This essay aims to make clear the system of restorative justice and its aims towards youth offending, whilst arguing points for and against the current system and whether or not it is more appropriate in terms of dealing with youth offending. It will also define restorative justice as well as defining what is meant by conventional justice. Making clear how and why these two systems came to be a part of youth justice whilst concluding as to which if either is more appropriate in dealing with youth offending behaviour. “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).
Restorative
…show more content…
There are already existing restorative practices that are place within the conventional criminal justice system at present namely probation, restitution and community service (Zehr, 1990). Admittedly they are not readily termed restorative justice programs however they are grounded in its theory.
The current conventional criminal justice process takes a more punitive, ‘retributive’ view of criminal justice. The retributive approach has become grounded into our current system of justice whereby it intends to establish blame on offenders and make them repay their debt to society by inflicting a form of punishment (Ball, 2000). The general stance in relation to the ‘retributive system’ is that its more offender-oriented and its focus is the past rather than the future (Griffiths, 1999). In addition to establishing blame, it tends to give less attention to future-oriented concerns such as how to repair the damages caused by the crime and how future recurrences can be prevented (Young, M, 1999). It has been argued that the existing ‘retributive system’ places excessive emphasis on the past whilst being less constructive towards victims, offenders and the society, as a result youths tend to get labelled as criminal from an early age leading in some cases to a life delinquent offending behaviour (Braithwaite, 1989). At present a crime is viewed as a social conflict within society, and so a crime is perceived an offense against society rather
Restorative Justice, according to Google, is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. It does not have a place in our society for several reasons. It is ineffective because it doesn’t punish people, doesn’t change them, and makes the situation even worse in most cases.
Restorative Justice will not make the basic prejudices on our society worse than what they are, however restorative justice should restore synchronization within the community or society as a whole through based on discussion of the offender’s underlying problems and not to reoffend against the victim in particular nor any member of society, and what charges the offender may face if he re-offends “Restorative justice is deliberative justice; it is about people deliberating over the consequences of crimes, and how to deal with them and prevent their recurrence” (Braithwaite, 1998, p. 438).
The criminal justice system approaches young offenders through unique policies to address the challenges of dealing with juvenile offending. They take special care when dealing with juveniles in order to stop them from repeat offending and stop any potential bad behaviour which could result in future. Juveniles have the highest tendency to rehabilitate and most adopt law-abiding lifestyles as they mature. There are several factors influencing juvenile crime including psychological and social pressures unique to juveniles, which may lead to an increase in juvenile’s risks of contact with the criminal justice system.
Restorative justice is a form of reconciliation after an offense that involves considering the harms done when addressing consequences but also includes the victim, the offender, and the community in the healing process. Restorative justice relates to social justice in that the needs of everyone involved are being addressed and everyone feels like they have a say in what’s going on. By pressing for restorative justice practices to be followed, we are straying away from the concept of retribution and opening a window for healing for everyone (Robinson, Handout “Restorative
"Restorative justice is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of the victims and the offenders, as well as the involved
The role of society in the reintegration of offenders is vital. The applications of sentencing in the criminal justice system is often misguided by the failure to recognize the role of community in transforming offenders into law- abiding citizens. By using restorative approaches when imposing sanctions and sentences on criminals, there is potential for them to be rerooted into their community and become a constructive member of society, also know as restorative justice, is something rarely witnessed when harsh sentences that are aimed towards punishment are imposed, (Aida Y. Hass, Caryn E. Saxon, 2011). Hass stated that the restorative justice came about to address the damage harsh sentencing does to the offenders at least from a rehabilitation
Albert Eglash first used the term restorative justice in the milieu of the criminal justice system in the 1950’s (Daniel W. Van Ness, 2014, p. 90). Eglash found restorative justice to be one of three components to the formula of criminal justice. He indicated two additional elements, retributive and distributive justice, focus solely on the offender resulting with the victims having little to no active involvement in the justice process. Restorative justice however, offers the offender and the victim both active roles in reparation and rehabilitation throughout the process of justice (Daniel W. Van Ness, 2014, p. 91).
