Introduction:
Restorative justice is the idea that harm caused by a crime can be repaired (Wallis, 2007) and that the victim and community can be restored to how it was previously, rather than resorting to punishing the offender (Liebmann, 2007). At the moment, the criminal justice system is based on retributive justice over restorative justice; this is where a lawbreaker receives punishment in proportion to the crime inflicted (Milovanovic, 2007) and is given back what they have given the victim: harm (Koneke, 2011). Restorative justice has been seen as a potentially transformative social practice that could see the end for the need for harsh criminal punishments and incarceration (Menkel-Meadow, 2007). This could change public debate about crime and justice completely because the idea behind crime and justice is beginning to move further away from the traditional, retributive system that we are so accustomed too, and towards a more liberal, restorative justice system that focuses on repairing the harm done by the offender.
Restorative Justice:
Restorative justice can be seen as a very beneficial thing because of the good it does to the community. It is felt that ordinary people who are directly affected by the wrongdoing should take an active part in deciding what should happen in the aftermath of the offence (Zernova, 2007) because it enables victims to meet with the offender and discuss what happened. This thereby requires the offender to be held accountable for the harm they have caused and that their accountability involves understanding and acknowledging the harm and taking steps to make things right (Zehr, 1990). Williams (2004) further argues that restorative justice is intended to represent the ideal that offenders sh...
... middle of paper ...
... Justice Press
Umbreit, M. (2001) The Handbook of Victim Offender Mediation: An Essential Guide to Practice and research California: Jossey-Bass In., Publishers
Umbreit, M. and Coates, R. (1992) Victim offender mediation: an analysis of programs in four states of the US Minneapolis: Minnesota Citizens’ Council on Crime & Justice
Umbreit, M., Coates, R. and Roberts, A. (1997) Cross-national impact of Restorative Justice through mediation and dialogue ICCA Journal on Community Corrections 8:2 pages 46–50.
Wallis, B. (2007) Guide to restorative justice. London: Jessica Kingley Publishers
Williams, K. (2004) ‘Victims, survivors and victimiology’ in Textbook on Criminology. New York: Oxford University Press
Zehr, H. (2002) The Little Book of Restorative Justice. USA: Good books
Zernova, M. (2007) Restorative justice: ideals and realities. Oxon; Ashgate Publishing
Restoration Restorative justice is based on bringing together the victim, the offender, and the community; all have equal parts in repairing the relationships destroyed by
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.
Focuses on harms and consequent needs (the victims’, as well as the communities’ and the offenders’).
There are better ways to punish criminals and protect society than mass incarceration. The state and local governments should be tough on crime, but “in ways that emphasize personal responsibility, promote rehabilitation and treatment, and allow for the provision of victim restitution where applicable” (Alec, 2014). The government also succeeds in overseeing punishment but fails to “…take into account the needs of offenders, victims, and their communities.” (Morris, 2002: Pg. 1 and 2). Alternatives to incarceration, such as sentencing circles, victim offender mediation, and family conferences, can successfully hold criminals responsible while allowing them a chance to get “back on their feet”. Research has proven that rehabilitation has lowered the rate of re-offenders, reducing the crime rate, protecting communities and also saves a lot of
Pros of the restorative justice system are that it brings parties together in crime. Instead of a short term goal, the restorative justice system takes a long-term approach to reducing crime and violence using different kinds of methods. In restorative justice programs, offenders work with others affected by their criminal actions. Restorative justice promotes instilling positive behaviors in young criminals and teaching long-lasting changes in behavior to prevent future crimes. There also could be negative consequences from the restorative justice system. For restorative justice to work, criminals and their victims must communicate about the crime and its consequences. Since violent crimes often leave victims feeling helpless and vulnerable, encouraging communication can result in increased anxiety and fear. Additionally, communication might breach confidentiality for victims of violent crimes, such as rape and assault, because they must discuss the outcome of the crime and how it has impacted
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.
