Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:25 pm
Time: 12:25 pm
Results for restorative justice
73 results foundAuthor: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspectorate Title: Community Restorative Justice Ireland: Report of an Inspection Summary: This report offers an evaluation of community-based restorative justice system schemes in Belfast and Derry/Londonderry. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2008 Source: Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 115753 Keywords: CommunitiesRestorative Justice |
Author: Kingi, Venezia Title: Review of the Delivery of Restorative Justice in Family Violence Cases by Providers funded by the Ministry of Justice Summary: This report was commissioned to review the delivery of restorative justice in family violence cases. The objectives of the review were to describe the nature and extent of the delivery of restorative justice in family violence cases across the restorative justice programs operating at five sites including: how selection of cases occurs; assessment of appropriateness of each referral; how the consent of participants is obtained; detail of the restorative justices processes; safety of participants; and the outcomes for individuals (both victim and offender) from the processes. Details: Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Justice, 2008 Source: Crime and Justice Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington Year: 2008 Country: New Zealand URL: Shelf Number: 115781 Keywords: Family ViolenceRestorative Justice |
Author: Rugge, Tanya Title: Restorative Justice's Impact on Participants' Psychological and Physical Health Summary: Research on restorative justice has cited many positive benefits for participants. For example, restorative justice processes are satisfying to both victims and offenders. However, despite references made to positive impacts on participants' well-being, few studies specifically examine the impact of restorative justice processes on participants' psychological health and physical health using specific health indicators. This study utilized a quasi-experimental, repeated-measures design to assess changes in psychological and physical health in 92 participants (50 victims and 42 offenders) who experienced a restorative justice process. Results indicated that the majority of participants did experience positive changes from pre-program to post-program. Details: Ottawa: Public Safety Canada, 2009 Source: Corrections Research: User Report; 2009-03 Year: 2009 Country: Canada URL: Shelf Number: 117385 Keywords: Restorative Justice |
Author: Daly, Kathleen Title: Defendants in the Circle: Nowra Circle Court, the Presence and Impact of Elders, and Re-Offending Summary: This report presents a qualitative study of how Indigenous offenders view the court process and the role of Indigenous Elders, with reference to the Nowra Circle Court in New South Wales, established in 2002. Details: Brisbane: School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University, 2009. 128p. Source: Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: Shelf Number: 118163 Keywords: CourtsIndigenous PeoplesRestorative Justice |
Author: Rosay, Andre B. Title: Juvenile Probation Officer Workload and Caseload Study: Alaska Division of Juvenile Justice Summary: This report describes results of a study to measure and analyze the workload and caseload of Juvenile Probation Officers (JPOs) within the Alaska Division of Juvenile Justice. More specifically, this study assessed the resources needed in both rural and urban Alaska to adequately meet minimum probation standards, to continue the development and enhancement of system improvements, and to fully implement the restorative justice field probation service delivery model. Details: Anchorage, AK: Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage, 2010. 48p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 119286 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersJuvenile Probation (Alaska)Probation OfficersRestorative Justice |
Author: Woods, Daniel J. Title: Unpacking the Impact of Restorative Justice in the RISE Experiments: Facilitators, Offenders, and Conference Non-Delivery Summary: Restorative Justice (RJ) programs are often evaluated in terms of their outcomes (e.g. impact on crime), with little attention to the process. RJ's impact is often assessed by examining the difference between RJ “treated” groups with controls who typically experience standard criminal justice system processing. This strategy yields average effects across individuals who experience RJ differently. The present dissertation unpacks these different effects in three separate inquiries utilizing data from the Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) conducted in Canberra, Australia from 1995 - 2000. First, borrowing a medical model, we descriptively assess the extent to which conference facilitators engender perceptions of procedural justice and legitimacy in offenders who attend RJ. We graphically examine the number of conferences delivered per facilitator (experience), sequential conferences (practice-makes-perfect) and the timing between conferences (skill maintenance). Certain conference facilitators are just who are good at promoting perceptions of procedural justice and legitimacy, two concepts that are linked with reduced criminal behavior. Second, we utilize trajectory analysis to assess the impact of assignment to RJ on subsequent criminal offending for individuals following different offending trajectories. The impact of RJ varies by offending group, with negative effects observed for Aboriginal offenders. Finally, utilizing multinomial logistic regression, we examine the characteristics associated with non-delivery of RJ, either due to offender-related or administrative-related reasons. From a practical standpoint, randomized controlled trials, such as RISE, rely on treatment integrity to best assess the impact of the assigned treatment. From a policy standpoint, the most efficient use of resources would rely on successful conference delivery. We find that the time between random assignment and the first conference attempt is significantly related to successful delivery. Specifically, organizing a conference too soon or too late increases the chance that the conference will fail. This dissertation takes important steps in understanding the importance of unpacking the impact of RJ and helps inform who should conduct RJ conferences, what groups of individuals to include in future studies, and what impacts non-delivery of RJ conferences. Details: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2009. 112p. (Thesis) Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 19, 2010 at:http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=edissertations Year: 2009 Country: Australia URL: http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1053&context=edissertations Shelf Number: 119642 Keywords: RecidivismRestorative Justice |
