Report from the Commission pursuant to Article 18 of the Council Framework Decision of 15 March 2001 on the standing of victims in criminal proceedings (2001/220/JHA) [SEC(2009) 476]
Date: 2009-04-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, civil rights, criminal procedure, national implementing measure, report, right to justice, victim

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 20.4.2009 
COM(2009) 166 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

pursuant to Article 18 of the Council Framework Decision of 15 March 2001 on the 
standing of victims in criminal proceedings (2001/220/JHA) 

[SEC(2009) 476] 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION 

pursuant to Article 18 of the Council Framework Decision of 15 March 2001 on the 
standing of victims in criminal proceedings (2001/220/JHA) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1. 

Background 

According to Article 18 of Council Framework Decision of 15 March 2001 on the standing of 
victims  in  criminal  proceedings1  ("the  Framework  Decision")  requires  the  Commission  to 
draw up a report on the implementation measures taken by Member States. The Commission 
published a first report on 16 February 20042 which examined transposal as of 25 March 2003 
when  only  AT,  BE,  FI,  DE,  IT,  IE,  LU,  PT,  ES  and  SE  had  sent  relatively  complete 
contributions on transposal into their national legislation. 

This final report takes into account implementation of all Articles of the Framework Decision 
as at 15 February 2008 in all 27 Member States.  

Despite  Article  18  laying  down  an  obligation  for  Member  States  to  submit  implementing 
legislation to the Commission by 22 March 2006, in November 2007 only 13 Member States 
(AT,  DK,  DE,  ES,  LU,  NL,  PT,  SE,  UK,  CZ,  HU,  LT,  PL)  had  sent  relatively  complete 
contributions. The Commission sent reminders to Member States; the final deadline was set at 
15  February  2008.  This  report  is  based  on  the  transposal  situation  on  15  February  2008, 
almost two years after the 22 March 2006 deadline. It should be read in conjunction with the 
first report which has information on the evaluation method and criteria, and with the annex 
which lists in tabular form the implementing provisions submitted by Member States for each 
Article. 

1.2. 

General remarks 

2  Member  States  (MT  and  EL)  did  not  submit  legislation  and  therefore  the  Commission 
cannot assess whether they have implemented the Framework Decision.  

LV sent a set of national provisions in Latvian on 12 December 2007 and further provisions 
on  6  March  2008  (after  the  deadline),  without  a  description  of  the  national  implementing 
measures  or  explanatory  notes.  Therefore,  the  Commission  cannot  assess  whether  LV  has 
fulfilled  the  obligation  as  set  out  in  Article  18.  Other  Member  States  submitted  national 
provisions that purport to implement the Framework Decision, in full or in part. LU informed 
the Commission that the Bill referred to in the first report has still not become law. It will not 
be taken into account in the assessment of the implementation by LU. UK states that it covers 
England,  Wales,  Scotland  and  Northern  Ireland,  but  UK  sent  an  additional  contribution 
regarding  transposal  in  Scotland  (the  Scottish  system  is  mentioned  specifically  where  it 
differs from the general provisions for the rest of the UK).  

1 
2 

OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 1. 
COM (2004) 54 final/2 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
No Member State transposed the Framework Decision in a single piece of national legislation. 
Member States all relied on existing provisions and many referred to their Code of Criminal 
Procedure for transposal. A few adopted new legislation covering one or more Articles. Many 
Member States submitted non-binding codes, Instructions and charters in lieu of legislation. 

Several  Member  States  have  covered  the  provisions  piecemeal  by  virtue  of  overlap  with  a 
variety of existing national provisions or newly adopted national provisions.  

2. 

ARTICLE BY ARTICLE ANALYSIS  

See the annexed table for measures submitted by Member States. 

Article 1: Definitions 

This  provision  lays  down  definitions  of  'victim',  'victim  support  organisation',  'criminal 
proceedings', 'proceedings' and 'mediation in criminal cases'. No Member State adopted new 
legislation to implement this Article, though several referred to existing national definitions of 
'victim' which corresponded to a greater or lesser extent to the definition in the FD. The other 
terms defined were not addressed. 

A wide definition of 'victim' is given by UK, BG, RO, LT and SE. The SK definition includes 
legal persons. ES, NL, DK, LU, EE, FI, BE and PT did not submit any transposing legislation. 
FR states that definitions match the notions commonly used anyway. IE states that it complies 
with the Framework Decision through its law, regulation and administrative provisions. 

