Within the judicial and criminal justice systems, restorative justice is seen as a forward moving process in regards to the way in which the sentencing of offenders is handled (Britto & Reimund, 2013). Restorative justice works to focus on the needs of both the victim and the offender but incorporates the community as well as those who support both the victim and offender (Britto & Reimund, 2013). The approach of restorative justice in not simply a means by which society responds to and reduces crime but instead, provides an equivalently valuable social response to crime (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). Furthermore, the restorative approach places emphasis on the personal and relational harms which were caused by the crime while creating space for dialogue concerning the actual damage, whether directly or …show more content…
Taking this first step in reconciliation allows for a face to face encounter where restorative dialogue can occur between the victim and the offender in a genuine interaction (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). Furthermore, this process requires that the offender take explicit responsibility for the actions committed while listening and responding to the victim affected by their crime so as to present their own approach for repairing the damage caused (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). This process promotes honest dialogue and an empowering experience for the victim as they feel that their needs are heard and feelings expressed (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt, 2013). In all, restorative justice benefits the victim, the offender and the community as community ties are strengthened while the process of the restorative approach discourages the offender from committing further crimes through the use of an open-minded and rehabilitative process (Dancig-Rosenberg and Galt,
Money is everything in today’s world, more money means more power , so corporations for their major contributions to the economy by giving jobs and paying taxes are favoured by judges whilst an individual is nothing to compare, and yet again corporation can afford to hire better lawyers than what an individual could, rarely does it happen that you hear on the news about an individual who beat a corporation in a court debate, also because of the toll and srees that an individual would have to go through in order to beat a corporation in court. Natalie DeFreitas has made numerous points as to why restorative justice as better than/more effective than the current law system here in Canada. The speaker talked about the 70% recurrence of crimes whereas only 15% repeat crimes after restorative justice, Texas’ crime rates and jail enrollment have dropped, the cost of jail enrollment is 115,000 CAD$ for one year per person, whereas restorative justice only costs about 10,000 CAD$ for the same person throughout the same term and how much more effective can restorative justice be with a provided life example of John’s case, the bottom line is that restorative justice reduces crimes, improves the lives of criminals by healing and makes communities a safer
110). According to the author, the aim of restorative justice is to heal communities from an incident where people were harmed and, ideally, help prevent the same thing from happening again. I believe that, there is going to be a higher possibility of crime reduction in schools and in different neighborhood if victims and offenders mediate a restitution agreement to the satisfaction of each other. In conjunction to this, if the government can be more committed in supporting these approaches, I believe that there will be a massive drop in crime
The balanced and restorative approach provides a significant change in toles and image of the juvenile justice system from a revolving door to a resource. The resource makes juvenile offenders accountable and enhances the quality of life within communities by community restoration using preventive services to help improve the safety of the community. 2-Compare and contrast the different types of restorative justice (i.e., VOM, FGC, NRB, peacemaking/sentencing circles)
Restorative justice is a very selective process, and can only truly work if both the victim and the offender agree to the terms of the conversation. In other words, strict vetting must be done on both the victim and the offender in order for restorative justice to occur. For this type of justice to actually be able to really work and bring about rehabilitation participation must be 100% voluntary otherwise it will fail. This among other things can be listed as a limitation of restorative justice. Another disadvantage is, that restorative justice cannot be implemented in all categories of crimes.
A “truth and reconciliation model involves providing a public forum for survivors/victims to testify to the events of their victimization and for offenders to admit previous wrongdoing, take responsibility, and ask forgiveness”(Colvin & Hill, 2020). This process provides the survivors/victims to be heard and share their traumatic experiences and to allow the offenders to take responsibility for their actions and correct the wrong they did. Both sides contribute to healing and growing. Survivors/victims are able to heal through confronting their offender and understanding why their offender behaved the way they did while the offender is able to learn and grow from their mistakes. They do recognize that this process is only in the beginning of what they hope will turn into a system that will be implemented in all states and countries.
