LAW

How Might the Idea of Restorative Justice Transform Public Debate about Crime and Justice?

How Might the Idea of Restorative Justice Transform Public Debate about Crime and Justice?

Introduction

Restorative justice is seen as centrally about restoration: restoration of the victim, restoration of the offender to a law-abiding life, restoration of the damage caused by crime to the community, while Liebmann (2007) proposes that its key attributes are the principle of 'inclusivity', the balancing of interests, non-coercive practice and a problem-solving orientation. Restorative justice differs from 'traditional' justice in so far as it is 'victim driven' or 'victim focused'.

Restorative approaches promote four goals: to enable the victim, offender and community to work together to understand what happened in the crime/conflict; to realize who has been affected by the events and how; to decide together what should happen in order to repair the harm; and to consider what can be arranged to help prevent the repetition of the harm. Restorative projects have been shown to bring benefits in meeting the needs of victims, in encouraging offenders to take responsibility for their actions and in helping communities of care to become part of the process of reconciliation and support (Johnstone et al. 2007: pp. 9-15). Thus, it is about building communities of care around individuals while not condoning harmful behavior, and holding individuals accountable for their actions within systems of support.

In this paper, we will be discussing that how the idea of restorative justice transforms public debate about crime and justice? We will also be discussing the concept of restorative justice as an area of study around the world. A study conducted by Crawford et al. is also discussed in the paper to present the concept of public debate and reactions towards the restorative justice system.

Discussion

A variety of practices and approaches can be described as 'restorative justice'. Each puts an emphasis on reparation or making amends, and outcomes (or agreements) include written or verbal apologies, financial restitution or unpaid work for the victim or the community. Approaches differ in the relative significance placed upon the victim, offender and 'community' in that process. They also differ in terms of their relationships to the formal criminal justice process, some having their basis in legislation while others - because they are predicated upon principles of voluntarism and non-coercion - operate more informally. The legislative context and location in the criminal justice system have a bearing on how restorative justice initiatives operate and on whom they are targeted. The extent to which they represent a 'mainstream' response to offending differs across jurisdictions, though they typically remain relatively marginalized in relation to traditional criminal justice processes (Johnstone 2003: pp. 47-54).

Victim offender mediation and reparation, originating in communities, involves skilled mediators facilitating an exchange between victim and offender, aimed at providing an explanation for the offence, enabling the offender to appreciate the impact of the offence and reaching an agreement as to how the offender will repair the harm. It most typically operates semi-independently of criminal justice agencies, dealing with ...