Article 2: Respect and recognition  

Article 2(1) requires that the victim be given "a real and appropriate role" in the criminal legal 
system. The  2004  report found  that AT, BE, FR, FI, DE,  IT, LU, PT  and  SE  had  complied 
with the Framework Decision. BG, EE, CZ, HU, IE, PL, LT, RO, UK and ES make explicit 
reference  to  "a  real  and  appropriate  role".  DK  and  SI  point  out  that  this  provision  is  very 
general and specific rights are covered by other Articles. Article 2(2) concerns “particularly 
vulnerable  victims"  (not  defined)  for  whom  “specific  treatment  best  suited  to  their 
circumstances” should be provided.  

FR, IE, BE, PT, PL, UK, SE, SI and IT protect certain persons considered vulnerable owing to 
their physical or mental fragility (minors and physically  disabled).  ES,  NL,  CY,  FI  and  RO 
focus  on  situations  which  can  lead  to  vulnerability  (family  violence,  sexual  offences, 
terrorism, trafficking in human beings). Others chose broader protection, covering all types of 
persons and situations. In SK and DE, when the witness cannot appear for questioning owing 
to  age,  illness,  or  handicap,  videoconferencing  is  used,  LT,  HU  and  CZ  provide  for  a 
protection  regime  (anonymity  or  other  measures)  in  certain  circumstances  (serious  threat  to 
the victim's or witness's life, serious crimes, relevance of the statement). In HU the victim's 
age  is  a  criterion.  BG  and  PL  grant  specific  protection  to  certain  categories  of  vulnerable 
people and when certain serious crimes are involved (trafficking in human beings or domestic 
violence). EE submitted no specific provisions protecting vulnerable individuals.  

Article 3: Hearings, and provision of evidence 

Article  3  lays  down  the  right  for  victims  to  be  heard  during  proceedings  and  to  supply 
evidence. Most countries (AT, BE, FI, FR, DE, IT, LU, NL, PT, ES, SE, HU, CZ, BG, PL, 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
SK, SK, RO and EE) grant victims a number of rights as parties to the criminal proceedings. 
Victims are not parties to criminal proceedings in common law countries but the right to be 
heard is recognised in UK and IE. 

Victims may give evidence in proceedings in most Member States. 3 countries did not submit 
specific provisions (DK, NL, UK).  

10  Member  States  (AT,  FI,  IT,  LU,  ES,  SE,  HU,  PL,  CZ,  BE)  transposed  the  second 
paragraph  of  Article  3,  which  states  that  "judicial  authorities  shall  question  victims  only 
insofar as necessary for the purpose of criminal proceedings" correctly. IT limits questioning 
to  facts  relevant  to  the  charge.  HU  provides  for  the  witness  to  be  able  to  give  a  written 
statement in evidence. In CZ, a victim can not be forced to attend subsequent proceedings if 
there is no need. In PL, the Supreme Court and Attorney General's Guidelines lay down the 
right  for  a  victim  not  to  be  questioned  repeatedly.  UK  refers  to  training  courses  for 
practitioners on how to question victims.  

Article 4: Right to receive information 

Article 4 covers the rights of victims to receive different types of information.  

Article 4(1) lists 10 types of information that must be transmitted to victims. AT, CY, FI, DE, 
IE, NL, UK (Scotland) and SE transposed this obligation by posting most of the information 
on  websites  and/or  by  creating  information  booklets.  It  is  not  clear  from  the  legislation 
submitted,  however,  whether  the  victim  has  effective  access  to  this  information  from  first 
contact with enforcement authorities.  

In IT and UK authorities are under no obligation to provide victims with all the information. 
PT measures do not oblige national authorities to transmit information to victims. 

BE, EE, FR, ES, CZ, HU and SK have an acceptable system whereby there is an obligation on 
police officers, prosecutors and judges to inform victims of most of their rights. FI limits the 
pre-trial investigation authorities' duty to informing victims about the right to compensation.  

In RO, BG, FI, LT and PL the approaches are combined. The authorities are obliged to inform 
victims  of  their  rights  and  these  countries  set  up  websites.  In  BG,  CY  and  RO  there  is  a 
telephone number to provide information to victims.  

The  SI  and  CY  legislation  is  incomplete  and  insufficient.  SI  refers  to  Ministry  of  Interior 
Guidelines  which  do  not  appear  to  be  binding  (the  text  was  not  submitted).  LU 
implementation is poor given that the Bill has not passed into law. 

