A03 Restorative Justice

• Diversity of programmes

  Unlike custodial sentencing, RJ tends to adopt a degree of flexibility in which programmes can be administered and covers a wide range of possible applications. Positive as schemes can be adopted and tailored to needs of individual situation. But general conclusions thus cannot be drawn.
• Relies on offender showing remorse


  Success of RJ programme relies on offender feeling remorse. But there is some danger that some offenders may 'sign up' for the scheme to avoid prison or promise of a reduced sentence, rather than genuine wilingess to make amends. Thus RJ does not always lead to positive outcomes.
• Expensive


  Shapland et al concluded that every £1 spent on RJ would save the criminal justice system would save £8 through reduced reoffending. But meeting between offender and victim may be an emotionally charged experience and so need for mediator who are expensive to hire. RJ programmes also have high dropout rates. Not always the best and most cost-effective solution.
• Feminist critique


  Growing number of feminist commentators like the 'Women's Aid' have called for a legislative ban on use of RJ in domestic violence cases. Concerns relate to power imbalance between abused and abuser.
• Soft opinion


  RJ may reduce rates of recidivism and may prove to be much cheaper than overpopulating prison. Alternatives to custodial sentencing tend to not be supported by public as it is often regarded as soft opinion and this is echoed by politicians keen to show off they are 'tough' on crime.