Providing Justice for Victims, Offenders and Community

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Outline

Restorative justice can be defined as a criminal justice theory that uses cooperative processes to repair the harm that has been exposed or caused by criminal behavior. Through restorative programs and practices, all stakeholders get involved in the restorative process through an effort to identify and repair the harm caused by particular crimes. This consolidated effort of restoring justice helps victims of crime, offenders and the communities they live in to unite in a transformed relationship dedicated to positive response towards crime. The offenders and the victims get together in a collective effort to deal with the effects of a crime and assess what implications the particular offense would have for the future. Through restorative justice processes, offenders are prodded to embrace full responsibility for the offense and the victim in turn accepts the process of reintegrating the offenders back to the community. This form of criminal justice has become a common process for resolving conflict and either supplements or acts as an alternative to the criminal justice system.

Introduction

Crime is a very harmful process that has been a major cause of conflict and subsequent divisions between individuals as well as within communities. Through restorative justice, attempts are made to reconcile the offenders and their victims by helping them to get rid of their past and look forward towards a future free of guilt or resentment. The most important aspect of restorative justice is the effort made to use resolution as a means of creating stronger communities. Apart from causing harm, crime may act as a means of exposing pre-existing injustices, a factor which if resolved leads to a stronger community and one that is not only just but also safe to live in.

Understanding the causes of crime

Through restorative justice processes, understanding the causes and nature of crime is very crucial as the basis upon which justice is delivered to the offender. The parties involved in the mediation process are able to assess the context within which the offender committed the crime and this helps in assisting the offender to accept responsibility for crime committed. Offenders are also likely to have suffered some form of harm in the course of committing a criminal act. By helping the offender to accept responsibility, mediators in the restorative process are able to focus on the future position of the offender in relation to the victim and the wider community at large. Offenders are also helped to understand that harmonious living can only be achieved by rectifying the effect of crime on individuals or community (Morris & Maxwell 5-6).

Understanding the causes and nature of crime also helps the parties involved in a restorative justice process to assess the impact of the crime on both the victim and the offender, and in such way it becomes possible to decide on the best type of reparation the offender will give to the victim. Making an offender accept responsibility of the crime he has committed gets him to experience the full impact of the crime and in such way, the offender will easily accept the type of intervention that is arrived at in the reconciliation process. Taking responsibility increases the likelihood that an offender will resist crime or experience reduced readiness to commit crime. Understanding the causes of crime also helps to address crime from a social rather than an individual approach, such that resolutions arrived at do not only affect victims but the community as well (Morris & Maxwell 11-13).

Providing justice for victims

Restorative justice processes take place under the consent and full participation of both offender and victim, an environment that invites the parties to have perceptions of a fair process and fair outcome. Restitution is arrived through negotiated agreements that in turn encourage compliance with such agreements (Morris & Maxwell 32). Victims are provided with the opportunity for a face-to-face interaction with the offender in such way that the victim gets an opportunity of conveying the impact of the offence directly to the offender. Through such a forum, victims get a chance to fully participate in the justice process and to actively contribute to the process of arriving at the type of justice that will be conversant with their needs. The impact of crime becomes real and skills and confidence to handle it aids future deterrence. Re-offending is reduced and the victim has less fear of crime being committed against him/her (Gerstenfeld & Grant 301, 304).

Interpersonal offenses are very harmful to any type of relationship whether between individual persons in a community or between entire communities. Whether the transgression is intentional or unintentional, the emotions that result thereof, is very strong and negative. Victims of an offense get subjected to feelings of anger, fear, sadness and un-forgiveness and to aid them in getting relief from such negativity, restorative justice acknowledges that victims have suffered harm or loss. The victim’s claim for amend is recognized and victims are given the opportunity to directly participate in defining the obligations and responsibilities of the transgressors. Primary benefits of reparation go to the victim (Morris & Maxwell 305).