Being a voluntary process, restorative justice requires the offender to take responsibility for their actions, truly understand their impact, and begin a journey of healing (Eggleton & Saint-Germain, 2018). Many Indigenous offenders are the product of their circumstances and feel helpless against the systemic hurdles they must overcome within society (Editorial Board, 2022). Restorative justice takes a less traditional approach compared to the oppressive justice system of today, enabling the Indigenous offender to be treated as a human being, and not just another statistic (Eggleton & Saint-Germain,
Restorative justice is a sentencing model that builds on restitution and community participation in an attempt to make a victim “whole again” (Schmalleger, 2010). Restorative justice can be explained as a form of punishment, which everyone involved or affected by a crime gets a feeling of peace after all if finalized. Both the victim and the offender have to agree to participate in restorative justice. There are needs that have to be met through restorative justice, which are the victim must be
It appears on the multiple studies reviewed in this report there is a variation in the response pending the severity of the offense and the type of restorative justice utilized. It is indicated Sentencing Circles are consistent in all arenas; they report a low recidivism rate in relation to all levels of crime severity. Over all, recidivism rates were down with restorative justice programs when compared to traditional programs. Statistics reported dependable results noting when offenders did re-offend the crimes were not as violent or severe and this was found not to be the circumstance with traditional programs (Umbreit, Vos, & Coates, 2006, p.
A study done by Criminal justice inspection Northern Ireland found the rate of recidivism went down when young offenders were diverted into restorative justice furthermore study concludes that people were often quite pleased with the outcome of the restorative justice(Restorative Justice Council,
Restorative justice is a response to crime in which it allows the victim and the offender to meet face to face and to settle their problems. It allows both parties to unite and to work out their differences and to make the offender responsible for his own actions (Correctional Services Canada, 2015). Offenders have to make amends with the victim or victims because for the crimes and damage they caused to the victim emotionally and physically (Antonacci, 2013).The boys have to be welcomed back into society by doing some good too help the community out and to be seen as changed members of the community. If this option was taken than the boys would have just done some community service such as helping out the hot dog vendor and cleaning up the
While indirect communication may not be suitable for all cases, it can be a valuable form of restorative justice that provides an alternative to a face-to-face meeting between the victim and offender. The use of indirect communication in restorative justice can promote healing for both the victim and the offender, and encourage accountability and
4 Criticism and Challenges The first point of criticism against victim participation in restorative justice processes arises from scepticism about an apology to the victim as a way of dealing with criminal matters. The perception sometimes exists as to it simply being a way to get away with the crime.106 Members of the public should thus be educated to understand that restorative justice is more than a mere saying sorry, but in the context of victim offender mediation or family group conferences it rather affords the victim the opportunity to confront the child offender with the real and human cost of his or her criminal actions. Another concern deals with the possible secondary victimisation of the victim in the case where the offender pretends
Restorative Justice processes are likely to reduce criminals from repeating offenses, as numerous recidivism studies have demonstrated. Thus, it would be more than justified to employ restorative processes a response to crimes under
Today our justice system has a multitude of options when dealing with those who are convicted of offenses. However, many argue that retributive justice is the only real justice there is. This is mainly because its advantage is that it gives criminals the appropriate punishment that they deserve. The goals of this approach are clear and direct. In his book The Little Book of Restorative Justice, Zehr Howard (2002), illustrates that the central focus of retributive justice is offenders getting what they deserve (p. 30).
Batley (2005) stated that restorative justice is about restoring, healing and re- integrating victims, offenders, as well as the society and also preventing further harm. In this assignment, I will be discussing approaches to restorative justice and illustrating their advantages and disadvantages to offending. I will also provide the applications of these five approaches of restorative justice which are retributive approach, utilitarian deterrence approach, rehabilitation approach, restitution approach and restorative approach in the given case study. I will then explain my preferred approach to justice through identifying a personal belief or value that underpins my choice.