Exploring Nature, Causes and Impacts: A Study on Complainant Victimization during Trial Process

Exploring Nature, Causes and Impacts: A Study on Complainant Victimization during Trial Process

Mahmuda Akter¹, Ahmed Istiaque Abdullah Adib², Pavel Ahmed³*,

¹Assistant Professor, Department of Criminology and Police Science, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Tangail-1902, Bangladesh

²B.Sc (Hons.) Graduate, Department of Criminology and Police Science, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Tangail-1902, Bangladesh.

³B.Sc (Hons.), Department of Criminology and Police Science, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, Tangail-1902, Bangladesh.

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2023.701186

Received: 04 October 2023; Revised: 01 November 2023; Accepted: 04 November 2023; Published: 25 November 2023

ABSTRACT

Victimization of complainants in criminal justice system prohibits legal initiatives of any crime that gradually gripping the attention of victimologists to ensure equal rights of victims. The principle aim of this study is to explore the nature of victimization of complainants during trial stage. To fulfill this, the types of victimization as well as its causes and impact are also investigated. Quantitative research method is used here; that follows purposive sampling to collect data from 50 respondents. The study reveals a concerning trend: the victimization rate among female complainants is on the rise, with 44% reporting instances of victimization. Furthermore, individuals from rural areas appear to face a higher incidence of victimization during trials, constituting 54% of the affected population. In violent cases, 54% of the complainants’ experience victimization through various assaults, and a significant portion (64%) report being victimized more than once. Respondents highlight the misuse of law (72%) as a major cause, with 67% emphasizing the alarming economic impact of such victimization. This study underscores the detrimental effect of complainant victimization on public confidence in the justice system, urging the government to implement measures to eliminate this issue in criminal cases in Bangladesh.

Keywords: Complainant; Criminal Case; Trial; Victimization

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The judiciary is an important branch of the government within Bangladesh’s democratic and constitutional framework, along with the legislature and executive. The court’s role in society is not only to resolve disputes between parties, but also to protect each individual’s rights and freedoms. However, there is still some reluctance among victims and complainants to seek justice in court, owing to issues such as the inability to identify their rights, the inability to articulate their arguments, and the low rate of conviction in cases (Bari, 2016). As Bangladesh has become a densely populated country with over 160 million people, the existing support from the criminal justice system is entirely inadequate to meet the huge demand (Akram, 2017). Due to a lengthy and substandard investigation, the prosecution may fail to pass the correct verdict, and thus, complainants may be deprived of the expected justice. Indeed, under current practices, the complainant has nothing to do after filing the case and appearing for the first information report (FIR) other than return to court repeatedly to learn if the accused has applied for bail, release, or criminal revision (Malik, 2002).

Victimization of complainants arises from the criminal justice system in the aftermath of the crime, which leads to secondary victimization, which occurs when there is a lack of proper support (Beqira and McNamara, 2014). This can be caused by friends, family, and most often by the professionals the victims encounter as a result of the crime. Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, social service workers, the media, coroners, clergy, and even mental health professionals can cause secondary injuries (Schneider, 2001). The unusual contribution included victim and complainant’s interviews containing considerable information that is not currently available about what they have to say about the role of the prosecutors, victim advocates, and judges (Uli, 2002).

It is important to remember that delays in the administration of justice affect not only the accused but also the complainants. Long trials can lead to evidence, especially eyewitness testimony, being forgotten or lost, which decreases the chance of conviction. Since victims play a very limited role in the prosecution process of a criminal case and thus have no control over the progress of the process, therefore delayed conclusion of trial can deter victims from filing or pursuing the case persistently (Islam and Solaiman, 2003). According to Transparency International’s Bangladesh National Household Survey of 2007, complainants from rural areas who deal with the lower courts are victims of corruption. Sometimes, bribes are solicited by court officials who are responsible for registering, filing, and processing cases. In contrast, other bribes are demanded by lawyers directly from the defendants and complainants and passed on to judges or magistrates.

