More handpicked essays just for you.
Concept and purpose of restorative justice
Concept and purpose of restorative justice
Restorative justice concept
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
B. Restorative Justice
There is some theoretical ambiguity in the meaning of Restorative Justice in spite of the many definitions and studies done on the subject. Restorative Justice has been defined as “an ethos with practical goals, among which to restore harm by including affected parties in a (direct or indirect) encounter and a process of understanding through voluntary and honest dialogue.” It is primarily concerned with the reinstatement of victims to life before the crime, restoration of the Offender to a well behaved and lawful life, restoration of the injury caused to the community and the creation of a better society in the present and the future.
Restorative Justice is not easily defined because it covers a wide range of
…show more content…
He focused his work on three theories of punishment namely retributive, distributive and restorative; and claimed that the first two focuses on the criminal act thereby denying the victim participation in the justice process and require merely passive participation of the offender. The third however focuses on restoring the harmful effects of these actions and actively involves all parties in the criminal process. He defined Restorative Justice as “a deliberate opportunity for offenders and victims to restore their relationship, along with the chance for the offender to come up with a means to repair the harm done to the …show more content…
He perceives crime as a “wound in human relationship” and an action that “creates an obligation to restore and repair it.” To make his understanding clear, Zehr contrasts his understanding of Restorative Justice with retributive justice and argues that retributive justice understands ‘crime’ as a “violation of the state, defined by lawbreaking and guilt, justice determines blame and administers pain in a context between the offender and the state directed by systematic rules” but restorative justice see things differently as “crime is fundamentally a violation of people and interpersonal
“Restorative justice is a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future” (Munchie, 2004).
This voluntary alternative gives the offender the opportunity to take responsibility for their actions and identify the impact they have had on their victim, while also giving the victim the chance to confront the offender and take steps to repair the harm done. The victim can ask the offender questions about the crime and the offender may apologise or make amends for their actions. Restorative justice is confrontational and can be difficult for both parties but is proven to help both the offender and victim. While it is confrontational for the victim, for some it can be better than testifying in court. Data shows that restorative justice greatly helps victims in their recovery from the offence. Although the benefits of restorative justice in adult offenders is unclear, it significantly reduces the number of reoffenders in youth. For this reason, restorative justice is mostly used for minor infringements and within the youth justice system.
Restorative justice can be defined as a theory related to justice that is concerned on repairing the harm that is caused or revealed by a criminal behavior (Barsh 2005: 359). Over the years, restorative justice has been seen as an effective way of dealing with both social as well as cultural issues of the aboriginal people. Because of these, restorative justice is used in many of the local communities in an effort to correct criminal behavior. This concept is seen as a conceptualization of justice which is in most cases congruent with the cultural and the community values of the aboriginal people. There is growing body of evidence which suggests that there are a number of challenges which accrue the effective implementation of restorative justice amongst the aboriginal people.
Instead of focusing on crime prevention, restoration focuses on repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. Along with restoring property and personal injuries, restoration is meant to bring back some kind of security. Legislators and victims want to know that justice has been done. Van Ness and Strong (1997: 8-9) suggested three core principles for the nature of restorative justice. First, Justice requires the healing of victims, offenders, and communities injured by the crime. Also, they should be permitted to stay involved in the justice process in a timely manner. Lastly, the government should be responsible for preserving a just order and the community should be responsible for establishing peace. The victims family in a murder case can have a since of relief when the offender is sentenced to the death penalty. They can know that justice has been done and will have a sense of security knowing the offender cannot harm anyone else again. The family can now mourn over there loss more
Lorraine Stutzman Amstutz states how schools that claim they are following restorative approaches through their policies in discipline are not necessarily restorative, but have enough flexibility to allow a restorative response.
