This paper is written to provide an evaluative, critical, and comparative study of the role of the victims of crime during primary criminal investigation under both the criminal procedural laws of Jordan and United Arab Emirate. It aims to suggest changes to the victim’s role, expectation and extent of positive involvement in criminal proceedings during primary criminal investigation. To achieve this goal, the paper explores the current state of law in both laws on the victims’ rights during this stage of the criminal case, and it goes on to discuss some changes that should be made for the justice system to leave the victims of crime more satisfied with their involvement in the criminal justice process during this curial stage of criminal proceedings. This is vitally important as criminal procedural laws in both Jordan and UAE have emphasized the interests of offenders, and consequently, the needs and rights of the victims have become subordinate to those of the offenders. The study revealed that victims of crime are often regarded under both laws as merely eyewitnesses to an offence which has been committed against them, whereas in fact, they should be treated as the primary opponent to the offender, with various procedural rights must be granted to them so as they can effectively participate in criminal proceedings along the side with public prosecutors. It is argued that a victim’s involvement, positive participation, and cooperation in an investigation could result in a prosecutor’s exercise of discretion in favor on criminal prosecution, and would render victims more satisfied with the outcome of criminal investigation. The analysis in this paper indicates that there is severe limits on the role of the victims of crime during primary criminal investigation, and points out towards some possible deeper structural reforms.

Key words: victims of crime, primary criminal investigation, public prosecutor, criminal case, parties to criminal case.

Included in

Criminal Law Commons