Two other weaknesses should be noted. The first concerns languages. Information should be 
given “as far as possible in languages commonly understood”. Certain Member States, (DE, 
the  UK  (Scotland),  NL,  SE,  BG  and  FI)  have  information  available  in  several  languages 
(English among them). Most Member States are silent on this. Only BG and RO legislation 
specifically requires information to be given to the victim in a language that he understands. 
CZ  and  HU  have  provisions  ensuring  the  right  of  a  person  who  does  not  understand  the 
language of the country to communicate with authorities in a language they understand. 

The  second  concerns  special  arrangements  available  to  non-resident  victims.  This  provision 
was ignored by Member States except the UK (Scotland) and BG, which has a telephone link 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
making  it  possible  to  reach  interpreters  directly.  In  IE  a  special  unit  in  the  victim  support 
organisation supports victims residing in another country. 

Article  4(2)  on  information  about  the  outcome  of  the  case,  was  correctly  transposed  except 
that DK, EE, UK, LU, SI and FR did not submit information on sentence. IT only notifies the 
decision to victims who have brought partie civile proceedings. FI has integrated obligation 
(c)  in  its  national  system  but  provided  no  legislative  basis.  The  PT  Code  of  Criminal 
Procedure does not ensure that the victim is informed actively by the national authority if he 
“expressed a wish to this effect”. The IE Victims' Charter lacks mandatory status. EE did not 
submit implementing legislation.  

Article 4(3) on notifying the victim of the offenders' release was correctly transposed only by 
FI, CZ, PL, SK and SE. IE's Victims' Charter states that the victim will be informed when the 
offender is released; if this is not done, the victim can only write to the Garda Victim Liaison 
Officer/local  Superintendent.  BG,  LU,  EE,  HU,  LT,  RO  and  SI  submitted  no  transposition. 
[The  UK  rules  have  two  weaknesses.  The  Criminal  Justice  and  Court  Service  Act  2000 
requires the victim to be informed of plans to release the offender and of conditions to which 
the  offender  is  to  be  subject  on  his  release,  but  this  applies  only  where  the  offender  was 
sentenced to more than 12 months for a sexual or violent offence. The Scottish legal system 
provides  for  the  victim  to  be  informed  of  his  aggressor's  release  but  the  instrument  is  not 
mandatory.  Giving  information  on  release  on  parole  is  the  police's  “current  practice”.]  ES 
refers to a provision concerning the duty to inform the victim of any procedural step which 
may affect his safety. FR states that work is in hand. PT states that it will take this provision 
into account in a forthcoming Bill amending the Code of Criminal Procedure. 

Article 4(4) is on the victim's right not to receive information on the offender's release. Only 
FI,  SE  and  SK  fully  transposed  this  provision.  HU,  CY,  LT  and  IT  state  that  they  have  no 
provisions to this effect. AT, DK, the UK, DE, FR, EL, NL, LU, LT, EE, RO, SI and ES did 
not submit provisions. In IE, where provision of information to which Article 4(3) applies is 
optional, the problem is, again, the Victims' Charter's status. PT provisions do not guarantee 
the victim the right not to receive the information. BE transposed this provision partially since 
it  provides  only  for  notification  of  information  concerning  the  release  of  the  offender  on 
parole. 

Article 5: Communication Safeguards 

Article 5 contains an obligation to "minimise as far as possible communication difficulties" as 
regards  victims'  understanding  of,  or  involvement  in,  the  relevant  steps  of  the  criminal 
proceedings,  to  an  extent  comparable  with  the  measures  of  this  type  which  Member  States 
take in respect of defendants. Communication difficulties could be interpreted more broadly 
so as to include the understanding of the procedure itself, but all Member States understood 
this to be limited to linguistic barriers. Only FI has an effective interpretation regime which 
extends  to  pre-trial  investigations.  In  FR,  IT,  SI  and  BE  the  assistance  of  an  interpreter  or 
translator is given if the victim becomes a party to the proceedings or is a witness. SK, BG, 
CZ, IE, DK, FI, HU, SI, ES, PL and RO offer full linguistic assistance. 

