Victim Empowerment In The Criminal Justice System

Victims, Victimization and Victimology: A Socio-Legal Study Dr. (Mrs.) Ravidankaur R. Karnani Assist. Professor & I/c. Principal, Law College, Palanpur karnani_ravidan@yahoo.com, 7990980278 Abstract For many decades, the victim was the forgotten party in the criminal justice system as the main focus was that the perpetrator of a crime should be punished. But the victims of crimes stand poised equally in the scales of justice as the victim is not a passive object but an active component of the whole judicial process.

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

There are several old ways of solving crime according to many sources, but restorative justice is a type of rehabilitation process which focuses on repairing, and as the word suggest brings restoration. It rebuilds the lives of individuals who are involve in crime. While crime damages a person life, restorative justice repairs it (Office for Victims of Crime, 2000; Morris and Maxwell, 2001). There are three main stakeholders in a restorative justice process, these are the victims, the offender, and the community, therefore when crime is committed restorative justice sees it as an office against people and not against the state. I believe that in order for restorative justice process to be successful all three parties involve, citizens, victims,

This type of justice system is designed very differently when compared with the retributive justice system. The restorative justice system endeavours to bring the victim and the offender together and allow them to speak with each other in the hopes to support the healing process. It will enable the victims to express themselves to the offender and lets the offender apologize and express their feelings to the victim. The restorative justice system often offers the victims of crime closure. The system encourages both parties to reveal themselves to each other and develop a solution for the future to satisfy both parties involved.

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

B. Restorative Justice There is some theoretical ambiguity in the meaning of Restorative Justice in spite of the many definitions and studies done on the subject. Restorative Justice has been defined as “an ethos with practical goals, among which to restore harm by including affected parties in a (direct or indirect) encounter and a process of understanding through voluntary and honest dialogue.” It is primarily concerned with the reinstatement of victims to life before the crime, restoration of the Offender to a well behaved and lawful life, restoration of the injury caused to the community and the creation of a better society in the present and the future. Restorative Justice is not easily defined because it covers a wide range of practices introduced at different stages of the criminal process, including diversion from prosecution, actions analogous with court decisions and meetings between victims and offenders at any stage of the criminal process. One widely-accepted definition of restorative justice was put forward by Tony Marshall which was also accepted by the United Nations Working Party on Restorative Justice, defined restorative justice as; “a process whereby all parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of an offence and its implications for the future.”

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).

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.

Victims of rape receive support from several government bodies such as sexual assault referral centres (SARC) and there are also Independent Sexual Violence Advisors (ISVAs). SARC is an organisation that provides services to the victims of rape or sexual assault regardless of whether

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.

The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Proponents of restorative justice contend that it is more likely than retributive justice to reduce the incidence of crime because of its central concern for the safety of victims. The studies have demonstrated that restorative justice can have a reductive effect in certain cases and can change the behaviour of offenders. On the whole, however, there is more evidence that restorative justice is effective in reducing either the frequency or severity of reoffending for juveniles than in the case of adult offenders. Conclusion 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

Injustice in The Criminal Justice System Due to several injustices within the American justice system, society has become more divided. The criminal justice system in the United States has been criticized for being a race-based establishment Institutions where minorities are subjected to more strenuous punishments than their white counterparts. Nonetheless, it goes without any debate that racism exists in the justice system. Are these realities the errors of a moral justice system, or does it prove that the criminal bias organization is working as expected? Is the criminal justice system utilized to regulate and manage the minority population?

Abstract In 1982, President Ronald Reagan created the President’s Task Force on Victims of Crime in order to address the needs of millions of Americans and their families who were victims of crime every year. The task force goal was to review the policies and programs that affected crime victims and then advise the president along with the Attorney General of any actions that was needed in order to improve efforts in assisting and protecting victims. The findings showed a lack of compensation and services for crime victims including a large imbalance between a defendant’s rights and those of the victim. As a result, the task force made many recommendations to both the President and Attorney General (U.S. Department of Justice, 2015). Courts

Restorative Justice past practices and activities that are popular within the Restorative justice movement are Prisoner rights and alternatives to prisons, which is a program to change prison condition and minimize incarceration sentencing, Conflict Resolution is a program that creates neighborhood justice centers available to the community. The Victim offender Reconciliation program (VORPs) is a meeting between the victim and the community, Victim-Offender Mediation (VOMS) is mediation between the victim and the offender, Victim Advocacy is the victim rights group which focused on the efforts for restitution for the crime. The family group conferences (FGCs) allow the victim and family and the offenders to meet. The Sentencing Circle includes