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
It is clear that we have not embraced the theory of rehabilitation because we still use prisons to “warehouse” offenders. The concern with “warehousing” is that the offender will more than likely end up back in prison. We have learned that recidivism is a major concern facing society today because offenders have little chance of employment, no funds or housing, and often time’s very little support from family or friends. I stand behind rehabilitation for offenders because I feel like it is the only way to truly stop crime. In
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)
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,
This process will ensure that each offender receives the proper punishment and that the community is satisfied with the decision. The offender-based models, retributive and utilitarian, does not help the victim recover. Restorative justice is designed
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
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
Traditionally, crime has been viewed as a violation against the state. Still too little attention is given to the fact that criminal acts are also violations of the victims and the communities. Punishing and correcting offenders’ criminal behaviors should not only be conducted using the concepts of retribution, incapacitation, and deterrence, it should also be designed to repair the damages done to the victims and the communities. Many benefits are associated with shifting to the restorative justice model, for the victim, the offender, and the community. Restorative justice benefits the victims by giving them a voice regarding the accountability of the offender.
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,
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).
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
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.