure law; On the other hand, when civil liability is investigated, the victim demands damages from the injurer, but the effect of the system is not fully exerted because the injurer is unable to compensate. Especially in the case of causing serious personal crimes (death, serious injury), the damage compensation system hardly works. In this way, if the victim of a crime has suffered great damage because of the crime, but he can't take measures to restore the victim's feelings and protect the victim from the law, it will lead to the distrust of criminal victims and citizens in the legal order, including criminal justice, and then weaken the regulatory function of criminal law. In a word, the significance of criminal policy to protect crime victims lies in maintaining and ensuring citizens' trust in legal order, including criminal justice, thus contributing to crime prevention and maintaining social order. (Note: The concept of victim protection and social reintegration. Some people think that in order to abolish the death penalty and promote the treatment of returning to society, it is necessary to protect the victims of crime and ease the retribution of society. Indeed, it is also one of its purposes to realize "returning to a society without hostility", but it is only a subsidiary effect after all (Otani's Compensation for Victims, p. 93). )
According to the above purpose, the current law has set up the following system:
(1) Tell, report and request. Criminal proceedings are monopolized by the state, and private proceedings are not allowed. However, if we do not establish a system that reflects the meaning of criminal victims in criminal proceedings, the criminal procedure law will be divorced from nationals and lose trust. Therefore, in criminal proceedings, in addition to reporting the victim, in order to respect the will of the victim and others to pursue the responsibility of the prisoner, a system of informing, informing and requesting is set up, that is, besides the victim can inform the prosecutor and the judicial police, people other than the victim can also report when they think there is a criminal act. In addition, there is a request system for crimes involving the destruction of foreign national flags and national emblems. On the other hand, in the crime of private prosecution, no public prosecution can be initiated without informing, so the victim's meaning is directly reflected in the criminal proceedings. When the prosecutor makes a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute, he tells people that he can receive the notice of the decision soon; In addition, in the case of non-prosecution, the whistleblower has the right to ask the reasons for the decision not to prosecute.
(2) Supplementary system of apology punishment. It is the prosecutor who brings a public prosecution. Because prosecutors have extensive discretion, even if they are informed, they may not necessarily initiate public prosecution. Therefore, in order to reflect the meaning and public opinion of the victim's right to public prosecution, the procuratorial review meeting and trial request system are established. The procuratorial review meeting is composed of 1 1 procuratorial review officers (with a term of six months) who are qualified to elect members of parliament, and they will judge whether the punishment for not complaining is appropriate. Informants, etc. If the public prosecutor refuses to accept the decision not to prosecute, he may request a review of the decision. The decision whether to prosecute made by the procuratorial review meeting is for the reference of the procurator-general. Attached to the trial request is a system, that is, when the prosecutor accuses a civil servant of abusing his power and the prosecutor does not prosecute the accusation, he can request a local court with jurisdiction to conduct a trial. The court shall hear and judge the request in the form of a collegiate bench, and make a decision to submit the matter to the court for trial when it considers that there are justified reasons. When this decision is made, it is considered that a public prosecution has been initiated. When the public prosecution is maintained, the court appoints a defender and allows the prosecutor to participate in the proceedings. (3) In addition to the above problems, the criminal justice system also takes into account the significance of the victim in minor crimes, prosecution discretion and sentencing, such as the victim's request for leniency. However, in the method of obtaining evidence in the search stage and asking the victim in the public trial stage, we can all hear the dissatisfaction from the crime victim and the lack of consideration for the victim's position. Moreover, as far as providing information to victims is concerned, it is still not enough from the perspective of criminal proceedings as a whole. It is also necessary to inform the victims of crimes about the progress of the procedure after prosecution, such as guilt, innocence, sentencing and execution. In recent years, in the United Nations and European and American countries, the topic of protecting victims' rights and interests in criminal proceedings has been raised as a problem: ① understanding the rights of criminal proceedings; (2) the right to participate in criminal proceedings; (3) victim defense system; (4) Being represented in court proceedings, and so on. In Canada, the United States, Germany and other countries, it goes further and puts forward a model based on criminal reconciliation. When the offender and the victim reach a settlement on damages, this situation should be considered in litigation and sentencing. The idea has been partially institutionalized. But the question is, to what extent should we consider the wishes and feelings of crime victims. Because the criminal justice system is not a system that directly meets the punishment requirements of victims. Therefore, the conclusion is that measures should be taken not to underestimate the victims of crime excessively, which will unbalance the protection of prisoners' human rights and the legal status of victims of crime, thus hurting citizens' trust in the criminal justice system.