Author: Richards, Kelly Title: Police-Referred Restorative Justice for Juveniles in Australia Summary: This preliminary paper provides an overview of the legislative and policy context of restorative justice measures for juveniles in each Australian state and territory, highlighting the diverse characteristics of current restorative practices. Further, it provides an indication of the numbers and characteristics of juveniles who are referred by police to restorative justice measures and the offence types for which they are most commonly referred. A number of key points about the application of restorative justice measures to juveniles in Australia’s jurisdictions are highlighted, including that juveniles were referred to conferences primarily for property crimes and that Indigenous juveniles comprised higher proportions of those sent to court than to conferencing. This paper argues that more detailed data on the offending histories, offence types and offence seriousness of juveniles referred by police to restorative justice processes would enable a more finely-grained analysis of restorative justice for juveniles in Australia. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2010. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, no. 398: Accessed September 1, 2010 at: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/D/3/F/{D3F3C924-7049-49E9-8545-B5D755553BBD}tandi398.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Australia URL: http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/D/3/F/{D3F3C924-7049-49E9-8545-B5D755553BBD}tandi398.pdf Shelf Number: 119723 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersRestorative Justice |
Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: Youth Conference Service: Inspection of the Youth Conference Service in Northern Ireland Summary: This inspection looked at how young offenders are dealt with through the Youth Conference Service (YCS). It followed on from a comprehensive evaluation of the service conducted early in its development by Queens University Belfast. Inspectors found that the YCS was delivering an effective and useful service but that it was operating at the boundary of its capacity under its present structures and resources. Staff and management were totally committed to providing a restorative system that worked for the young offenders as well as for victims and they were focused on getting the balance right between the needs of offenders and victims. The key recommendation of this Inspection is that a full system-wide review into current practices in youth offending is now needed with the aim of developing a clearer and more integrated system with restorative practice at its core. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2008. 48p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 9, 2010 at: http://www.juvenilejusticepanel.org/resource/items/C/J/CJINIYouthConference2007_EN.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.juvenilejusticepanel.org/resource/items/C/J/CJINIYouthConference2007_EN.pdf Shelf Number: 119740 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersRehabilitationRestorative Justice |
Author: Jacobson, Jessica Title: Making Amends: Restorative Youth Justice in Northern Ireland Summary: The Youth Conference Service, established in Northern Ireland in 2003, placed restorative justice at the heart of the youth justice system, integrated within both the prosecution and sentencing processes. Since then, the number of young people engaged in youth conferencing has grown year on year and, to date, more than 5,500 referrals have been made to the service. There is sound evidence that victims who attend conferences express high-levels of satisfaction with the process and outcomes, and levels of participation are reasonably high. There are encouraging signs that youth conferencing is leading to a reduction in reoffending rates. The establishment of the Youth Conference Service has also contributed to an overall decline in the use of custody for young offenders, and to an increasing rate of diversion of young people out of the formal criminal justice process. This report, commissioned as part of the Prison Reform Trust’s strategy to reduce child and youth imprisonment in the UK, explores the experience and impact of youth conferencing in Northern Ireland and looks at the potential benefits of introducing a similar model to the youth justice system in England and Wales. Details: London: Prison Reform Trust, 2009. 24p. Source: Internet Resource" Accessed September 13, 2010 at: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/uploads/documents/making_amends.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/uploads/documents/making_amends.pdf Shelf Number: 119785 Keywords: Juvenile DiversionJuvenile OffendersRecidivismRestorative JusticeYouth Conferencing |
Author: Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial Behaviour (UK) Title: Time for a Fresh Start: The Report of the Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial Behaviour Summary: The Commission’s inquiry was prompted by concern about deep-rooted failings in the response to antisocial behaviour and crime involving children and young people. Large sums of public money are currently wasted across England and Wales because: Investment in proven preventive measures and constructive sanctions is too low; Children and young people who could be turned away from a life of crime are not receiving timely help and support; and Those involved in persistent and serious offending are often treated in ways that do little to prevent reoffending – and may make their criminal behaviour worse. The Commission has concluded that the public can be offered better protection against youth crime and antisocial behaviour by: tackling antisocial behaviour, crime and reoffending through the underlying circumstances and needs in children and young people’s lives (a principle of prevention); ensuring that children and young people responsible for antisocial behaviour and crime face meaningful consequences that hold them accountable for the harm caused to victims and the wider community (a principle of restoration); and seeking to retain children and young people who offend within mainstream society or to reconnect them in ways that enable them to lead law-abiding lives. Details: London: The Police Foundation, 2010. 115 p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 1, 2010 at: http://www.youthcrimecommission.org.uk/attachments/076_FreshStart.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.youthcrimecommission.org.uk/attachments/076_FreshStart.pdf Shelf Number: 120139 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationJuvenile JusticeJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile OffendersRestorative Justice |