The citizen charter aims to promote enhanced delivery of service, honesty, productivity, and responsibility of state-or public-sector institutions that provide services to the public(Korishi et al., 2022). However, stages of law enforcement are sometimes whimsical. There may be attempts to requalify a crime and to restart proceedings after a pause(Kozhevnikov, 2021). Besides, inadequate protection measures for the victims and witnesses are a big concern in Bangladesh’s already paralyzed trial system, where dreadful criminals and assailants often tend to threaten the victims and witnesses and, thus, compel them to either withdraw the case or produce obliging evidence in court. In certain cases, the victim feels embarrassed and threatened while answering inquiries from the lawyer or judge in the immediate presence of the offender. Further, many victims of crimes relating to violence against women become malicious targets of further psychological assault in the face of unhealthy cross-examinations by the defense lawyer (Faruk, Sahni and Kirchhoff, 2020).Reactions from the criminal justice system to allegations of sexual assault have frequently been criticized for being ineffective or aggravating the victims(Spencer et al., 2018).Moreover, through myths and false societal conceptions, the judicial system and society continue to victimize victims(Wheat croft et al., 2009).Gender bias is also seen in courtrooms during trial process (Tannvi & Narayana, 2022). Besides, judges are influenced in many ways while making decision about a verdict, and this makes the complainants vulnerable (Atri, 2022). This re-traumatizes the complainants. This re-traumatization can be one of the main causes of an adverse experience with the legal system(Orth, 2002).This is common in Bangladesh’s criminal justice system. Because the complainants fear being victimized again and facing reprisals from the accused, victims in Bangladesh frequently express reluctance to participate in the criminal justice system. They also wish to avoid filing a lawsuit, going to court, and making further such calls to the police. Their financial susceptibility is another reason why they have little interest in bringing lawsuits. Furthermore, the criminal justice system’s existing procedures place a greater emphasis on protecting the rights of offenders than they do on protecting the rights of victims. In actuality, the system is frequently chastised for its indifference to victims’ safety(Rahaman, 2013).The nation’s judicial system seems dedicated on protecting perpetrators rather than victims in the guise of fair trials (Bari, 2016). This affects the psychology of the victims (Orth, 2002).  However, less is known about the nature, cause and impacts of victimization of complainants. Therefore, it is exigent to understand their victimization to find out solutions. This study fills the void and represents the nature of the victimization of the complainants and the experience of the complainants during the trial stage. Although the diverse effects of victimization on a complainants’ overall life were not given much attention, measures taken by legal authorities are emphasized here. This study also identifies different obstacles for complainants to get proper justice and their opinion to overcome those to make the justice system a standard service providing judiciary in society. Moreover, this study contributes to the current literature by showing a scope of further study about complainants’ experiences.

Objectives of the Study

The primary goal of this study is to investigate the nature of victimization of complainants during the trial stage in criminal cases in Tangail, Bangladesh. To fulfill this, the specific objectives of this study are the followings:

1. To explore the types of victimization of complainants during the trial stage in criminal case.
2. To examine the causes and impact of victimization of complainants during the trial stage in criminal case.
3. To identify some preventive initiatives from the complainants to prevent victimization of complainants during the trial stage in criminal case.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework provides the roadmap of the study to understand victimization of complainants. We used Social Learning theory to answer the research questions and to understand complainants’ victimization.

Social Learning Theory

Within the framework of the social learning theory, individuals might pick up new behavioral patterns through first-hand experience or by seeing how others behave. The more primitive type of learning is primarily controlled by the positive and negative outcomes of each particular activity (Bandura, 1971). The theory states an individual’s interactions with their social or cultural surroundings shape their customs, views, goals, and ideologies (Hammer, 2011). It has been found that victims experience with the Criminal Justice System, especially due to doubts about the criminal justice system’s ability to help them in their circumstances and their concern for the perpetrator’s revenge, victims may choose not to report further victimizations (Hotaling & Buzawa, 2003). One of the most cited reasons given by victims for not reporting personal crimes was that they did not think, based on prior experience, that the police would do anything or could handle the situation well (Fishman, 1979). This study uses the Social Learning theory to find the connection between victims’ experiences and not reporting to the Criminal Justice System