Transmitted provisions show a poor level of implementation in 5 Member States (LT, LU, SE, 
UK, NL) in relation to the higher protection granted to defendants. It is not clear whether in 
EE the victim support services provide a translation service or whether assistance is limited to 
helping victims with overall understanding of the process. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
PL and CY did not submit implementing provisions. 

Article 6: Specific assistance to the victim 

This Article imposes a two-fold obligation. 

First,  Member  States  are  required  to  ensure  that  victims  have  access,  free  of  charge  if 
necessary, to any form of advice other than legal advice and legal aid. Only 10 Member States 
(BG, EE, BE, ES, IE, SE, FR, RO, UK and DK) have acted on this obligation. The definition 
of  any  form  of  advice  differs  from  one  State  to  the  other,  from  psychological  assistance  to 
medical treatment or information.  

Generally, implementation by Member States is incomplete. SI transmitted Article 65 of the 
Criminal Procedural Act which does not match the obligation set out in Article 6. IT only sent 
legislation on specific assistance to minors who are victims of serious crimes and to victims of 
trafficking of human beings. 9 Member States (LU, HU, CZ, FI, PL, SK, LT, CY and NL) do 
not ensure that victims have free access to advice other than legal advice and legal aid.  

Second, Member States are required to ensure that victims have access to legal aid when it is 
possible for them to have the status of parties to the proceedings. This provision was correctly 
transposed by most Member States except SI. There are differences in who can benefit from 
the assistance. NL informed the Commission of its system of limited legal aid (half an hour's 
advice) regardless of income.  

Article 7: Victims' expenses with respect to criminal proceedings 

Article  7  covers  the  expenses  of  victims  who  are  parties  to,  or  witnesses  in,  the  criminal 
proceedings.  AT,  DE,  EE,  DK,  PL,  IT,  PT,  FI,  LT,  ES  and  SE  made  a  distinction  between 
victim as party and victim as witness. Most Member States (except BE, IE, NL and UK) cover 
lawyers'  expenses  if  the  victim  is  a  party  in  the  proceedings.  Unless  victims  are  entitled  to 
legal aid, under IT, HU, ES, CZ, RO and SK law, the victim's lawyer's expenses can only be 
charged to the offender. This could create problems if the offender is insolvent. In BG, legal 
costs can be paid. In LT, witnesses' and victims' expenses are covered. In PL, victims' legal 
expenses are covered by the offender and under some unspecified circumstances by the State. 
In  FI,  if  the  victim's  legal  expenses  are  not  covered  by  public  funds,  the  offender  may  be 
required to pay them. 

CY's submission is incomplete and EE only mentions reimbursement of expenses incurred by 
victims when heard as witness. 

Article 8: Right to protection 

Article 8 confers different rights to protection.  

Article  8(1)  covers  the  obligation  to  ensure  the  safety  of  victims  and  their  families  and 
protection of their privacy; it was transposed by AT, BE, FI, DE, PT, NL, ES, SE, CY, CZ, 
RO, SK, SI, BG and HU. FR, LT and PL have taken measures to protect victims but not the 
family;  they  have  not  submitted  provisions  transposing  other  aspects  of  Article  8(1).  IE 
transposed Article 8(1) in its Victims' Charter (not mandatory). As for protection of victims' 
privacy,  all  Member  States  except  SI  mentioned  the  possibility  of  holding  in  camera 
proceedings.  Protection  of  the  victim's  family's  privacy  is  mentioned  explicitly  only  by  FI, 
although the relevant text was not sent.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Article 8(2) refers to privacy in relation to court proceedings. AT, BE, BG, FR, SK, HU, DE 
and PT supplied information on protection of the photographic image.  

DK provided  incomplete information on Articles 8 (1) and (2) referring only to  the  witness 
protection regime.  

Article 8(3) aims to reduce contact between victim and offender, in particular by providing for 
separate waiting areas in courts. Only DE, IT and ES sent provisions transposing Article 8(3). 
DE has transposed this correctly; ES has provided only for separate premises for victims as 
witnesses. FI, IE, LU, CZ, UK and SE say that they comply in practice (but not in law). PL 
stated  that  Presidents  of  Courts  are  aware  of  the  need  and  DK  stated  that  the  Ministry  of 
Justice had sent communications to this effect. SK states that the judge can take the necessary 
measures  to  ensure  that  there  is  no  contact  between  accused  and  victim  at  court,  but  this  is 
limited to certain cases and does not ensure separate premises. 

