restorative justice (dealing with offending behaviour)

• individual vs state

  • historically = a person convicted of a criminal offence would have been regarded as committing a crime against the state
  • RJ programmes = switch the emphasis from the need of the state (to enforce law) to the needs of the survivor (to feel compensated in some way and come to terms with the crime)
  • ie = getting the offender to recognise the consequences of their actions and make amends to their victim(s)
  • survivor = victim
• RJ is a healing process

  • RJ = less about 'retribution' = punishing the offender
  • RJ = more about 'reparation' = repairing the harm caused
  • RJ seeks to focus on 2 things:
  • the survivor of the crime and their recovery
  • the offender and their recovery/rehabilitation process
• key features of RJ

  • trained mediator supervises the meeting
  • non-courtroom setting where offender voluntarily meets with survivor(s)
  • face-to-face meeting or remotely via video link
  • survivor explains how the incident affected them, so offender can understand effects
  • active rather than passive involvement of all parties
  • focus on positive outcomes for both survivors and offenders
  • other relevant community members may be involved and explain consequences (eg friends, family members)
• sentencing

  • RJ may occur pre-trial and may affect sentencing
  • it may be given as an alternative to prison (especially if the offender is young)
  • RJ could occur while in prison as an incentive to reduce the length of sentence
• restitution

  • restitution = a monetary payment by the offender to the survivor for harm from the offence
  • financial = offender pays
  • practical = offender does repair themselves
  • emotional = support healing process by helping to rebuild the survivor's confidence
  • eg = in the case of something like vandalism = RJ might require the vandal to spend time fixing the property they damaged
• the Restorative Justice Council (RJC)

  • RJC = sets and monitors standards, and supports survivors and specialists in the field
  • it promotes the use of RJ principles as a general way to prevent and manage conflict (eg in schools, workplaces and communities)
• consent in RJ

  • both the offender and the victim must consent to a restorative justice program
  • the offender must acknowledge responsibility for their crime and be willing to voluntarily take steps to repair the damage they have caused
  • the victim must also be willing to take part in the program, and it should not cause them further trauma.
• strength = RJ supports the needs of survivors

  • the RJC reported the results of a 7-year project: (Shapland)
  • 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
  • 2% said it made them feel worse
  • suggests that RJ is a worthwhile experience and helps survivors of crime cope with the aftermath of the incident
• counterpoint to supporting the needs of survivors

  • RJ programmes are not always as survivor-focused as reported in satisfaction programmes (Wood and Suzuki)
  • survivors of crimes may be used to help rehabilitate offenders, not the other way around
  • suggests that the needs of the survivor may be seen as secondary to the need to rehabilitate offenders
• strength = RJ leads to a decrease in offending

  • Strang et al = in a meta-analysis found offenders who experienced RJ were less-likely to reoffend (though reduction was larger in cases of violent crime than property crime)
  • Bain = found lowered lower recidivism with adult offenders who had to use one-to-one contact with their survivor (rather than community contact)
  • suggests that RJ has a positive impact on reoffending, maybe 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 genuinely feeling regret for their actions
  • Van Gijseghem = suggests that offenders may use restorative justice to avoid punishment, play down their faults or even take pride in their relationship with the survivor
  • this would explain why not all offenders ultimately benefit from RJ and go on to reoffend
• extra evaluation = domestic violence

  • in DV cases = the power imbalance between the abuser and abused puts pressure on survivors to go along with their partner's suggestions during mediation
  • BUT = RJ in DV cases has produced positive results for survivors (eg where a couple wishes to stay together to address the harm caused)
  • suggests that for some types of crime the offender may manipulate the situation so great care is needed