THE ECONOMIC DIMENSION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: FROM CRIMINALISATION OF AN ACT TO REPARATION IN THE CONTEXT OF ECTHR PRACTICE

Abstract

The subject of the present study is the legal and institutional framework for responding to the economic dimension of domestic violence. The focus of the study is on the transition from criminalisation of the act to reparation for the victim in the context of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The paper focuses on the interaction between criminal liability, positive obligations of the state, economic autonomy of the victim, compensation mechanisms, social support, and human rights standards in ensuring effective protection against domestic violence. Methodology. This research draws on a combination of comparative legal, systemic, human rights-based, criminal law and institutional economic methods. The analysis integrates the European Convention on Human Rights, an examination of the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) case law on domestic violence, an assessment of the economic consequences of abuse, and an evaluation of legal mechanisms for compensation, protection and restoration. This methodological approach has enabled the interdependency between criminalisation, institutional responsibility, economic deprivation, victim protection and the enforceability of human rights in cases of domestic violence to be identified. This work aims to define the legal and economic framework of the state's response to domestic violence, evaluate the limitations of criminalisation as a protective measure and develop a conceptual approach to reparation that encompasses compensation, restoration of autonomy, social support and the prevention of further violations. The article demonstrates that domestic violence is a human rights violation with direct material, social and institutional consequences. The results of the study demonstrate that domestic violence is a complex legal, social and economic phenomenon. The first necessary level of legal recognition is criminalisation, because it confirms the public nature of the violation and creates the basis for intervention, investigation, prosecution and protective measures. However, the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) demonstrates that formal criminal provisions are insufficient where public authorities fail to assess risks, respond to complaints, protect victims, or address repeated patterns of abuse. Cases such as Opuz v. Turkey, Volodina v. Russia, Kurt v. Austria, Tunikova and Others v. Russia, Talpis v. Italy and Tkhelidze v. Georgia demonstrate that state responsibility can include effective prevention, protection and investigation measures, as well as just satisfaction and structural reforms. The study emphasises that the economic aspect of domestic violence is an integral part of the harm caused. Victims may be deprived of income, housing, employment opportunities, access to documents, family resources, childcare, mobility and the practical capacity to leave the abusive relationship. These losses are often hidden, cumulative and difficult to prove, yet they are crucial in determining whether the victim can establish an independent life. Therefore, the legal response should include compensation for material and non-material damage, as well as access to safe housing, legal aid, psychological and medical support, employment assistance, protection from financial abuse and stable public financing of infrastructure supporting victims. Conclusion. The legal regulation of domestic violence is the responsibility of the state in terms of criminal law, economics, and human rights. The shift from criminalisation to reparation reflects the need to change the state's response from punishing the perpetrator to restoring the victim’s autonomy and preventing repeated harm. In the context of the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) practice, effective protection requires a model in which criminal liability, positive obligations, compensation, social support, institutional accountability, and financial responsibility operate within a single framework. The future development of this model hinges on national legal systems recognising the economic impact of domestic violence and redistributing the associated costs away from victims through compensation, public support and structural prevention measures.