Crime victims compo scheme ‘discriminatory’

THE limited compensation paid to victims of crime may be in breach of an EU directive, a leading personal injury lawyer has claimed.

The Irish Criminal Injuries Tribunal, which paid out €4.2 million in 2009, considers applications from victims who suffer a personal injury as a result of a crime of violence.

Dependents of those killed in crimes, others injured while attempting to prevent a crime and anyone hurt in saving a human life may also claim compensation under the scheme.

During 2009, the tribunal dealt with 97 applications for non-fatal injury and 16 fatalities including murder.

Naas-based solicitor Liam Moloney said the function of the scheme was to provide a safety net for crime victims who, in many cases, could not recover compensation from offenders.

The levels of compensation under a 2004 EU directive was left to member states discretion provided it was “fair and appropriate”.

Mr Moloney said compensation may be awarded on the basis of any out of pocket expenses including loss of earnings by a victim.

Dependents of someone who died as a result of crime may also benefit.

“But victims are not entitled to recover damages for pain and suffering, infringement of personal integrity, long term mental suffering, scarring and disfigurement.”

He said compensation for pain and suffering was awarded in Belgium, Britain, France, Luxembourg, Sweden, Denmark and Finland and of these Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France and Sweden offered additional compensation for moral damages or for the violation of the victim’s personal integrity.

“In Britain, awards of up to €300,000 can be made for pain and suffering and other non-material damages.”

Mr Moloney, of Moloney & Co, Solicitors, Naas, Co Kildare, said it was clear that victims of crime in Ireland were being discriminated against when it came to “appropriate and fair” levels of compensation.

“The EU directive stated that all member states shall ensure that their national rules provide for the existence of compensation schemes which guarantee fair and appropriate compensation to victims of intentional crime.”

He said that in a large number of cases victims were not being adequately compensated for very serious injuries.

In many cases, victims recovered physically fairly quickly but psychological effects might be long term, causing severe suffering for which there was no compensation.

“The scheme should be amended immediately to bring it into line with our EU counterparts and to ensure compliance with EU law,” Mr Moloney said.

“It is only a matter of time before the state’s refusal to fully compensate victims is challenged in the courts.”