Author: Skinns, Layla Title: An Evaluation of Bristol RAiS Summary: Since April 2007, the programme, Restorative Approaches in Schools (RAiS), has been implemented in four schools in the South of the Bristol. The aims of this evaluation of the program were: To describe how school leaders and teachers incorporate restorative approaches in the development of school policies and processes; To examine to what extent the use of whole-school restorative approaches can produce positive changes in pupil and staff perceptions of the climate for learning; To examine whether and how restorative processes impact on attendance levels of the pupils involved in restorative conferences or across the whole of the school; To examine whether and how the use of restorative conferences can reduce school term exclusions (permanent and fixed-term): and To examine whether and how restorative processes impact on educational attainment levels of the pupils involved in restorative conferences or across the whole of the school. Details: London: Institute for Criminal Policy Research, King's College London, 2009. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 7, 2010 at: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/Resources/Research/Schools/RAiS%20Bristol%20Full%20Evaluation.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/Resources/Research/Schools/RAiS%20Bristol%20Full%20Evaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 120398 Keywords: Restorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool Discipline |
Author: Stovel, Laura Title: Restorative Justice After Mass Violence: Opportunities and Risks for Children and Youth Summary: There is growing interest in the role that restorative justice can play in addressing mass atrocities. This paper describes the associated principles and practices within juvenile justice systems and in societies emerging from mass violence. It also examines the meaning, opportunities and limitations of restorative justice in transitional societies, particularly in relation to the needs of young victims and offenders. We argue that procedural forms of restorative justice, involving redress by offenders, face considerable challenges because communities and governments often lack the coercive capacity or will to hold offenders accountable. In contexts where accountability is lacking we argue that pressuring victims to meet with, and forgive, those who harmed them may be inappropriate. Such encounters should only occur where victims see them as necessary to their own healing. Despite the procedural limitations of restorative justice, this perspective (ontology) helps us analyse the route to reconciliation in different conflict contexts and reveals opportunities and challenges for justice and reconciliation in each case. This ontology reveals that intra-communal and inter-communal (ethnic/religious) conflicts have dramatically different justice and reconciliation challenges. In an intra-communal conflict, such as in Sierra Leone, offenders need to reintegrate into communities that they or their factions harmed. The desire to reintegrate into communities that condemn their crimes while accepting them provides opportunities for young offenders to address their crimes. In ethnically divided societies, offenders are often seen as heroes in their communities and may not have to address their crimes until the communities themselves condemn them. This makes restorative justice and reconciliation much more difficult, as communities do not take on the role of promoting accountability for their own members. In such cases, restorative justice efforts must promote social trust between groups. In both intra-communal and inter-communal conflicts, victims are often marginalized by their own communities and receive inadequate assistance. Restorative justice shows us that much can be done to help young victims, and this should become an explicit part of the justice picture. Finally, we argue that traditional justice is not synonymous with restorative justice. While traditional justice is community based and often meaningful to people, many of its forms are retributive; deny a voice to children, youth and other disadvantaged groups; or place community reconciliation above individual justice. Therefore, traditional justice practices should be assessed case by case if they are to be claimed as restorative justice equivalents. Details: Florence, Italy: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre, 2010. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Innocenti Working Paper 2010-15: Accessed December 23, 2010 at: http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/iwp_2010_15.pdf Year: 2010 Country: International URL: http://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/iwp_2010_15.pdf Shelf Number: 120628 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersJuvenile Victims of CrimeRestorative JusticeViolence |
Author: Independent Commission on Youth Crime and Antisocial Behavior Title: Time for a New Hearing: A Comparative Study of Alternative Criminal Proceedings for Children and Young People Summary: Time for a new hearing is the report from a comparative examination of alternative youth justice hearings and systems in the United Kingdom and other parts of the world. It concludes that the mainstream use of restorative justice in England and Wales, based on the youth conferencing system in Northern Ireland, would be likely to reduce reoffending, improve victims’ confidence and result in considerable savings in court time and the costs of custody. Details: London: The Police Foundation, 2010. 44p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 28, 2011 at: http://www.youthcrimecommission.org.uk/attachments/095_PF%20Time%20for%20a%20New%20Hearing%20Report.