A High Court judge said yesterday that the Government ought to bear in mind that State agencies had to face up to the question of compensation for victims of crime.
Mr Justice Moriarty was speaking at a conference on "Victims of Crime" in Dublin.
The legislation regarding compensation extended generally only to physical or sexual violence, he said. "The whole context of economic compensation is excluded."
He had had to deal with many cases of a traumatised victim in sexual cases, but it was a regrettable oversight that no provision was made where an economic catastrophe had happened, for example, where an insurance broker was convicted of defrauding a couple in their 70s of all their savings.
That would have a shattering effect.
"The damage done to such a person would, in many respects, be on a par with and be as disastrous as sexual and physical violence," Mr Justice Moriarty told the conference.
It was invidious that this sphere should be excluded from legislation covering compensation. Judges could use their discretion but it depended on the whim of the courts and people had no special rights.
The judge said that until recent times there was at best a condescending form of tolerance of victims. They were treated as if they had some trifling walk-on part.
Then Section 5 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 was introduced. It dealt with the whole context of the victim impact report and gave statutory recognition to the position of the victim. It did significantly reflect a culture change in that the position of the victim had to be faced realistically.
Mr Justice Moriarty said that the New Zealand law for victims was a good model. It seemed to have included a mixture of pragmatism, compassion and professionalism.
It was embodied in the Victims of Offences Act 1987 and was a good example which could be followed.
It provided that victims should be treated with courtesy and compassion, have access to services and information, a speedy return of property after trial, impact reports, and assurance that a victim's residential address was never stated.
The judge said recognition of the victim's position was reflected by the increasing degree of financial help towards Victim Support, the Rape Crisis Centre and other agencies.