Besides encouraging victim participation in the justice process, restorative justice also involves the participation of the offender and the community at large so that they too can help in deciding the best methods of repairing the harm caused to the victim and the community. By involving the community, restorative justice provides the victim with a better sense of protection from the community. Involvement of the larger community acts as a witness to resolving past grudges between offender and victim as well as strengthening both interpersonal and community bonds. Involvement of other parties also provides a secure setting for addressing particular questions and discussing the impact of an offense on the victim. Restorative justice approaches justice from a restitution rather than the retribution process that is practiced by state justice systems. Through restitution, the goal is to resolve disputes so that the victim is helped to heal their wounds, the offender is helped back into society and the victim is assured of any further harassment (Gerstenfeld & Grant 301, 303).

Serving society through restorative justice

Unlike the traditional system of justice that deals with crime as violation of the law, restorative justice treats crime as violation to individual persons and communities. Those affected by crime enjoy a central place in determining how offenders are to be dealt with, while the nature of harm and its effects is supposed to determine the type of sanctions to be imposed on the transgressors. The traditional model fails to do so and victims of crime have little or no access to the justice process and most of them end up feeling marginalized (Cornwell 64).

Justice plays the role of repairing the harmful effects of crime as well as assisting in rebuilding whatever relationships may have been destroyed by crime. Through restorative justice, the victim, the offender, and the community are bestowed with the obligation of making right, the harm caused by a crime. The offender is particularly encouraged to accept accountability and take responsibility of working towards repairing the harm that he/she has caused. Restorative justice therefore views the offender as an active partaker in the justice process, and allows greater involvement of victims in delivering justice. The traditional justice system has continually closed out the victims by preventing their voices from being heard (Gerstenfeld & Grant 301).

The traditional model of justice uses imprisonment as the major form of punishment for crime. Through imprisonment however, the offender is at most required to serve a sentence for the crime committed and no consideration is made of those offenders who express remorsefulness and would wish to make compensation for crimes committed. Restorative justice on the other hand gives offenders the opportunity to acknowledge their mistakes and probably apologize to the victims; as well as do something towards the reparation of victims. Such a process ensures that harmony is restored to the relationship and the offender is given a chance to reform through forgiveness (Cornwell 62).

Unlike the traditional system of justice that follows pre-set guidelines under the law in delivering a sentence for a particular crime, in restorative justice, offender accountability is not determined by degree of harm caused through the offense. When an offender agrees to participate in a restorative process for example, this should not be used in subsequent legal proceedings as evidence that he/she has agreed to having committed an offense. All parties in a restorative justice process participate in mediation upon the basic facts that an offense was committed and that the issue needs to be resolved (Morris & Maxwell14, 32).

Traditional criminal justice deals with an offender as a criminal or law breaker. Restorative justice on the other hand views crime as an offense against individuals, communities or relationships. Although the victim is given first priority in the mediation process, restorative justice does not ignore the fact that offenders commit acts of crime within specific contexts and that they too are likely to have suffered harm in a criminal activity (Rabin 248-250). By inviting consensus, restorative justice gives room to other parties other than the offenders and offended who may feel the particular offense in question has interfered with some of their interests. Restorative justice puts into consideration the need for healing for both victim and offender. While the victim may be in need of reparation, the offenders may need to come to terms with the offense and mediation becomes a good opportunity to address the underlying causes of the crime as well as restore things back to their rightful state (Morris & Maxwell 5-6).

Conclusion

Although restorative justice principles have widely been adopted in the criminal justice system and has potential to change the traditional criminal justice system for the better, there is considerable resistance to such change. This is because most traditional legal systems are change-resistant structures that are strongly motivated to preserve their judicial independence. The principles followed by restorative justice of involving victims, their offenders and the entire community in restoring justice is perceived to transfer certain authority from the courts as well as increase the number o acknowledged stakeholders within the administration of justice. Many people argue that restorative justice places very high and unrealistic demands on the traditional legal systems; yet such demands could be pursued to deliver justice in a more qualitative manner.

Works Cited

Cornwell, David J. Doing Justice better. The Politics of Restorative Justice. Winchester: Waterside Press, 2007.

Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B and Grant Diana R. Crimes of Hate: Selected Readings. Seminole: SAGE, 2003.

Morris, Allison and Maxwell Gabriel. Restorative Justice for Juveniles : Conferencing, Mediation and Circles. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001.

Rabi, Jack. Encyclopedia of Public Administration and Public Policy: First Update. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2005.

Click Here To Order Now!