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.youthcrimecommission.org.uk/attachments/095_PF%20Time%20for%20a%20New%20Hearing%20Report.pdf Shelf Number: 120880 Keywords: Juvenile CourtJuvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Offenders (U.K.)Restorative Justice |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Exercising Discretion: The Gateway to Justice. A study by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate on cautions, penalty notices for disorder and restorative justice Summary: In 2009, 38 per cent of the 1.29 million offences ‘solved’ by police were dealt with outside of the court system. We found that the use of out-of-court disposals has evolved in a piecemeal and largely uncontrolled way. An earlier public survey conducted on behalf of HMIC confirmed general public support for giving first-time offenders a second chance – which out-of-court options certainly offer; but this public support ebbs away when they are used for persistent offenders. Our work also suggested that victim satisfaction is high when offenders take part in RJ approaches. RJ, used appropriately, may also reduce re-offending. The substantial growth in the use of out-of-court disposals has created some disquiet among criminal justice professionals over inconsistencies in their use, in particular for persistent and more serious offending. We found wide variations in practice across police force areas in the proportion and types of offences handled out of court. In view of the growth and wide variations in practice, and the consequences for offenders and victims as well as for public confidence in the criminal justice system, we believe the time has come to formulate a national strategy to improve consistency in the use of out-of-court disposals across England and Wales, and we have made this our primary recommendation. We hope that such a strategy will draw on the good practice identified in this report, promote understanding and reduce excessive variations and inconsistencies. The strategy should be based on what works to improve victim satisfaction, reduce re-offending and provide value for money. It should take into account not only the nature of offending and offenders, but how best to achieve transparency and reassurance for the public. In making this recommendation, we are acutely aware of the challenge that a national strategy may increase the bureaucratic burdens of prosecutors and police officers. We do not believe that such increases are an automatic consequence of this recommendation. In contrast, there are more definite consequences to decisions about whether someone enters the formal criminal justice system or receives an out-of-court disposal: an individual’s chance of getting a job or travelling abroad can be affected, for instance, and there may be wider implications for public confidence. It is therefore imperative that the principles of openness and fairness are applied to the use of out-of-court disposals. This will necessarily rely on record-keeping, since confidence in a system of justice that is delivered outside the courtroom is dependent on the ability of police and prosecutors to publish information about their use, enabling the public to see how out-of-court disposals are managed locally. This record-keeping must be proportionate and can be based on existing systems. Details: London: HMIC and HMCPSI, 2011. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 11, 2011 at: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Joint%20Inspections/CJI_20110609.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.hmic.gov.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Joint%20Inspections/CJI_20110609.pdf Shelf Number: 122023 Keywords: Penalty NoticesPolice Discretion (U.K.)Restorative JusticeSentencing |
Author: Generation Five Title: Toward Transformative Justice: A Liberatory Approach to Child Sexual Abuse and other forms of Intimate and Community Violence. A Call to Action for the Left and the Sexual and Domestic Violence Sectors Summary: This paper offers a substantive discussion on the liberatory politic of Transformative Justice. Transformative Justice, as defined in this paper, is premised on the idea that individual justice and collective liberation are equally important, mutually supportive, and fundamentally intertwined — the achievement of one is impossible without the achievement of the other. We believe that Transformative Justice presents us with a politic and model to heal the trauma of past violence, reduce the level of violence we experience, and mobilize masses of people. Transformative Justice is a response to the State’s inability to provide justice on either individual or collective levels. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a model that responds to experiences of violence without relying on current State systems. We believe this to be a liberating politic that creates opportunities for healing and transformation rather than retribution and punishment. Transformative Justice moves us toward equity and liberation rather than maintaining the inequality that the current State and systems maintain. The development of the Transformative Justice model is rooted in Generation FIVE’s substantive work on the personal and the political realities of child sexual abuse. One of the most intimate, stigmatized, and demonized forms of violence, child sexual abuse continues to be pervasive and persistent across nations, ‘race’, class, religions, and cultures. For a variety of reasons, including the State’s inability to create solutions that families and communities will use, people rarely report child sexual abuse. When they do report, they do not get the justice, safety, or change they seek. In addition to the State’s inability to address the needs of those who have been sexually abused, future violence is not prevented due to the lack of opportunities for transformation of individuals, relationships, families, or communities. As a result of this and the lack of viable alternatives, rates of child sexual abuse remain epidemic. This paper focuses on ways to secure both individual and social justice in cases of child sexual abuse. We assert that Transformative Justice is a way not only to address incidents of abuse but also to prevent further abuse by working on the social conditions that perpetuate and are perpetuated by child sexual abuse. Transformative Justice is also about building the capacity of individuals and collectives to address larger conditions of inequality and injustice as well as to challenge State violence. Section One explains Transformative Justice and argues the need for liberatory approaches to violence, in particular child sexual abuse. This section speaks to the urgency of addressing child sexual abuse as part of our liberation struggles, both as a specific form of violence that reflects and perpetuates multiple forms of oppression and as one that is exploited by the Right. A liberatory approach to child sexual abuse uniquely positions us to resist this exploitation. Section Two describes in detail the core principles of a Transformative Justice model. These include: liberation, shifting power, safety, accountability, collective action, honoring diversity and sustainability. Section Three proposes a set of practices to address child sexual abuse in a transformative way. Practices of Transformative Justice include: building a Collective, preparation and capacity building, naming and defining child sexual abuse, conducting assessment, developing a safety strategy, supporting healing and resilience, holding accountability, working for community transformation as well as strengthening collective resistance. The Conclusion offers next steps toward integrating Transformative Justice into intimate, activist and community networks, as well as mass-base and community organizations and the sexual and domestic violence sectors. Details: San Francisco: Generation Five, 2007. 