The Purpose of Restorative Justice Methods Introduction High rates of recidivism demonstrate that the judicial system has been unsuccessful in determining criminal activity. Alternatives to incarceration known as restorative justice has existed for centuries, yet has only been recently implicated into the Canadian judicial system. The practices of restorative justice have been proven very successful for minor offences among adults and youth in bringing together the offenders, victims, and the community. However, acts of violence and serious offences committed by youths have no place in these resolutions. The act of violence is traumatizing to the victim. There is a high chance of re-conviction of a violent offence and these types of …show more content…
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
They are ‘informal’ in the sense that they apply non-state methods of conflict resolution (Kariuki, 2015). These procedures typically aim at restoring social peace instead of enforcing abstract legislation and in many cases reflect prevailing community norms and values. While some may view the restorative approach as ‘soft’ on crime, in reality it promotes the possibility of a win-win outcome for the offender, the victim, and the society in general (Lab, 2015). It is important to realize that this approach does not necessarily reject punishment entirely. Instead, it views it as an addition to restorative measures, such as forgiveness; therefore relieving victims, offenders, and the community at large from the psychological effects of crimes committed (Van Wormer & Walker, 2013). Additionally, restorative justice is a progressive and preventive response that strives to understand crime in its social context. It challenges one to examine the root causes of violence and crime in order to break these cycles (Berlin, 2016). This requires the assumption that crimes or violations are committed against real individuals, rather than against the state. The goal of restorative justice is not just to punish the perpetrator, but to compensate the victim for their loss, to prevent the accused from committing the crime again, and to reintegrate both the victim and offender
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).
Restorative justice is rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community. Restorative justice programs are conferences held to enable offenders, victims and community members to meet face to face to discuss the crime that was done and determine the best way to repair the harm. Usually when offenders hear their victims describe the effect the crime had on them, they often feel sympathy and express remorse. Restorative justice conferences give the victims and community member’s justice and satisfaction. I believe the system is good because it gives criminals time to try and better themselves and try to change, and also gives justice and closure to the victims.
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 stigmatises them, worsening the situation instead of improving it (Johnstone 2003). “Stigmatisation is the kind of shaming that creates outcasts; it is disrespectful, humiliating” (p.85). It breaks the moral bonds between offender and community and can result in the creation of a destructive cycle that may result in fear and isolation. The shaming by stigmatisation creates a negative effect which
During the 1990s, the emphasis and development of restorative justice perhaps reached its summit when both the federal government and the RCMP outwardly problematized conventional justice on the one hand, while they “championed” restorative justice on the other. Victims have generally expressed their satisfaction after participating in restorative justice programs. Moreover, while conventional justice has been plagued by significant reoffending rates, many scholars have found that restorative programs demonstrate success in this regard. Thus, we essentially have a failed experiment by Canada's leading and national police force on the one hand, but widespread academic support for restorative justice both in Canada and internationally on the
Its most commonly known definition was provided by Marshall in 1996, that describes restorative justice as a process where both parties; victims and offenders, work together to restore, resolve and deal with the after effects of the offence and future ramifications (as cited in Van Camp & Wemmers, 2013). The concept of restorative justice originally derived from various indigenous and pre-industrial western justice practices, however, in the 1970's it begun to appear in modern times and was then developed as a reference to describe victim-offender programs that were developed in North America (Strang, 2001). Restorative Justice approaches spread across the world in the 1990's, where many countries such as Canada, Australia and the United Kingdom, began introducing these approaches as alternatives in their criminal justice systems (Braithwaite, 1999). The concept of restorative justice usually involves victim and offender direct participation and is conducted in the form of conferences or mediation. This is where both parties; the victims and offenders, come together fact-to-face in one location, alongside a facilitator, police and support people, and work out together the consequences of the offenders actions and the
Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. Understanding the definition may be really hard to understand, however when we put it in a different form that many can understand it comes down to repair, encounter and transformation. Our book describes restorative justice in three parts as accountability, community protection and competency development (Sieh, 2006).
A key aspect of restorative justice lies in the offender apologizing for the crime and members
Restorative justice is a system of criminal justice that focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large. This criminal justice system that restores promotes accountability between parties involved and builds the community through the provision of assistance and respects to victims and anyone involved in the community because crime disrupts lives.
“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.
When considering studies in corrections on a global scale it is important to understand how to utilize the most applicable method to gather knowledge. Comparative studies are often used to explore methods for explicating or developing knowledge and attitudes. Comparative research examines cases with the intention to reveal the structure and invariance or unchanging relationship for an entire group or population. In this case, and for the purpose of this paper, the comparative research is suggested to be used in corrections on a global scale. Several problems arise when using comparative research studies on a global scale. Some of these issues are cross-cultural research between countries, selecting a compatible research design whether
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 or Community Justice is a fairly new concept. It is aimed more at repairing damages caused by the crime to the victim(s) and the community involved. In this method the victim lays out conditions for the offender and what is necessary to help repair any losses. The community provides assistance to help restore the offender to the community. Some say that this method can be dangerous and bypasses certain safeguards.