Restorative justice

    Cards (19)

    • Historically, a person convicted of a criminal offence would have been regarded as committing a crime against the state- in contrast, restorative justice programmes switch the emphasis from the need of the state (to enforce the law) to the needs of the victim (to come to terms with the crime and move on)
    • Victim takes an active role & offenders sees the consequences of their actions
    • Victims are encourages to take an active role in the processes
    • Offenders are required to take responsibility and face up to what they have done
    • A supervised meeting between the two parties is arranged and managed by a trained mediator
    • Restorative justice is a process of managed collaboration between offender and victim based on the principles of healing and empowerment
    • Braithwaite suggests: 'crime hurts, justice should heal'
    • The victim is given the opportunity to explain how the incident affected them (including emotional distress)- an important part of the rehabilitative process
    • Key features of RJ programmes:
      • focus on acceptance of responsibility and positive change, less emphasis on punishment
      • non-courtroom setting where offenders voluntarily choose to meet face-to-face with victim (survivor)
      • active rather than passive involvement of all parties
      • focus on positive outcomes for both survivors and offenders
    • Not all RJ programmes involve face-to-face contact between offender and victim
    • Variations of RJ:
      Occasionally, the offender may make some financial restitution to the victim to compensate for the physical or psychological damage done
    • Variations of RJ:
      May be an 'add-on' to community service or as an incentive which may lead to the reduction of an existing sentence
    • Variations of RJ:
      The offender may fix any physical damage themselves (e.g. in the case of a burglary)
    • The Restorative Justice Council (RJC) is an independent body
    • Role of the RJC:
      • establish clear standards for the use of restorative justice and to support victims and specialist professionals
      • it advocates the use of restorative justice in schools, hospitals, prisons, etc.
    • Strength: diversity
      There is flexibility in the way RJ programmes can be used (unlike custodial sentencing) and RJ covers a wide range of possible applications (prisons, schools, etc.). This is positive in the sense that schemes can be adapted and tailored to the needs of the individual situation. However, this does not prevent difficulties in terms of drawing conclusions about the effectiveness of the approach
    • Limitation: reliance on offender showing remorse
      The success of RJ programmes may hinge on the extent to which the offender feels remorse for their actions. Some offenders may 'sign up' to avoid prison or for a reduced sentence. The victim themselves may have an ulterior motive- to seek revenge or retribution of their own. This means that RJ programmes may not lead to positive outcomes where the participants themselves do not have the best of intentions
    • Limitation: feminist critique
      Feminist commentators take issue with the widespread use of RJ. The charity Women's Aid had called fr a legislative ban on its use in domestic violence cases. They are concerned about the power imbalance in the relationship between abuser and abused, and the fact that the wider community, which should be supportive, often resorts to blaming the victim. This questions the suitability of RJ programmes for certain types of offence
    • Limitation: RJ programmes are seen as a 'soft option'
      RJ may reduce recidivism rates and is cheaper than running overcrowded prisons, but it often does not receive public support. Programmes are often regarded as soft options, a view echoed by politicians keen to convince voters they are 'tough on crime'. So despite their effectiveness, the political will to use RJ is not always there