86). Restorative Justice is guided by factors such as the victims must give up and withdraws their free, voluntary, and informed consent to participate in the restorative justice process; they also must be fully informed about the process and its consequences. The offenders must admit responsibility for the offence, and both the victim and offender must agree on the essential facts of the case. The offenders and victims can have legal advice at any time and can withdraw if they so wish. Admissions of guilt cannot be used as evidence in any later legal proceedings. Failure to reach an agreement cannot be used in any legal proceeding to justify a harsher sentence than would otherwise be given out. The consequences of failing to honour an agreement is to be clearly stated (Goff, 2011, p.86).When the restorative justice methods are implicated the “disapproval will then be dispensed within an ongoing relationship with the offender based on respect” (Goff, 2011, p. 90). The victim and significant others will then confront the offender, explain what harm was caused, and an attempt to build a moral conscience and strengthen social bonds begin (Goff, 2011, p.90). A key component to restorative
If we are to understand restorative justice, we need to go back and look at the theories that explain how the society-offender relationship works. Braithwaite (1989) argued that there are five dominant theories that set the basics: labelling, subcultural, control, opportunity, and learning theories; but this essay will only be talking about labelling and subcultural theories. Labelling theory was first introduced by Frank Tannenbaum (1938) and developed by many sociologists in 1960s. Theory indicates that “the person becomes the thing he is described as being” (Tannenbaum, 1938, pp.20), and we tend to label offenders as evil, wrong, or bad individuals although label can change depending the crime size. Labelling perspective is more into what happens after the crime rather than the reason caused
Latimer, Dowden, and Muise (2005) showed comparable results of the effectiveness of restorative justice programs by conducting a meta-analysis. 22 studies were collected through a comprehensive literature search and experts were consulted to reveal any unpublished research pertitnant to the effects of the restorative justice program, VOM on juvenile recidivism (Latimer et al., 2005). The outcome measures for this study focused on recidivism, along with restitution compliance and victim and offender satisfaction (Latimer et al., 2005). Juveniles that participated in each study were assigned to either VOM groups or traditional justice comparison groups. The overall results of the meta-analysis showed a positive effect size of .07 on juvenile recidivism (Latimer et al., 2005).
The United Nations has said that human rights and juvenile justice should not counteract one another, and restorative justice is the best way to deal with children who behave outside of the law in a way that respects their rights as well as promotes societal justice (Odala, 2012). Restorative justice (RJ) involves many different concepts, but the primary goal is to restore the harm caused by the crime. RJ participants are not limited to those who were directly involved, i.e. the victim and offender. Instead, restorative justice takes a more holistic approach, considering the families of both the victim and offender and the community at large. Restorative justice has widespread benefits that are not limited to adults. It is worthwhile to consider the implications of restorative justice techniques on the juvenile population, both in schools and as an alternative to the criminal justice system.
The perception by many involved in the justice system in general, and youth justice in particular, is that the present model of punitive retributive justice, often involving incarceration does not work. Indeed, it may be compounding an already huge social problem. This realisation has lead many to look for alternative systems. At present there is a considerable momentum building that advocates the use of a restorative justice model. Marshall has defined restorative justice as a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to deal with the aftermath of
Restorative justice has been found to permit the victim of a crime, the offender of the crimes, and the affected members of the affected community of that crime an opportunity to respond to the crime (Fisher, Ury, & Patton,1991) . By recognizing that criminal acts are more comprehensive than that of the traditional approach of law breaking, restorative justice takes on a more contemporary approach to criminal justice (Gerkin, 2012). Restorative justice measures its success in the amount of harm that is repaired or prevented, rather than the amount of punishment that is inflicted to an offender (Fisher et al., 1991).
Restorative justice advocates promote restorative justice as a better reaction to criminal behavior than traditional (retributive) criminal justice, claiming advantages for offenders, victims and society (Sherman & Strang, 2007). Sherman and Strang (2007) summarized the advocates’ arguments as two major claims: the procedural claim and the effectiveness claim. Restorative justice advocates claim that restorative justice is a more humane and respectful way of processing crimes than traditional criminal justice (the procedural claim), and that restorative justice produces better results than traditional criminal justice, like less repeat offending and more repair of harm to victims (the effectiveness claim) (Sherman & Strang,
For centuries, our justice system had one common goal and that was retribution. Our justice system was a retributive system, it severely punishes those who committed wrong and/or unjustly acts and crimes. However, approaching the 20th century, we as a society has come to realize that our retributive system, we’re creating more problems and hardships for, not only, the person who committed the act but also society itself. In this awakening, we have come together to create a new conceptual system style called Restorative Justice. This style has spread itself throughout the criminal justice field because we were moving from a punishing state to a rehabilitation state. Because of that, the juvenile justice system also has adopted this new system as well, instead of punishing young offenders, they wanted to fix and help them move past their criminal ways. Where there is something new, flaws shall emerge afterward, but first, we need to know what is Restorative Justice?