78p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 20, 2011 at: http://www.generationfive.org/downloads/G5_Toward_Transformative_Justice.pdf Year: 2007 Country: United States URL: http://www.generationfive.org/downloads/G5_Toward_Transformative_Justice.pdf Shelf Number: 122798 Keywords: Child Sexual AbuseRestorative JusticeSexual AbuseTransformative JusticeVictims of Sexual Abuse |
Author: Rix, Andrew Title: Youth Restorative Disposal Process Evaluation Summary: The Youth Restorative Disposal (YRD) was piloted in eight police forces in England and Wales between April 2008 and September 2009. Developed by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) in partnership with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), the Department for Education (the then Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF)) and the Ministry of Justice, it aims to offer operational police officers and Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) more discretion. The YRD is intended to be a quick and effective means for dealing with low-level, anti-social and nuisance offending, offering an alternative to arrest and formal criminal justice processing. By doing so, it was also intended to provide a more efficient use of police time than current disposal options, carry public support and provide Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) with an early opportunity to provide support and intervention to young people who may be at risk of becoming further involved in criminal or anti-social behaviour. A YRD can be applied to young people between the ages of 10 and 17 who have not previously received a Reprimand, Final Warning, or Caution. A young person may only receive one YRD. Any future offence reverts to an established criminal justice measure. Serious crimes, such as weapons, sexual and drug offences are excluded. Both the victim and offender need to agree to participate in the YRD, which is facilitated by an authorised police officer or PCSO trained in restorative techniques. Children’s Services and the YOT are informed after the YRD is issued to provide an opportunity to identify early risk factors and get the right agencies to step in and provide appropriate support to the young person. YRDs are recorded locally against the young person’s name to ensure that young people are not issued with a further YRD and to avoid disproportionate criminalisation that would result from being recorded on the Police National Computer (PNC). The process must be resolved within a reasonable time (e.g. on the street or shortly thereafter). The policy backdrop to the YDR is one of growing evidence that early and appropriate intervention can have a significant impact on the likelihood of reoffending. There is also some evidence, both from the UK and elsewhere, that restorative approaches can have a positive impact on offenders, are popular with victims, and help to improve public confidence in the Criminal Justice System (CJS). In some cases they have also been found to reduce the frequency of reoffending. This research report is based on analysis of locally held management information and a small number of interviews with key people and delivery partners in each of the eight participating pilot areas. Across all the pilot areas, a total of 10 interviews were conducted with pilot leads, 56 with police officers, 17 with YOT workers and five with other stakeholders. These interviews were supplemented by case studies in four of the pilot areas and included interviews with victims (12), offenders (seven), parents/guardians (10). Six observation sessions were conducted in two of the case study areas. The report is based upon an exploratory and largely qualitative research into the processes involved in implementing the YRD across eight of the police force areas in which the YRD was piloted. The number of interviews conducted was small and the findings reported may not be representative of all views. Also, it is important to note that the pilot forces had very different starting points and contexts with regard to using restorative justice (RJ). Two had long histories of using RJ in general, across a broad spectrum of crime and non-crime issues, some introduced YRD forcewide, others more locally, and some had implementation issues caused by demographic or organisational factors. Finally, one of the eight police forces dropped out of the pilot (and the evaluation) after the initial interviews, as they felt that their priorities differed from those of the YRD pilot. Therefore, the data presented in this report should be viewed as indicative and this should be taken into account when interpreting findings. Details: London: Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, 2011. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 6, 2011 at: http://www.yjb.gov.uk/publications/Resources/Downloads/Youth%20Restorative%20Disposal%20Process%20Evaluation.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.yjb.gov.uk/publications/Resources/Downloads/Youth%20Restorative%20Disposal%20Process%20Evaluation.pdf Shelf Number: 123001 Keywords: Anti-Social BehaviorsNuisance Behaviors and DisordersPolice DiscretionRestorative Justice |