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study is descriptive in nature where quantitative research design is used about nature of victimization of complainants during trial stage in criminal case in Tangail, Bangladesh.  This research was conducted in Tangail because a large number of complainant faced different victimization in trail process in criminal case and it was known. Both primary and secondary sources (relevant books, newspapers, journal, articles etc.) data were used in this study where primary data were collected from the complainant respondents who lives different areas of Tangail and attended their trial in criminal court. As there is no official record about this huge number of complainants, the total population of this research was unknown. Each of the complainant was viewed as a unit of analysis for this study. This study used non-probability purposive sampling method to collect the data from respondents. Because the population size was unknown, and samples were selected purposively based on their availability. Upon reaching the study site (Tangail Judge Court), complainants were asked if they have been victimized in any manner. Complainants were selected as samples if they replied ‘yes’ and agreed that they were victimized. The  sample size was 50. By using survey method, structured questionnaire (including both close ended and open ended questions) was used. The time period of data collection was from March, 2021 to April, 2021. The data were processed through coding, categorization and tabulation. Then, the Statistical Program for Social Science (SPSS) was used for analyzing the survey data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The data has been analyzed by using the statistical methods and procedures needed to finding out the results and fulfilling the research objectives. The findings are presented in tables and figures, and illustrated appropriately.

Socio-demographic Characteristics of the Respondents

TABLE 1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics Of The Respondents

Total Respondent: 50

Table 1 of this study represents different socio-demographic information of the respondents. Age is one of the important demographic characteristics of all. This study identifies different age groups of respondents where 26% respondent belongs in the age group between 29- 38 years. Here, 56% of the respondents are male and 44% are female. Table 1 also indicates that most of the respondents are Muslim (74%) while 26% are Hindus. Besides, the majority of the respondents are married (84%) and the unmarried rate is 16%. Additionally, 36% of the respondents have their schooling in primary level, while 26% of the respondents did not attend school and 22% have secondary education but those who have higher secondary and graduate level are the least victimized.

In this study, table 1 correspondingly indicates that 34% respondents are job holder who are mainly men; 26% respondents are businessman; 16% of the respondents maintain their livelihood from agriculture, they are generally rural based people.  16% of the respondents are doing household work, who are mainly women.

Furthermore, this study also shows that 28 % of the respondents have income of less than 10,000 Taka, another significant scenario is that those who earn between 30,000 to 40,000 Taka constitute 28% of the respondents. These 28% who have a moderate level of income are somehow maintaining their pending cases for years and becoming economically looser, but those 28% who have the least income are mainly women and are in huge disaster in maintain the path of getting justice. Consequently, they are becoming economically vulnerable. Here, about 46% of respondents have expenditure of less than 10,000 Taka. About 20% of the respondents have expenditure of more than 40,000 Taka. It is a burden for people who have less expenditure to maintain expenses regarding to case, as they have less income. Besides about 18% respondent have expenditure between (10,001- 20,000 Taka). This study also shows that 46% and 54% ofthe respondents are from urban and rural area respectively.  Rural people are not much conscious about the litigation process like the urban people. As a result, this rural people are getting victimized in the trial process.

Nature of the Criminal Event in Which the Respondent is victimized

Table 2  Nature of the Criminal Event in Which the Respondent is Victimized

This study reveals that, from Table 2, 72% respondents have 1 to 2 cases pending, 18% respondents have 3 to 4 cases pending and 10% have more than 4 cases pending. Besides, 82% respondents have their cases pending for 1 to 2 years and about 4% respondents have their cases pending for more than 4 years. This study also shows that defendants are mostly relatives of the victims as 30% respondents lodged cases against their relatives. The rate of neighbors as defendantsis 28% while 22% women lodged file against their husbands, and 20% defendants have no relation with the respondents. Moreover, about 54% respondents’ lodged cases for assault by the defendants. Besides, dowry, extortion and robbery have the same portion (12%) of victimized respondents. In addition, 4% respondents lodged cases of kidnapping and 4% respondents were victims of threats, whereas 2% respondents lodged murder cases.

Nature of Victimization of Respondents during Trail

Table 3 Nature of Victimization of Respondents during Trail

Victimization during investigation or inquiry process have impact in criminal proceeding. According to this study, Table 3 demonstrates that 74% respondents were victimized during investigation processes of a criminal cases, whereas 16% of the respondents were not victims of the process. Besides, in 34% cases, investigating authorities denied to lodge cases. Additionally, 40% of the respondents got less cooperation from the authorities and 26% respondents have experienced that unethical benefits were given to the defendants by the investigating authorities. However, 34% respondents said investigation was fair, while 66% respondents said that investigation was unfair. And for 54% respondents, the investigation period was a tenure between 4-7 months, whereas 36% respondents’ investigation period was between 1-3 months and for 10% of the victims, investigation time was more than 7 months.  Along with this, Table 3 shows that 66% respondents reported that court officials were reluctant to perform their duties properly. On the other hand, 34% respondents said that court officials performed their duties properly. Besides, 78% respondents agreed that the courts have inadequacy of judging case-evidence due to many barriers like shortage of manpower, technological facilities etc.