Article 8(4) requires Member States to protect victims by allowing them to testify in a manner 
that  will  respect  their  vulnerability.  Most  Member  States  have  transposed  this  article  to  a 
certain  extent.  FR,  SI,  EE,  LT  and  EL  sent  no  legislation.  FI  mentions  a  Bill  providing  for 
protective measures for minors. UK applies measures in Crown Courts but their application in 
Magistrates'  Courts  is  confined  to  the  use  of  audio-visual  link-ups.  CZ  provides  for  limited 
protection  of  persons  under  15.  DK  provides  for  a  general  regime  of  protection  (non 
communication  of  the  person's  personal  data)  when  an  individual  might  be  in  danger.  This 
doesn't  achieve  the  objective  of  this  provision  e.g.  in  respect  of  young  children.  EE's 
implementation of Article 8 is unsatisfactory as there is no reference to protection of families 
and  vulnerable  persons.  Similarly,  LU  implementation  is  poor;  the  Bill  has  not  passed  into 
law. 

Article 9: Right to compensation in the course of criminal proceedings  

Article  9(1)  obliges  Member  States  to  ensure  that  the  decision  on  compensation  by  the 
offender is taken within  a reasonable time. Most Member States considered that it could be 
transposed by means of partie civile proceedings joined to criminal proceedings.  

Common law countries do not have partie civile proceedings. IE has a compensation scheme 
for certain categories of victim. DK, EL and UK notified no transposal provisions. CY, DE, 
FR,  LT,  BE,  ES  and  SE  provide  only  for  certain  categories  of  victims  to  be  compensated. 
Such measures do not transpose Article 9(1). 

Article 9(2) requires Member States to encourage the offender to provide compensation. AT, 
FR, DE, FI, IE, IT, ES and NL took appropriate measures to implement it. Release on bail or 
parole is conditional on the offender's conduct towards the victim. In RO, the prosecutor or 
the  judge  may  take  provisional  measures,  such  as  seizure  or  confiscation  of  the  offender's 
assets,  to  ensure  that  compensation  is  paid,  but  there  are  no  provisions  for  payment  if  the 
offender is insolvent. In LT, FI, HU, SI and CZ, reparation of damage caused by the offence 
can be a mitigating circumstance in relation to sentence. DK, EE, EL and UK did not notify 
any transposal provisions.  

Article 9(3) requires Member States to ensure that the victim's property is returned promptly. 
Most Member States have introduced this obligation. DK, FR, DE, EL and ES did not submit 
provisions. IE and UK state that this obligation is fulfilled, although they sent no legislation. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
Article 10: Penal mediation in the course of criminal proceedings 

Article 10 obliges Member States to promote mediation in appropriate cases. Most Member 
States have a regime making mediation available. LU limits the choice of recourse to penal 
mediation  to  the  procureur  d'Etat;  parties  have  no  right  of  initiative.  In  SI,  the  state 
prosecutor decides to transfer the case to mediation, but mediation may take place only with 
the  offender  and  victim's  consent;  on  receiving  notification  that  the  terms  of  the  agreement 
have been met, the state prosecutor dismisses the charge. In PL and FI, mediation can reduce 
the severity of the penalty. In LT, if parties agree to mediation, the criminal proceedings stop 
and in BG, a mediation agreement is binding on the parties. In SE mediation is available when 
the offender is under 21.  

In  CY  and  DK,  mediation  is  not  regulated.  DK  is  exploring  the  possibility  of  introducing 
mediation on  a  permanent  basis  after a  pilot project started in 1994 and extended further in 
2003 and 2007.  

Article 11: Victim resident in another Member State 

Article  11(1)  requires  Member  States  to  consider  enabling  non-resident  victims  to  make  a 
statement immediately or to allow the use of videoconferencing, as laid down in Articles 10 
and 11 of the 2000 Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance. The Convention is not in force in 
EL, IT, IE and LU anyway. AT, BE, DK, DE, EL, LU, NL and SI did not submit provisions. 
Their  legislation  appears  to  allow  a  statement  to  be  made  immediately  after  an  offence  has 
been committed. ES has not transposed the article. NL, LU, SE and UK describe their system, 
but do not specify the legislative sources.  

Article 11(2) enables non-resident victims to make a complaint in their state of residence. FR, 
IT, CY, PT, ES and SE have not transposed it AT, BE, DK, DE, LU, NL, LT, RO, EE, SI and 
SE  did  not  submit  any  provisions.  BE,  IE,  DK,  HU,  NL  and  SK  accept  complaints  and 
transmit them if necessary to the country where the offence was committed. Only LU and FI 
transposed this paragraph.  