In fact, restorative justice system response to wrongdoing that emphasizes healing the wounds of victims, offenders, and communities caused or revealed by crime (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2014, p.62). The main goal here is to establish a form of boundaries when it comes to the level and extent of punishment. Non one here on earth is allowed to just display deviant criminal behavior without some form of discipline and/or punishment. Furthermore, for those whom display criminal behavior disrupts the community as well. In addition deterrence is another key factor in the goals of punishment and the efforts to make it back right. Exploring further along to where restoration of the justice system have and still is occurring in today’s
The concept of restorative justice became a game-changer in juvenile justice system. Through the course of time, professionals explored every possible methods and approaches that could positively affect the children without the expense of harming their future and wellbeing. The idea of restorative justice is “administer justice that focuses or repairing the harm done to the victim and the community. (Save the Children-UK, 2005)” The four guiding principles are to: (1) Repair and restore the balance within the community. (2) restitution for the victim. (3) Ensure that the offender understand and take responsibility. (4) Help the offender to change and improve. In South Africa, this is practiced in their community throughout
Similarly to rehabilitation, restoration looks to better society, however, this approach to justice emphasises the needs of the victim. In cases of minor crimes such as vandalism or petty theft, restoration is preferable to rehabilitation. This is because those who commit these minor crimes often don’t have the need for rehabilitation as mental health isn’t a large concern. In these small cases, it is also not burdensome to compensate for the losses of the victim, making restoration the ideal
“Restorative justice is an approach to crime and other wrongdoings that focuses on repairing harm and encouraging responsibility and involvement of the parties impacted by the wrong.” This quote comes from a leading restorative justice scholar named Howard Zehr. The process of restorative justice necessitates a shift in responsibility for addressing crime. In a restorative justice process, the citizens who have been affected by a crime must take an active role in addressing that crime. Although law professionals may have secondary roles in facilitating the restorative justice process, it is the citizens who must take up the majority of the responsibility in healing the pains caused by crime. Restorative justice is a very broad subject and has many other topics inside of it. The main goal of the restorative justice system is to focus on the needs of the victims, the offenders, and the community, and focus
Restorative justice is defined as “using humanistic, no punitive strategies to right wrongs and restore social harmony” (Siegel, 2008, p. 189). Instead of imposing harsh penalties on offenders like long prison sentences or even the death penalty, restorative justice calls for a more rehabilitative approach, such as reconciliation and offender assistance.
Restorative justice is an alternative community based program for juvenile offenders. Instead of sending juvenile offenders to jail or punishing them, they are taught
Agreeing on a definition of restorative justice has proved difficult. One definition is a theory of justice that focuses mostly on repairing the harm caused by criminal behaviour. The reparation is done through a cooperative process that includes all the stakeholders. Restorative justice can also be explained as an approach of justice that aims to satisfy the needs of the victims and offenders, as well as the entire community. The most broadly accepted definition for restorative justice, however, is a process whereby all the parties that have a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve on how to deal with the aftermath. This process is largely focused around reparation, reintegration and participation of victims. That is to say, it is a victim-centred approach to criminal justice, and it perceives crime differently than the adversarial system of justice.
Restorative justice is an alternative process through which the offender must embrace the core values of accountability and responsibility. The offender must focus on the harm done to victims and their needs in recovering are at the center of the restorative justice process. Offenders have to recognize their obligation to their victims in attempt to repair the harm their crimes have caused. The community also carries an obligation to aid the victim in recovering and the offender’s need for transitional support to prevent re-offending and recidivism.
As the purpose of restorative justice is to mend the very relationship between the victim, offender, and society, communities that embrace restorative justice foster an awareness on how the act has harmed others. Braithwaite (1989) notes that by rejecting only the criminal act and not the offender, restorative justice allows for a closer empathetic relationship between the offender, victims, and community. By acknowledging the intrinsic worth of the offender and their ability to contribute back to the community, restorative justice shows how all individuals are capable of being useful despite criminal acts previous. This encourages offenders to safely reintegrate into society, as they are encouraged to rejoin and find rapport with the community through their emotions and
Feinburg (1994, cited in: Easton, 2012: 4) says that punishment is “a symbolic way of getting back at the criminal, of expressing a kind of vindictive resentment”. When punishing an offender there are two key principles that determine the kind of punishment. These are the Retributivism response and the Reductivist response. The first principle, Retributivism, focuses on punishing the offence using 'denunciation' where they denounce the crime that has been committed so society knows they have done wrong, and it also uses 'just deserts' where the equity 'eye for an eye' is the main idea. The second principle, Reductivism, believes that deterrence, incapacitation and rehabilitation is the best strategy to use to punish, its aim is to reduce crime and use punishment to serve a purpose. This essay will look closer and outline the purpose of just deserts and deterrence as punishment in society, although these punishments are used widely across most crimes, this essay will look specifically at prolific offenders.