English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In 2006, Brazil’s domestic violence legislation came into force and, among other innovations, established specialised courts to deal with criminal offences committed against women in the domestic context. This legislation has been referred to by United Nations (UN) entities as a global model, particularly for the creation of such courts, which are structured to work within a multidisciplinary approach and in tandem with a network of services to support and protect victims against further violence. More recently, though, UN Women has acknowledged some limitations in their workings, particularly linked to the lack of coordination between agencies and of trained personnel. This article is aimed at supporting and illustrating such concerns. It draws on a larger empirical study to showcase how victims’ experiences of secondary victimisation are linked to judges’ focus on the criminal aspects of the  Maria da Penha  Law and to their lack of expertise in gender issues.

international journal of comparative and applied criminal justice

Secondary victimisation, procedural injustices, and  machismo : the experiences of women who access Brazil’s not-so-specialised domestic violence courts