Causes of victimization of Respondents

Table 4 Causes of Victimization of the Respondents

This study identifies numerous causes of victimization during the trial process. Here, from Table 4, it can be seen that 38% respondents said that demands for bribery from court officials is one of the major causes of victimization, while almost 26% respondents claimed that unawareness of court officials and long duration of investigation are the major causes. Moreover, 38% respondents said that local political leaders are trying to influence in the court processes and are responsible for their victimization, whereas 36% respondents claimed that various administrative officials of courts and 23% respondents approve accused advocates as responsible for complainants’ victimization.

It is a fact of regret that we are still following outdated laws of criminal cases where many sections are disputing with the present socio-economic conditions of Bangladesh. As a result, from this study, Table 4 shows that 72% respondents said that misuse of criminal laws is the cause of their victimization, while 22% respondents did not agree with it. Effective and efficient court administration has impact on the speediness and interruption of the criminal proceeding. This study also reveals that 26% respondents think that the inefficiency behind the court administration is the high number of unskilled court officials, whereas 24% of the respondents said that the reason behind the inefficiency of court administration is political pressure. But, 40% of the respondents marked that the reason behind the inefficiency of court administration is inadequate manpower.

Impact of Complainants’ Victimization in Respondents’ Life

Fig. 1 Impacts of Complainants’ Victimization in Respondents’ Life

Victimization in trial process has impact on the overall life of respondents. This impact can be physical, social, economic and psychological.  It is clear from Figure-1 that among the respondents, 40% experienced psychological impact as a result of victimization in the trial process, 27% respondents had economic impact, 18% respondent marked that the impact was physical, and 15% of the respondents said that they were socially victimized.

Forms of Physical and Social Victimization of the Respondents: Figure-2 shows the different forms of physical victimization of the respondents where 40% were victimized by harassment and assault, and 20% are victimized by threat. Moreover, 45% respondents were socially victimized by detachment and 33% respondents faced dishonor in society due to the complicated court proceeding in trail stage.

Fig. 2 Forms of Physical Harm and Social Victimization of the respondents

Economic Cost of Running Criminal Case: Economic cost of running criminal cases is also a significant victimization of the respondents. Figure-3 shows the economical victimization of the respondents. Here, 41% of them lost more than 30,000 Taka, while 21% of them lost more than 20,000 Taka and 17% of them faced a loss of between 20,001-30,000 Taka.

Fig. 3 Amount of Money Lost for Victimization in Trail of the Respondents

Feelings of Respondent after Being Victimized

Fig. 4 Feelings of Respondents after Being Victimized

If a complainant experiences different victimization in trail stage, it badly impacts his/her psychology. As shown by figure-4, after being victimized, about 42% respondents said that they will never suit any case again, 40% respondents lost believe over justice system, and 18% said that they will stay away from court related people. So, the overall confidence over justice system becomes very dissatisfactory for them.

Respondents’ Short-term Recommendations in Fixing Victimization in the Trial Process

Fig. 5 Respondents’ Short-term Recommendations in Fixing Victimization in the Trial Process

Respondent has put some early recommendations in fixing delayed justice. Here, figure no 5 shows that, 46% of the respondent recommended that increasing number of judges and courts can be pivotal in dealing with victimization in short term, 42%of the respondent have suggested to introduce evening courts to fix the issue., where as 12% commented to make the court staff skillful.

Long-term Recommendations in in Fixing Victimization in Trial Process

Fig. 6 Respondents’ Long-term Recommendations in Fixing Victimization in Trial Process

The problem of victimization in trial process demands some long term solution from the respondents. As figure-6 of this study shows, 36% of the respondents suggested that appointing additional judges can reduce victimization in trial process, whereas 32% respondents said that forming institute for judicial skill development can be effective to minimize the extent of victimization in trial process. However, 22% of the respondents have suggested that infrastructural development can be effective, and 10% of them have said that technological development may be crucial to fix victimization in trial process.

