The Justice And Restorative Justice

Restorative justice is a style of discipline found within the criminal justice system that focuses on the rehabilitation of juvenile and adult offenders through reconciliation with victims and society at large (Richards 2009). Practices and programs that reflect restorative purposes will respond to crime by identifying harm and pain caused, taking steps to mitigate damage, and finally repairing the harm caused. Restorative justice encompasses all

Even though restorative justice is the new alternative, the empirical data on the positive social implications of using it rather than the retributive justice are worth the change in terms of social benefits. . More so, restorative justice can be applied to both the minors and adults without causing controversies that are initiated majorly by social activists. Even though some governments have argued that restorative justice is beneficial to the proprietor rather than the victim, the change is inevitable if we are to socially change the mindsets of criminals. More so, restorative justice has been studied to provide greater satisfaction to the victims through assuring accountability and by the drastic reduction in repeat offences. Through the development of theoretical approaches we can thus understand the social implications of restorative justice and how we can potentially integrate the same to states’ judicial system.

The restorative justice movement emerged in the 1970s in Canada. However, some of its key principles were already in place. At one point in history, crimes were not seen against the state. Instead, it was up to the victim and/or their family to seek reparation from the offender. This approach was very victim-centered, but this changed as crimes began to be seen as crimes against the state as well. This made the justice system more offender-centered. People began getting together and formed a general consensus that victims deserved the same rights as the offender. This is how the restorative justice model began. The movement was based on the belief that we should not be solely focused on punishing the offender or trying to pit the defendant

Restorative justice is a way to view crime in a positive way, viewing it as a way to help those who offend and those who are affected. By punishing an offender immediately no matter the crime committed they are stigmatized instantly by society, their peers, family and possibly even themselves. The negative stigmatization slowly but surely removes them from society as they are seen as people who do not belong and people who break the rules. Restorative justice helps because they are not stigmatized and punished immediately and by not doing so, and instead helping and guiding them, on what will happen, how to re enter society and having the people who were affected by their actions express their experience and feelings the offender will see the error of his or her ways.

Karp argues that restorative justice is a more effective system than the prevailing retributive model. Within the book it is asserted that restorative justice systems had a higher degree of satisfaction for victims than the retributive approach(page 46). In addition to the higher degree of victim satisfaction the restorative approach was also less likely to result in an appeal, with a less than one percent of cases being appealed(page 47). (MAYBE A LITTLE MORE) These are the tangible benefits when compared empirically to retributive systems, restorative approaches have other benefits as well.

When hearing about restorative justice, one can have various ideas or assumptions of what this means based in either personal experiences or preconceived ideas. Allen, Latessa, and Ponder define restorative justice as a theory of justice

Restorative justice is an innovative approach to the criminal justice system that focuses on repairing the harm caused by crimes committed. The methods used in the conventional justice system may deter the offender from committing further crimes, but it does neither repair the harm caused, nor help them acknowledge their responsibility, instead it stigmatizes them, worsening the situation instead of improving it. Many have attempted to facilitate a consensual understanding for RJ. The truth is that has not yet been possible for RJ proponents to formulate a definition to which all would be subscribed. (Gavrielides, 2008)

Every year thousands of youth are incarcerated for petty crimes or crimes that they may not have fully understood at the time. Incarcerating youth not only sets them up for failure, but it also costs the tax payers of this country millions of dollars every year (Rejust paper). Although it seems just for a person to do the time after committing a crime, perhaps there is an alternative to incarceration. The most appropriate alternative to incarceration appears to be restorative justice. Restorative justice is based

Last year in Chicago, there were nearly 800 homicides that took place throughout the city and that is just Chicago alone! Imagine what the numbers would be like if you added up all the homicides that took place in each state throughout the United States. It would be outrageous and that would only be for our 50 states, it does not include other countries around our world. Crime rates are skyrocketing and something needs to be done. For some of these offenders, receiving a harsh punishment and being put in jail makes them realize what they have done and makes them want to better themselves once they get out. On the other hand, other offenders serve their time, get released, and go right back to their old ways, the ways that put them in jail in the first place. Punishment does not seem to work for everyone; therefore a new approach must be put into action, this approach being restorative justice. Restorative justice is a groundbreaking

Since ancient times, restorative and retributive practices were used. Retributive justice is oriented toward punishing the offender for breaking laws and rules. Prevention of future crimes or rehabilitation is not considered when punishing the offender. In restorative justice, the focus is mainly on the victim. Harm is amended and the offender is rehabilitated. Both of these practices are used today around the world.

“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).

The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.

Restorative justice has some key restorative values that are vital in the restorative justice conference to make the experience ‘restorative’. Concerning addressing victim needs and concerns means for listening, respecting, being non-judgmental, not blaming the victim and apologizing. The RJ system was bought as an alternative to the criminal justice system to give greater emphasis on victim rights and needs, offender accountability and community involvement. Throughout the essay, there will be an insight into how Restorative Justice addresses needs of victims in terms of the different proponents such as Information provided to victim, restitution/compensation, emotional and practical needs met, participation and involvement of victim and protection of victim, which (Wemmers and Marisa, 2002) as essentials to victims participating in the practice. The two countries that will be addressed will have had restorative justice built out of injustices and over-representation of the current criminal justice system to the indigenous peoples of those countries.

Re-integration not segregation might be said to be the moral centre of restorative justice. Daly and others see it, as at least in part, a feminist issue, with the role of the state being a dominating masculine presence, which is in essence aggressive to both victim and offender, and a change in this dynamic must occur to allow inclusiveness (Daly,2008).

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?