Restorative Justice

• Restorative justice

  A system for dealing with offending behaviour which focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with the victims
• Restorative justice

  • Switches the emphasis from the needs of the state (to enforce the law and punish) to the needs of the victim in coming to terms with the crime and moving on
  • Both the offender and victim are encouraged to be active participants in the process, which can take place face-to-face or using alternative methods e.g. via letter
  • The focus is on positive outcomes for survivors and offenders, and on acceptance of responsibility and positive change for offenders
  • There is less emphasis on punishment
• Victim-Offender Mediation

  1. Supervised meeting between two parties

  2. Attended by trained mediator

  3. Victim given opportunity to confront offender

  4. Offender sees consequences of actions, including emotional distress

  5. Offender may make financial restitution or repair damage
• Victim-Offender Mediation

  • Can be alternative to custodial sentencing
  • Can be 'add-on' to community service
  • Can be incentive leading to reduction of existing sentence
• •Restorative justice addresses two key aims of custodial sentencing
• –Rehabilitation of offenders – as the victim has the opportunity to explain the impact of the crime, the offender understands the effects on the victim. Therefore, they learn to take the perspective of others, which reduces the likelihood of reoffending, especially as the offender is encouraged to take responsibility for their crime.–
• Retribution – the offender ‘suffers’ by showing feelings of guilt or compensating the survivor. They may also show understanding of the effects of their actions. The victim’s explanation offers the offender the chance of developing empathy, which reduces the likelihood of reoffending.–
• Restorative Justice

  Reduces the victim’s sense of victimisation because they are no longer powerless and have a voice. They may also develop a greater understanding of the offender by listening to their account, which reduces their sense of being harmed.
• Eval- Supporting Evidence

  •The UK Restorative Justice Council (2015) report 85% satisfaction from victims in face-to-face meetings with their offender(s). Avon and Somerset police reported 92.5% victim satisfaction with restorative justice for victims of violent crime.••This supports that victims who have participated in restorative justice feel it was beneficial. This is a particular advantage of restorative justice compared to the other ways of dealing with offending behaviour because it is the only method that truly aims to support the victims as well as rehabilitate offenders.
• Ethical concerns with restorative justice

  • Victim may feel worse afterwards
  • Power imbalance in domestic violence cases
  • Potential for abuse of power, e.g. victim/family ganging up on offender, especially if offender is a child
  • Victim or offender may 'lose their nerve' leading to high dropout rates
• Restorative justice programmes

  • Need to be carefully balanced and mediated to ensure benefit to both victim and offender
  • May only be appropriate for certain types of offence rather than every crime
• Women's Aid have called for a legislative ban on the use of restorative justice in domestic violence cases because of the power imbalance in the relationship between the abuser and the abused
• Making people face up to their wrongdoing can lead to abuses of power
• The high dropout rates from one or the other 'losing their nerve' may mean that restorative justice is not currently the best long-term solution
• Eval- Offender Remorse

  •The success of restorative justice programmes relies on the extent to which an offender feels remorse for their actions. There is a danger that some offenders may ‘sign up’ for the scheme to avoid prison, or for the promise of a reduced sentence, rather than a genuine willingness to want to make amends with the victim.••This means that restorative justice programmes may not lead to positive outcomes when participants do not agree to take part for the best of intentions, which may limit the overall effectiveness of the programmes.
• Restorative justice

  • Retribution, rehabilitation and deterrence can all be achieved
  • The process of facing the victim is seen as a punishment (although preferable to incarceration)
  • May be enough to act as a deterrent
• Avoiding custodial sentencing

  Negative psychological effects of custodial sentencing can be avoided
• Restorative justice

  Expensive as it requires a trained specialist mediator
• Estimates from the Restorative Justice Council claim that reduced reoffending means that £8 is saved for every £1 spent on the restorative process
• Restorative justice is a cost-effective way of dealing with offending behaviour
• Restorative justice

  • Seems to reduce rates of recidivism
  • May prove cheaper than running and staffing overcrowded prisons
• Alternatives to custodial sentencing tend not to gather much public support
• Alternatives to custodial sentencing

  Often regarded as soft options because the deterrent and retribution are less explicitly obvious and the aim of incapacitation is not met
• These sentiments tend to be echoed by politicians who are keen to convince the electorate that they are 'tough on crime'
• Despite its seeming effectiveness

  Restorative justice may never be tolerated by the public on a widespread scale, limiting its overall impact on recidivism rates