Author: Silverman, Carol Title: The Consequences of Structural Racism, Concentrated Poverty and Violence on Young Men and Boys of Color Summary: This brief examines the broader structural and institutional elements that research implicates as the root causes of violence among boys and young men of color. It includes policy solutions and emerging and promising practices that respond to the primacy of broader structural issues, including structural racism. The brief also highlights organizations seeking to change conditions in their communities. Details: Berkeley, CA: Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy, University of California, Berkeley Law School, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Brief: Accessed November 29, 2011 at: http://www.boysandmenofcolor.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Youth-Violence-for-Boys-and-Men-of-Color-Research-Brief.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.boysandmenofcolor.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Youth-Violence-for-Boys-and-Men-of-Color-Research-Brief.pdf Shelf Number: 123464 Keywords: African AmericansDelinquency PreventionPovertyRacismRestorative JusticeSocioeconomic StatusViolent CrimeYouth Violence |
Author: Torres, Cesar Title: Alternative Justice, Reconciliation and Colombia's Disarmed Paramilitaries: Beginning the Discussion Summary: Colombia is currently implementing a controversial process of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) of paramilitary fighters into local communities. The Colombian justice system is not equipped with sufficient technical, financial or human resources to examine the criminal record of all of the estimated 30,000 paramilitaries who are part of this process. The legal status of almost 19,000 of these paramilitaries has not been defined. Within this group of 19,000 there are some individuals who have perhaps committed what could be categorized as lesser crimes during the conflict. In other countries undertaking DDR processes, alternative justice mechanisms have been used to bring to justice and facilitate the reintegration of this category of demobilized excombatants. The Colombian Constitution and laws recognize the existence of alternative justice methods as socially‐accepted practices of conflict resolution at the community level. However, for a variety of complex reasons, the potential to leverage these alternative justice practices to deal with the DDR overload has received very little attention in Colombia to date. This project undertook an initial exploration of some of the constraints and opportunities –‐political, social, legal and security ‐‐ that would need to be considered if alternative justice mechanisms were to be used to address some of the less serious conflict‐related crimes committed by paramilitaries. The research used a mixed‐methods approach including key informant interviews and focus group consultations in Colombia, to gather information and opinions on the prospects for alternative justice processes as an adjunct to the DDR effort. The preliminary findings show that alternative justice is not well understood among certain sectors in Colombia and that stakeholder perceptions are divided around its potential to address issues of truth‐telling, justice and reparation for victims. The study illuminates in particular, the need for deeper research on the legal viability for using alternative justice, the preparedness of alternative justice operators to address conflict‐related crimes, and the risks involved for victims, family members, demobilized paramilitaries, judicial operators and other individuals involved in community‐based justice. Details: Ottawa, ON, Canada: The SecDev Group, 2010. Source: Internet Resource: Final Project Technical Report, 105088: Accessed on December 8, 2011 at: http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/45207/2/131672.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Colombia URL: http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/45207/2/131672.pdf Shelf Number: 123505 Keywords: ParamilitariesRestorative Justice |
Author: Sumner, Michael D. Title: School-Based Restorative Justice as an Alternative to Zero-Tolerance Policies: Lessons from West Oakland Summary: In this report we examine a pilot restorative justice program at a school that primarily served students of color from low-income families. We document the implementation of the program at Cole Middle School in West Oakland, California, and the observations and perceptions of those who participated in it. We also draw lessons from Cole’s experiences that we hope will be helpful to those interested in implementing school-based restorative justice. Restorative justice is an alternative to retributive zero-tolerance policies that mandate suspension or expulsion of students from school for a wide variety of misbehaviors including possession of alcohol or cigarettes, fighting, dress code violations, and cursing. Although zero-tolerance policies have resulted in substantial increases in student suspensions and expulsions for students of all races, African American and Hispanic/Latino youth are disproportionately impacted by a zero-tolerance approach. Under zero tolerance, suspensions and expulsions can directly or indirectly result in referrals to the juvenile and adult criminal systems where African American and Hispanic/Latino youth are also disproportionately represented. This phenomenon, part of a process that criminalizes students, has been termed the school-to-prison pipeline. Proponents of restorative justice have begun to promote school-based restorative justice as an alternative to zero-tolerance policies. Restorative justice is a set of principles and practices grounded in the values of showing respect, taking responsibility, and strengthening relationships. When harm occurs, restorative justice focuses on repair of harm and prevention of re-occurrence. Although preliminary research suggests that school-based restorative justice reduces violence, school suspensions, expulsions, and referrals to the juvenile and criminal justice systems, little research looks at the impact of restorative justice programs as an alternative to zero-tolerance policies for youth of color. This research seeks to fill that gap. The findings presented in this report are based on a case study of a single school conducted by researchers at the Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law. Data are drawn from observations, openended interviews and a questionnaire along with statistics collected from published reports from the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) and the California Department of Education. Details: Berkeley, CA: Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, 2010. 40p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 26, 2012 at http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/11-2010_School-based_Restorative_Justice_As_an_Alternative_to_Zero-Tolerance_Policies.pdf Year: 2010 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/11-2010_School-based_Restorative_Justice_As_an_Alternative_to_Zero-Tolerance_Policies.pdf Shelf Number: 123776 Keywords: Delinquency PreventionEducationRacial DisparitiesRestorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool DisciplineSchool SuspensionsStudent ExpulsionZero Tolerance |