Bivariate Analysis

Table 5  Cross Tabulations between Living Area of the Respondents* Respondents Opinion about Inadequacy of Justifying Evidence during Trail

Table-5(Cross Tabulation) presents the relationship between the living area of the respondents and their opinion about the inadequacy of justifying evidence during trail. Overall, tabulation had suggested that, 62% respondents marked that they experienced inadequacy of justifying evidence. More specifically, 46% respondents said that inadequacy of justifying evidence happens mostly in urban areas, while 54% respondents marked that inadequacy of justifying evidence occurs mostly for those respondents who come from the rural areas. So, the cross tabulation between the living area of the respondents and the inadequacy of justifying evidence during trail concludes that the people of rural areas become more victimized in trail stage.

Table 6  Cross Tabulations between Number of Trial in Cases*Ignorance of Court Officials

Table-6 of cross tabulation indicates the relationship between number of trial in cases and ignorance of court officials. Here, this tabulation suggests that 90% respondents said that ignorant role of court officials is common during trials of cases. Here, 34% respondents said that ignorant role of court officials is common during 1-3 times trail in cases, while 38% respondents said that ignorance of court officials is common during 4-6 times trail and 14% respondents said that it is common for 7-10 times trail. So, the cross tabulation between number of trial in cases and ignorant role of court officials concludes thatthe respondents become victimized for the ignorance of court officials.

Test of significances

Hypothesis test 1:Null hypothesis:  Victimization in trial process does not extend the economic sufferings of the rural respondents more than the urban respondents.

Alternative hypothesis: Victimization in trial process extends the economic sufferings of the rural respondents more than the urban respondents.

From the table, we have got that the level of significance is .441, degrees of freedom is 1, the tabulated value of chi square test is 3.841 and the calculated value is of chi square test is .593. Here, alternative hypothesis is rejected and the null hypothesis is accepted because the tabulated value is greater than the calculated value. So, chi-square test table 1 suggests that victimization in trial process does not extend the economic sufferings of the rural respondents more than the urban respondents.

Hypothesis Test 2:Null hypothesis: Inefficiency of court administration has no effect on public interest towards justice system. Alternative hypothesis: Inefficiency of court administration effects public interest towards justice system.

From the Chi-square table 2, the level of significance is .638, degrees of freedom are 4, the tabulated value of chi square test is 9.488 and the calculated value of chi square test is 2.537. Here, alternative hypothesis is rejected and the null hypothesis is accepted because the tabulated value is greater than the calculated value. So, chi-square test table 2 suggests that the inefficiency of court administration has no effect on public interest towards justice system.

CONCLUSION

Victimization of the complainants is a dreadful problem in justice system. Bangladesh has grappled with this issue for several decades, though this deeply rooted practice has still not been solved. Nevertheless, people are not so concerned about involving themselves within their community to make free from victimization. Besides, the activities of responsible authorities are not sufficient to control it in comparison to its extent. Consequently, complainants are getting habituated to become victims of the injustice system. The impact of the complainants’ issue is an alarming issue because people loss their faith in the justice system as it is a common fact that the person who entered into the justice system cannot get out of its loophole. Complainants are victimized physically, psychologically, economically, and socially that hamper their entire living conditions. So, it is a difficulty that demands an urgent change. The government as well as the judicial authorities should take necessary initiatives to ensure proper rights of complainants to prevent their victimization at trail stage as early and aptly as possible. This current study supports the notion of impunity in Bangladesh by showing that complaints about criminal incidents are not taken seriously or are neglected by the officials involved. Complainants can hardly lodge cases in the first place. Besides, they are victimized by the investigating officers. This gets worse when the court justifies evidence wrongfully and announces inadequate verdicts. However, unskilled and inadequate manpower and political influence harm the complainants’ trust in the justice system. Nevertheless, increasing the number of judges and developing the skills of the personnel are the two main recommendations that can reduce the physical, psychological, and financial sufferings of the complainants

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The study uses non-probability purposive sampling. This limits generalizing the findings upon a larger population. Besides, the result may show different findings in more rural or urban areas. Moreover, the sample size is only 50, but to know in-depth about the experiences of the complainants, the sample size should have been more. However, despite the limitations, the study adds to the current scholarship and provides scope of further, large-scale study.

