restorative justice

restorative justice

a system for dealing with offending behaviour focusing on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims (survivors), enables an offender to see the impact of their crime and serves to empower survivors by giving them a voice

aims to change perspective- individual vs state

• historically, a person convicted of a criminal offence would have been tried and regarded as committing a crime against the state, prosecutors represent the state

• restorative justice programmes aim to switch the emphasis from the need of the state, to enforce the law, to the needs of the survivor, to feel compensated in some way and come to terms with the crime

aims to change perspective- a healing process

• aims to be a healing process, focuses less on retribution (punishing the offender) and more about reparation (repairing the harm they caused), RJ focuses on 2 things:

• 1. the survivor/victim of the crime and their recovery

• 2. the offender and their recovery and rehabilitation process

key features of RJ

1. trained mediator supervises the meeting

2. non courtroom setting where offenders voluntarily meet with survivors

3. face to face meeting or remotely via video link

4. survivor can confront the offender and explain how the incident affected them so offender can understand consequences of their actions

5. must be active not passive involvement of all parties

6. focuses on positive outcomes for both survivors and offenders

7. other relevant community members may attend and explain consequences eg family, friends, neighbours

sentencing

• RJ could take place before the trial and may affect sentencing eg if an offender is cooperative it could reduce their sentencing

• may be given as an alternative for prison, especially if the offender is young and cooperates well

• could also be used alongside prison, occurs while in prison as an incentive to reduce the length of a sentence

restitution

• often a monetary payment by the offender to the survivor for the harm caused by the offence

• aims to reflect the psychological damage caused or actual physical damage

3 types of restitution

1. financial- offender pays eg payment of cost of replacing door after a break in

2. practical- offender does the repairs themselves eg replacing door after a break in

3. emotional- supports healing process by helping to rebuild the survivors confidence or self esteem

Restorative Justice Council (RJC)

• independent body set up with the aim of establishing and monitoring clear standards for the use of RJ

• supports survivors and specialists in the field

• they promote the use of RJ in a general way, argues it could be used not just in prisons but in schools, workplaces, communities to prevent and manage conflict

strength- RJ supports the needs of survivors

• RJ has positive outcomes, the RJC reported the results of a 7 year project on the impact of RJ, 85% of survivors said they were satisfied with the process

• 78% would recommend it, 60% said the process made them feel better about the incident and gave them closure, only 2% said it made them feel worse

• suggests RJ is a worthwhile experience and helps survivors of crime cope with the aftermath of the incident

counterpoint- evidence to contradict

• RJ programmes aren’t always as survivor focused as they should be and as reported in satisfaction surveys

• survivors of crime may be used to help rehabilitate offenders, not the other way around, survivors may feel they are being used and not gaining anything themselves (Wood + Suzuki 2016)

• suggests the needs of the survivor may be seen as secondary to the need to rehabilitate offenders

strength- RJ leads to decrease in offending and recidivism

• in a meta analysis (Strang et al. 2013) comparing offenders who went through RJ and those who went through prison, found offenders who experienced RJ were less likely to reoffend, though reduction was larger in cases of violent crime than property crime

• Bain (2012) found lowered recidivism with adult offenders who took part in RJ, especially those who had one to one contact with their survivor, rather than community contact

• suggests RJ has a positive impact on reoffending, may be more so for some types of offence than others and some approaches

limitation- offenders may abuse the system

• the success of RJ hinges on an offender having honourable intentions, they must genuinely feel regret for their actions and want to make amends

• Van Gijseghem (2003) suggests offenders may use RJ to avoid punishment, play down their faults, or even take pride in their relationship with the survivor and show off to them

• would explain why not all offenders ultimately benefit from RJ and go on to reoffend

evaluation- domestic violence

• in DV cases, the power imbalance between abuser and abused puts pressure on survivors to go along with their partners suggestions during mediation, they may accept their apology to end the process (Liebman 2016)

• however, RJ in DV cases has produced positive results for survivors eg where a couple wishes to stay together to address the harm caused and plan to avoid it in the future (Sen et al. 2018) or pre trial mediation

• suggests, for some type of crime, the offender may manipulate the situation so great care is needed, so RJ for DV cases is rare and unpopular