Does Restorative Justice Bring A Fresh And More Just Relationship

Rooted in our civilization, restorative justice was once viewed as a sin against a sovereign society of a King, Queen, or Emperor. Albert Eglash (1975) first articulated restorative justice over retributive and rehabilitative justice, an indeed search for the original status of security of the victim’s feelings. Restorative Justice, a more victim-centered aspect of punishment than the offender, however, the victim should consider, what it is that restorative justice will restore to its original state of security, and would it be enough justice that the victim seeks.

Restitution as a means of rehabilitating offenders tries to give the offenders a better understanding of what they have done, and the effects they have caused due to their actions. Punishing them with jail time does not seem to be enough to get offenders to understand the magnitude of their crime. If they have the ability to pay back the victims it will give them a sense of accomplishment and will allow them to feel as if they are doing good and correcting their mistakes. Restitution as a means of reconciling offender and their victims give the ideology that if they fully paid the person they hurt that they can both put their anger behind them and move on from what had happened.

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 based on the principle that criminal behavior injures not only the victim but also the community and the offender, and any effort to resolve these problems caused by criminal behavior should involve all of these parties. Common restorative justice initiatives are victim-offender mediation, circle sentencing, community holistic healing programs, and family group conferences. A key to all these responses to criminal behavior is to address not only the offender, but all parties involved including the victim and their families, offender's family, community citizens, and even the police officers themselves.

Restorative justice (RJ) is the practice of trying to restore the victims of harm or trauma back to a state of peace and contentment. It is used to benefit the victims so they can in a way reclaim a part of themselves. Restorative justice has three main models/practices; Victim Offender Conferencing (VOC), Circle Processes, and Family Group Conferences. Victim offender conferencing is the most common application of restorative justice in North America. In, The Little Book of Victim Offender Conferencing, Lorraine Stutzman Amstutz explains, “the victim offender conferencing process brings victims and offenders of crime together in a face-to-face meeting prepared and led by a trained facilitator, often a community volunteer, to talk about the impact of the consequences of the crime.”

Our current system of law and justice is oriented completely to the offender. “Restorative” justice is a term used to describe a number of programs that seek to do…what? What is “Restorative” justice and how may it work? Pg 67

Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that emphasizes the rehabilitation of offenders through mending ties with the victims and the community. A better explanation of restorative justice is a theory of justice that emphasizes repairing the harm caused by criminal behavior. It is best accomplished through cooperative processes that include everyone involved. This can lead to transformation of people, relationships and communities.

The violation of law is not the sole focus in the restorative process. It is an attempt to repair the harm of the offense by having those directly involved mutually agree how the offender can best compensate or restore their victim, community, and self (Saxon, 2013). Traditional methods of justice often remove the victim from the community and relies only on the direction of laws to impose sentences on the offender (Saxon, 2013). One of the major drawbacks of this process is that it empowers victims, offenders, and communities in making the sentencing agreement and may result in some offenders being sentenced more harshly for the same crime another person committed (Saxon, 2013).

Restorative justice is a very complex process in the justice system. It is a positive program that helps in the aid of victims of crimes. The process for restorative justice is broken down into steps which map out how the process should take place. According to Johnstone, “Restorative justice is the theory that justice aids the victim and emphasizes the repair of harm caused by unjust or harmful behavior.” In my opinion the restorative justice process is a great accomplishment to the justice system. Restorative justice does not always work as intended but the theory of which it is intended for is enough to be improved upon.

Restorative Justice was created in effort to repare the victim of a crime (emotionally and mentally), along with restoring the criminals view and attitude towards the public/community. It is based off the Christian belief of forgiving, and working things out with the one who has done you wrong. Restorative Justice has the community focus on the victim, and takes the criminals attention away from his/her punishment. This justice system works “through a process of negotiation, meditation, victim empowerment, and reparation” (“Restorative Justice”). Restorative Justice is often used in elementary schools. For example, if a kid picked on you, you were sent into the hallway to talk through it with them. This is Restorative Justice. This justice

Restorative justice is a response to misconduct that gives people the opportunity to mature whether

However, it quickly became a way of making the offender pay for every little thing possible, all in the name of “correcting the wrong”. There are certainly flaws within this policy, as there are in all areas of the criminal justice system. On the bright side, the underlying reasoning for the restorative justice program seem to be right, and there are many things within this model that could be seen as beneficial for both the victim and the offender. Many areas within this model allow for closure, and allow for forgiveness. It also allows for more possibility than the retributive model. This is not always the case in models that focus on more harsh punishment for the

I consider that restorative justice can be a viable decision-making approach in some circumstances. Various studies indicate that these programs can be effective to improve satisfactory resolutions among victims and offenders, increased compliance with restitution for offenses committed, and reduce recidivism of offenses. In the area of psychology I ponder that victim-offender mediation, circles, and victim-offender panels can help on existing decision-making processes or prepare professionals for future decisions. Victim-offender mediation includes the victim, offender, and trained mediators. In this forum, both the victim and the offender express their views and feelings about the issue in hand, and then come to a mutual agreement on how to solve the problem. The mediator is there only to facilitate the decision-making process, not favor any parties involve. In this process both the victim and the offender must be willing to voluntarily confront each other.

When restorative justice was first created it came from the perspectives and views of the Europeans. Restorative justice is based on a retributive philosophy. Retributive philosophy is a theory that takes the punishment into account, then makes the criminal forfeit something in return. Retributive philosophy is, involved in conflict, intended as punishment, guided by codified laws, written rules, procedures and guidelines, and is arranged in order of rank(Armour). Restorative justice was originally created to reduce violence (Centre for Justice and Reconciliation).

This paper will focus on retributive justice and restorative justice. Let’s begin with the definition of each. Retributive justice is a theory of justice that considers that punishment, if proportionate, is a morally acceptable response to crime. On the other hand, restorative justice is the opposite. It is a theory of justice that focuses on the needs of the victims and the offenders. So which of these should be morally right?