REFERENCES

1. Akram M. (2017). A Critical Analysis of Access to Justice in Bangladesh, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, Volume 6 Issue 8. Retrieved at January 14, 2023.
2. Atri, C. (2022). A Critical Examination of Judicial Stereotyping and Gender Bias in Indian Courts. Indian Journal of Integrated Research in Law, 2 Part 1, 1.
3. Bari, H.M.F. (2016). An Appraisal of Victim Protection in Bangladesh, Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh (Hum.), 61(2), Retrieved at January 14, 2021. Retrieved at January 18, 2023.
4. Beqiraj J. and McNamara L. (2014). International Access to Justice: Barriers and Solutions (Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law Report 02/2014), International Bar Association, Retrieved at January 10, 2023.
5. Faruk, Omar; Sahni& Kirchhoff. (2020) Absence of Respect and Recognition of Victims in the Criminal Justice System in Bangladesh, Firebaugh, n 8. Retrieved at February 3, 2023.
6. Fishman, G. (1979). Patterns of Victimisation and Notification. British Journal of Criminology, 19, 146.
7. Hammer, T. R. (2011). Social Learning Theory. In S. Goldstein & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Child Behavior and Development (pp. 1396–1397). Springer US. https:// doi.org/ 10.1007/978-0-387-79061-9_2695
8. Hotaling, G. T., & Buzawa, E. S. (2003). Forgoing Criminal Justice Assistance: The Non-Reporting of New Incidents of Abuse in a Court Sample of Domestic Violence Victims: (300602003-001) [dataset]. https://doi.org/10.1037/e300602003-001
9. Islam, M.R. and Solaiman, S.M. (2003) ‘Public Confidence Crisis in the Judiciary and Judicial Accountability in Bangladesh’, Journal of Judicial Administration, Volume 13(1), Retrieved at February 15, 2023.
10. Korishi, R., Biswas, B. D., & Rahman, M. (2022). Citizen’s Charter in Public Services: Development, Principles and Practice. Britain International of Humanities and Social Sciences (BIoHS) Journal, 4(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.33258/biohs.v4i3.799
11. Kozhevnikov, V. V. (2021). About Law Enforcement. Polit Journal, 1(2), Article 2. https:// doi.org/10.33258/polit.v1i2.446
12. Kozhevnikov, V. V. (2021). About Law Enforcement. Polit Journal, 1(2), Article 2. https:// doi.org/10.33258/polit.v1i2.446
13. Malik S. (2002). Perceiving Crimes and Criminals: Law Making in the early 19th century Bengal, Bangladesh Journal of Law, Volume 6. Retrieved at January 21, 2023.
14. Orth, U. (2002). Secondary Victimization of Crime Victims by Criminal Proceedings. Social Justice Research, 15(4), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021210323461
15. Rahaman, S. (2013). VICTIM PROTECTION IN BANGLADESH: A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK.
16. Schneider, H.J. (2001). Victimological developments in the world during the past three decades: A study of comparative victimology – Part 2. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, Volume 45(5), Retrieved at February 20, 2023.
17. Spencer, D., Dodge, A., Ricciardelli, R., & Ballucci, D. (2018). “I Think It’s Re-Victimizing Victims Almost Every Time”: Police Perceptions of Criminal Justice Responses to Sexual Violence. Critical Criminology, 26(2), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-018-9390-2
18. Tannvi, T., & Narayana, S. (2022). The challenge of gender stereotyping in Indian courts. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 2116815. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2116815
19. Transparency International’s Bangladesh (TIB). (2007). National Household Survey of 2007 Retrieved at January 28, 2023.
20. Uli Orth (2002). Secondary Victimization of Crime Victims by Criminal Proceedings, Journal of Social Justice Research, Volume. 15, No. 4, Retrieved at March 17, 2023.
21. Wheatcroft, J. M., Wagstaff, G. F., & Moran, A. (2009). Revictimizing the Victim? How Rape Victims Experience the UK Legal System. Victims & Offenders, 4(3), 265–284. https:// doi.org/10.1080/15564880903048529