The program is modeled after similar programs that begun in the 1970s and 1980s in New Zealand and Australia (Lawson 2004). It is used in schools, juvenile courts, and youth centers. However, for this discussion I will use the facts from Catherine Lawson’s restorative justice study in Missouri. In Lawson’s writings she references Derek R. Brookes, who came up with the conclusion that restorative justice attempts to produce these three outcomes: reconciliation, reparation, and transformation. Reconciliation is stage where all the apologies happen. Reparation is the stage at which the offender takes responsibility for his or actions, by providing fair restitution to the victim and lastly transformation is the stage where the offender is re-guided back into society as a productive member and is out of the cycle of
This approach has introduced a criminal justice policy agenda. In the past, victims to criminal activities have been outsiders to the criminal conflict. In recent times, many efforts have been made to give the victims a more central role in the criminal justice system. Some of these efforts were introduced a few years back, though even at that time, these efforts were seen as long overdue. Some of these efforts include access to state compensation and forms of practical support. For advocates of restorative justice, crime is perceived primarily as a violation of people and relationships, and the aim is to make amends for all the harm suffered by victims, offenders and communities. The most commonly used forms of restorative justice include direct mediation, indirect mediation, restorative cautioning, sentencing panels or circles and conferencing. In recent...
From the origins of criminal victimization, we begin with blaming the offended. (Silverii). Still what is more baffling is to question whether or not it is one's duty to make sure victims won't be victimized again or if victims of a crime that are unreported should even be considered victims. There are three main issues that are provided through victimology and these are context, connections, and investigative direction (Turvey). Most victims are not just victims they're perceived by a criminal as an ideal victim. An ‘ideal victim’ is someone who has played no part in their victimization by an offender who was solely responsible for the incident. In the early 1970s, research by the National Opinion Research Center and the President's Commission on Law Enforcement, and the Administration of Justice indicated that many crimes were not reported to police. A lot of times victims are not prepared for the insensitive and unpleasant treatment they may incur from the police, hospitals, and judicial system. In response, the U.S. Census Bureau began conducting the annual National Crime Victimization Survey in 1973. The survey provides the largest national forum for victims to describe the impact of crime and characteristics of violent offenders. The data includes type of crime, month, time, and location of the crime; relationship between victim and offender; characteristics of the offender; self-protective actions taken by the victim during the incident and results of those actions; consequences of the victimization; type of property lost; whether the crime was reported to the police and reasons for reporting or not reporting; and offender use of weapons, drugs, and alcohol.
A common focus of rehabilitation states that “criminality is a disease that can be cured”. The theory states that many offenders who are let into rehabilitation are usually treated with medical or drug treatments. The rehabilitation sentencing theory is mainly only given to children and or first-time offenders and not repeat offenders because they obviously have not learned from their past mistakes and have no hope left. The mentality is to find people who are capable of being cured and are able to get another chance in life. Finally, restorative justice is the theory of rehabilitating the victims and not the offenders. While rehabilitation mainly focuses on the offender, restorative justice focuses on getting the offender and victim together to be able to change and address the damage that was done. The goal is to remove the harm done to the victim by having them work together in the hope of
...apabilities to deal with this which is not the case so much nowadays as Tony Marshall (1999) argues. There are criticisms over procedures, loss of rights such as an independent and impartial forum as well as the principle of proportionality in sentencing. There is also an unrealistic expectation that restorative justice can produce major changes in deviant behaviour, as there is not enough evidence to support this claim (Cunneen, 2007). Levrant et al (1999) on the other hand suggests that restorative justice still remains unproven in its’ effectiveness to stop reoffending and argues that its appeal lies in its apparent morality and humanistic sentiments rather than its empirical effectiveness. He continues to argue that it allows people to feel better within themselves through having the moral high ground rather than focusing on providing justice to the offender.
Davis, R. C., Lurigio, A. J., & Skogan, W. G. (1997). Victims of crime (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
...mmunity involvement in justice and to provide on-site support services for victims (Hall 2010, p. 196). Although reforms to prevent crime have been increasingly influenced by victims, they are still widely recognised as neglected parties in the criminal system, mainly during the prosecution and sentencing of offenders (Strang, Heather, Lawrence W. Sherman 2003).
Johnstone, G. and Ness, D. (2007) Handbook of Restorative Justice. USA: Willan Publishing. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/the-big-question-what-are-the-alternatives-to-prison-and-do-they-work-419388.html [Accessed 01 January 2014].
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