Author: European Forum for Restorative Justice Title: Restorative Justice and Crime Prevention: Presenting a Theoretical Exploration, An Empirical Analysis and the Policy Perspective Summary: The report opens with a wide theoretical reflection on restorative justice and crime prevention. In this first chapter the points of connection (and departure) between restorative justice theory and crime prevention models are explored. An elaborate, detailed and well-explained conceptual framework is presented; and thereby attention is paid to social and ethical issues raised by the relationship between both concepts. Reference is also made to community justice. Overall the chapter explicitly raises more questions for reflection and future empirical research than it provides concrete answers. The challenge to build, in an empirical way, upon the concepts, theories and connection points with regard to restorative justice and crime prevention is taken up in the second chapter. The way restorative justice fits as an object of criminological research together with some other background information is explained; but only serves as an introduction to the core of the chapter. For the most part, methodological considerations (that seem relevant when combining restorative justice and crime prevention in differing aspects) and empirical findings (with regard to offenders, victims and community/society) are presented and discussed. In the third chapter, the focus lies on the legal and policy level, and more specific, on the extent to which restorative justice is inscribed in crime prevention or other policies. Attention is also given to the presence of (crime) prevention goals within restorative justice related (legal) documents. For well-considered reasons the chapter contains extensive accounts of countries (Belgium, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy and UK), short country examples and an international overview based on the three main international institutions (Council of Europe, United Nations and European Union). Whereas the theoretical, empirical and policy oriented chapters are based on available literature and documents, the fourth chapter is of different nature. The results of a European survey – formally administered to gather information about practices, perceptions, and dominant beliefs and cultures across Europe in regards to current practice and the potential that restorative justice programmes and practices may play in crime prevention efforts - are presented. In addition challenges and recommendations for action complete the chapter. In chapter five, final conclusions and recommendations can be found. Details: Brussels, Belgium: European Forum for Restorative Justice, 2010. 196p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 14, 2012 at: http://www.euforumrj.org/Projects/Restorative%20Justice%20and%20Crime%20Prevention%20Final%20report.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Europe URL: http://www.euforumrj.org/Projects/Restorative%20Justice%20and%20Crime%20Prevention%20Final%20report.pdf Shelf Number: 124126 Keywords: Restorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Rix, Andrew Title: Improving Public Confidence in the Police: A Review of the Evidence Summary: It is important that the public feel confident in the police and other crime-fighting agencies. We know that crime has fallen considerably in the last ten years but the public are not feeling the impact of this and believe crime is rising. In 2008 the Government published the Green Paper From the neighbourhood to the national: policing our communities together which proposed a single top-down target to replace the multiple targets previously used to monitor police performance. The single target is to improve levels of public confidence that the police and local councils are dealing with the crime and anti-social behaviour issues that matter locally, as measured by the British Crime Survey. Individual targets were set for each police force and published in March 2009. To inform evidence-based guidance to forces on how to improve performance, a literature review was commissioned to summarise the best available evidence on ‘what works’ in terms of improving public confidence in the police and to identify what other interventions look promising and merit further exploration. Details: London: Home Office, 2009. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: Research Report 28: Accessed April 11, 2012 at http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/horr28c.pdf Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs09/horr28c.pdf Shelf Number: 124929 Keywords: Community PolicingPolice-Community Relations (U.K.)Restorative Justice |
Author: McLaren, Kaye Title: Alternative Actions that Work: A Review of the Research on Police Warnings and Alternative Actions with Children and Young People Summary: Alternative Actions that Work’ is a review of research on ‘what works’ in Police Warnings and Alternative Actions with children and young people who offend. The emphasis of the review is on the practical implications for those in the field. ‘Alternative Actions that Work’ links high quality international research with each step of the Police youth Alternative Action and Warning processes in New Zealand. The document is in two sections, beginning with an overview of Police youth diversion systems in New Zealand and overseas. The second section draws on international and New Zealand research on Police diversion and restorative justice and describes 23 effectiveness principles, starting with overarching principles, followed by principles that relate to the various stages of the youth diversion process. These effectiveness principles have been distilled into 11 key findings that are outlined below. Details: Wellington, NZ: Police Youth Services Group, New Zealand Police, 2011. 118p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 5, 2012 at: http://www.rethinking.org.nz/assets/Young_People_and_Crime/Alternative_Actions_2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: New Zealand URL: http://www.rethinking.org.nz/assets/Young_People_and_Crime/Alternative_Actions_2011.pdf Shelf Number: 126881 Keywords: Juvenile DiversionJuvenile Offenders (New Zealand)Restorative Justice |
