RESTORATIVE JUSTICE

→ Focuses on the victim and their recovery

→ Focuses on the offender and their rehabilitation process

~Key Features Of Restorative Justice Meeting~

• Trained mediator attends the meeting

• Non-courtroom setting where offenders voluntarily meet with victim

• Victim is given the opportunity to confront the offender and explain how the incident affected them, enabling the offender to understand the consequences of their actions and the emotional distress it caused

• Focuses on positive outcomes for both the offender and the victim

→ Restorative justice may occur alongside a prison sentence or as an alternative to prison. It may also be used as an incentive to reduce the length of the sentence

→ The idea is that the meeting allows the victim to recover emotionally by rebuilding their confidence and self-esteem

EVALUATION

Research Support:

→ EVIDENCE FOR POSITIVE OUTCOMES

• One strength is that there is evidence to suggest it has positive outcomes.

• Shapland et al (2008) reported that 85% of survivors reported satisfaction with the process of meeting their offender face-to-face.

• 60% said the process made them feel better about themselves, allowing them to have closure. Only 2% said it made them feel worse.

• This suggests restorative justice achieves some of its aim, helping survivors of crime cope with the aftermath of the incident.

• However, not all research is overwhelmingly positive.

• Wood & Suzuki (2016) argue that restorative processes are not as survivor focused as often reported in satisfaction surveys.

• The researchers say that restorative justice can become distorted, such as when survivors of crime are ‘used’ as a way of helping to rehabilitate offenders, rather than being helped themselves.

• This suggests that the needs of the survivor in restorative justice may been seen as secondary to the need to rehabilitate offenders.

→ LEADS TO A DECREASE IN REOFFENDING

• Another strength is that restorative justice does seem to lead to a decrease in rate of reoffending.

• A meta analysis of ten studies by Strang et al (2013) compared offenders who experienced face-to-face restorative justice schemes with those who just experienced custodial sentencing.

• The restorative justice group was significantly less likely to offend - the reduction was larger in offenders convicted of violent crime than crime against property.

• This suggests that restorative justice has a positive impact on reoffending, maybe more for some types of offence than others and some approaches.

Conflicting Evidence:

→ OFFENDERS MAY ABUSE THE SYSTEM

• One limitation is that offenders may abuse the system.

• The success of the restorative justice programmes may hinge on an offenders intentions being honourable - this is, they must be taking part because they genuinely regret the hurt caused and they want to make amends.

• Psychologists suggest that offenders may use restorative justice as a way to avoid punishment, play down their faults and even take pride in their relationship with the survivor using direct contact.

• This would explain why not all offenders ultimately benefit from restorative justice and go on to offend.