Article 12: Cooperation between Member States  

Article  12  covers  cooperation  between  Member  States.  PT,  HU  and  BG  cited  national 
implementing  provisions.  UK  and  CZ  refer  to  the  role  played  by  their  victim  support 
organisations within the European Forum for Victim Services (now renamed Victim Support 
Europe).  SE  mentions  its  role  in  organising  international  conferences.  IT  and  ES  claim  to 
have transposed Article 12 by implementing respectively the 2004 Directive on Compensation 
and the Convention on Mutual Legal Assistance. FR, CY, SI, SK, DK and EE did not mention 
this provision. CY, FI and LT state that legislation is not required in order to implement it.  

Article 13: Specialist services and victim support organisations 

Article  13  requires  Member  States  to  promote  the  role  of  victim  support  organisations  for 
reception, accompaniment and support of victims. Most Member States say that they have a 
State financed victim support service providing information, guidance and support. Only AT, 
BE, BG, FR, PT EE and SE submitted provisions on the functions of these organisations, and 
in particular on support after criminal proceedings. CY, SI and SK made no mention of this 
Article. IT provides assistance only to certain categories of victims (abused minors, extortion 
related crimes etc.). RO provides psychological support free of charge for victims of certain 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
categories  of  offence.  ES  and  FR  refer  to  existing  national  legislation  without  specifying 
articles,  and  it  is  consequently  not  possible  to  check  transposition.  LT  has  "national  victim 
support programmes" (no further information). UK (Scotland), PL and CZ note that the state 
subsidises victim support organisations and describes their functions, but gives no legislative 
basis.  

Article 14: Training for personnel involved in proceedings or otherwise in contact with 
victims 

Article 14 requires personnel coming into contact with victims (especially police officers and 
legal  practitioners)  to  be  suitably  trained.  PT,  RO  and  SE  are  the  only  countries  to  have 
transposed  both  paragraphs  of  this  Article.  It  is  not  clear  whether  the  "victims  of  crime 
assistance  personnel"  mentioned  by  BG  covers  police  and  legal  practitioners.  Most  other 
countries, except DK and IT, merely refer to bodies tasked with providing vocational training 
for relevant personnel. It is not always clear whether these bodies are financed by the State, as 
Article 14 prescribes. The AT transposal provision does not transpose Article 14 since it does 
not address training for personnel. 

Article 15: Practical conditions regarding the position of victims in proceedings 

Article  15(1)  governs  the  prevention  of  secondary  victimisation.  Only  AT,  IT  and  ES 
transposed  this  Article.  Other  Member  States,  except  DK  and  IT,  state  that  they  have 
introduced the necessary measures, although the description given by those Member States is 
vague and unsatisfactory. In BE, police officers are entitled to subsidies to arrange facilities 
for victims, but only for victims of physical or sexual violence.  

Article  15(2)  requires  Member  States  to  adapt  facilities  to  prevent  secondary  victimisation. 
Most  Member  States  have  not  referred  to  Article  15(2)  at  all.  SE  states  that  most  police 
departments now have a separate room for children; for other categories of victim, work is in 
hand and suitable conditions will exist in the future. 

Article 16: Territorial scope 

The  UK  has  not  provided  information  suggesting  that  this  provision  was  transposed  for 
Gibraltar. 

3. 

CONCLUSION 

The implementation of this Framework Decision is not satisfactory. The national legislation 
sent  to  the  Commission  contains  numerous  omissions.  Moreover,  it  largely  reflects  existing 
practice prior to adoption of the Framework Decision. The aim of harmonising legislation in 
this field has not been achieved owing to the wide disparity in national laws. Many provisions 
have  been  implemented  by  way  of  non-binding  guidelines,  charters  and  recommendations. 
The Commission cannot assess whether these are adhered to in practice. 

The Commission invites Member States to consider this Report and to take the opportunity to 
provide all further relevant information to the Commission and to the Council Secretariat, in 
order to fulfil their obligations under Article 18 of the Framework Decision. In addition, the 
Commission  encourages  those  Member  State  that  have  indicated  that  they  are  preparing 
relevant legislation, to enact and submit these national measures as soon as possible.  

EN 

9 

   EN