THE SINGLE VICTIM STATEMENT IN THE INTERINSTITUTIONAL PATHWAY: AN INTERSECTIONAL APPROACH AND THE USE OF THE GESELL CHAMBER

This article analyzes the single victim statement as a structural element of the Interinstitutional Pathway for victims of violence, from an intersectional perspective, and its implementation through the use of the Gesell Chamber. It argues that the omission of these standards is not merely a procedural defect, but rather a structural failure of the duty of enhanced due diligence, generating institutional violence and potential state liability, particularly in contexts of violence against children and adolescents, femicide, sexual violence, and gender-based violence.

Introduction

The state's response to violence against women requires more than the formal opening of criminal proceedings. It demands the effective activation of a coordinated protection system capable of preventing, investigating, punishing, and providing redress. In the Bolivian context, this system is expressed through the Interinstitutional Pathway, conceived as a mandatory coordination mechanism among institutions. Within this pathway, the victim's single statement occupies a central place; it is not merely an evidentiary act, but a measure for the protection of fundamental rights, the non-compliance with which directly impacts the victim's psychological integrity, the effectiveness of the investigation, and the State's international responsibility.

The Interinstitutional Pathway as an Obligation of the State.

The Interinstitutional Pathway is the set of sequential and coordinated actions that must be implemented from the detection of an act of violence to the restitution of rights and the full reparation of damages. Its foundation lies in: the Political Constitution of the State, which mandates reinforced protection of life and physical integrity; Law No. 348, which requires comprehensive, timely, and non-revictimizing care; international human rights standards, particularly the Belém do Pará Convention; and the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The Interinstitutional Pathway is neither optional nor flexible: failure to comply with it constitutes a failure of the justice system.

The Victim's Single Statement: Nature and Purpose

The victim's single statement consists of receiving the account of the events only once, under technical, human, and legal conditions that allow its use by all entities involved in the process.

Its purpose is threefold: to prevent revictimization by reducing the repetition of the traumatic account, to strengthen the consistency of evidence by avoiding contradictions induced by emotional distress, and to guarantee inter-institutional coordination by allowing information to circulate between institutions without shifting the burden onto the victim. From this perspective, the single statement is a substantive guarantee, not simply a procedural efficiency mechanism.

Intersectional Approach and Differentiated Duty of Protection

The intersectional approach requires recognizing that violence is exacerbated when multiple vulnerability factors converge, such as gender, poverty, economic dependence, motherhood, rurality, low educational attainment, or a history of prolonged violence.

Applied to the Interinstitutional Pathway, this approach imposes on the State the duty to: adopt differentiated protection measures, adapt procedures to the victim's reality, and avoid standardized responses that reproduce structural inequalities. From this perspective, the single declaration becomes an affirmative action measure, essential to guaranteeing real access to justice.

The Gesell Chamber as a technical instrument of the Interinstitutional Pathway.

The Gesell Chamber is the ideal device for obtaining a single statement in contexts of high vulnerability, allowing testimony to be taken in a non-intimidating environment, with the intervention of specialized personnel, and with a complete and reproducible audiovisual recording that is valid throughout the criminal process.

Its use should not be restricted to children and adolescents, since the intersectional approach allows for the inclusion of victims—whether women, men, or elderly, regardless of sexual orientation—who may be exposed to systematic violence and power imbalances, depending on the type of crime. The Gesell Chamber is a reinforced protection tool for all victims and/or witnesses who require this space

Single declaration, Gesell Chamber, and prohibition of institutional violence.

The unnecessary repetition of the account, the absence of psychological support, or the unjustified refusal to use the Gesell Chamber constitute forms of institutional violence. These practices deepen psychological harm, weaken testimonial evidence, increase the risk of impunity, and compromise the State's responsibility for a lack of due diligence. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has been clear in stating that States must organize their entire institutional apparatus to guarantee an effective investigation, free from stereotypes and revictimization

Relevance in cases of femicide.

In numerous cases of femicide, there is evidence of prior complaints, repeated accounts, and fragmented institutional pathways. The absence of a single statement and a Gesell Chamber interview allows us to conclude that the State was aware of the risk, failed to adopt adequate or differentiated measures, and that the lethal outcome was foreseeable and preventable. These omissions are relevant not only from a criminal perspective but also in the context of state responsibility and comprehensive reparations for the harm suffered

Implications for expert analysis and reparations.

From an expert perspective, the breakdown of the Interinstitutional Protocol, particularly the omission of the single declaration and the Gesell Chamber, provides grounds for aggravated psychological damage due to revictimization, institutional moral damage, loss of the opportunity for effective protection, and damage to individual and family life plans. These elements strengthen expert reports with a human rights and gender focus, and provide solidity for future claims of liability against the State.

As a point of contention, we can observe that the single victim statement, applied with an intersectional approach and materialized through the proper use of the Gesell Chamber, constitutes the operational core of the Interinstitutional Pathway. Its omission is not an isolated error, but a structural failure of the State's protection system, incompatible with national and international human rights standards. Guaranteeing a single statement from the victim, under appropriate conditions and with reinforced protection, not only improves the quality of evidence, but also saves lives, prevents irreparable harm, and reaffirms the State's responsibility in the face of violence against women.

Silvana Orieta Diaz Gutiérrez

Criminal Laywer