Author: High Hopes Campaign Title: From Policy to Standard Practice: Restorative Justice in Chicago Public Schools Summary: The High HOPES (Healing Over the Punishment of Expulsions and Suspensions) Campaign is calling on Chicago Public Schools (CPS) to reduce suspensions and expulsions by 40% through the implementation of restorative justice practices, which are recognized and embraced in CPS' own Student Code of Conduct. A reduction of at least 40% would mean that thousands of students would be disciplined more effectively and a true culture shift would begin to take place throughout the city's schools. To do this, we call on CPS to work with youth, parent, and community organizations to implement restorative justice strategies, as well as develop and provide accurate and timely performance measures to track the effectiveness of reaching our goals. Details: Chicago: High Hopes Campaign, 2012. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 23, 2013 at: http://www.dignityinschools.org/sites/default/files/FromPolicyToStandardPractice.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.dignityinschools.org/sites/default/files/FromPolicyToStandardPractice.pdf Shelf Number: 127356 Keywords: Restorative JusticeSchool Crimes (Chicago)School DisciplineSchool SafetySchool Suspensions |
Author: Braithwaite, Valerie Title: A Multipronged Approach to the Regulation of Workplace Bullying Summary: This paper reviews the substantial body of research on workplace bullying with a view to developing a regulatory framework for controlling and preventing bullying problems. The paper argues that Top down approaches in dealing with workplace bullying are unlikely to be effective; Local knowledge, understanding and capacity are crucial to managing workplace bullying; Workplace bullying is an interpersonal issue that can be triggered and sustained by a host of factors including the personalities of the people involved, the norms of the workplace, structural features of the work, management style and emotional well-being; Workplace bullying can be understood as a competitive struggle of oneupmanship that locks individuals into bullying/victim roles; Better management of shame is at the heart of workplace bullying problems; Because of the complex set of factors leading to shame and shaping bullying, a multipronged approach is necessary that engages all levels of the organization. This might include organizational policy, organizational backing of local plans for managing bullying, mentoring, counselling, restorative justice conferencing, overhaul of work structures and practices, and mediation; Where workgroups communicate well, show respect for each other, are fair and open in their dealings with each other and are supported by their senior officers, compliance with policies such as anti-bullying is likely to be higher. Details: Canberra: Regulatory Institutions Network, Australian National University, 2013. 26p. Source: Internet Resource: RegNet Occasional Paper 20: Accessed June 1, 2013 at: http://regnet.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/ROP20.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://regnet.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/ROP20.pdf Shelf Number: 128884 Keywords: Restorative JusticeWorkplace BullyingWorkplace Security |
Author: Marder, Ian Title: Restorative Justice for Young Adults: Factoring in Maturity and Facilitating Desistance Summary: Drawing on primary evidence in the form of interviews with criminal justice practitioners and young adult offenders, as well as the existing literature, the aim of this report is to broaden our understanding of how restorative justice can be used with young adults (both victims and offenders) throughout the criminal justice process, considering the relevance of the maturation process, its implications for restorative practitioners working with this age group, and why restorative justice might be effective at encouraging desistance from crime. The main findings are as follows: • Although technically considered to be adults, victims and offenders between the ages of 18 and 25 may not be fully mature. This has many implications for restorative practice, of which facilitators and other criminal justice professionals must be aware; • There are a number of theoretically- and empirically-informed ways in which participation in a restorative process might encourage desistance and otherwise have a significant impact on young adult offenders. For example, it can be argued that it helps to develop a sense of personal responsibility and self-efficacy, is conducive to the building of social bonds and attachments and encourages compliance by being perceived by participant offenders to be more procedurally-just than court-based processes. Depending on the offender, restorative justice might either instigate the desistance process or provide additional motivation for those who have already chosen or begun to desist; • It is possible for service managers to integrate restorative practices into their work with 18-25 year old victims and offenders at any stage of the criminal justice process. The key recommendations are as follows: • Restorative justice should be offered to all victims irrespective of the age of the offender; • Restorative practitioners who work with young adults should be aware of the practice implications of a lack of maturity; • Restorative practice should be used to develop maturity and facilitate desistance among young adults who offend. Details: London: Restorative Justice Council, 2013. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 3, 2013 at: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/t2a-985/#.UayXHDXD_cs Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/t2a-985/#.UayXHDXD_cs Shelf Number: 128926 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender MediationYoung Adult Offenders (U.K.) |
Author: Meadows, Linda Title: Evaluation of Sheffield City Council's Community Justice Panels Project Summary: This report is the output of an evaluation commissioned by Sheffield City Council and undertaken by the Hallam Centre for Community Justice at Sheffield Hallam University. The evaluation was undertaken during October and November 2009 with the objectives of assessing the effectiveness of the Community Justice Panels project so far and providing recommendations for future development. The evaluation used an action research methodology and included documentary analysis, semi-structured interviews with strategic partners and stakeholders, wrongdoers and harmed persons, facilitator focus group and observation of the Panels. Community Justice Panels were introduced in Sheffield in June 2009, following approval from Sheffield City Council with the objectives of: • Reducing re-offending and involvement in anti-social behaviour and low-level crime; • Improving victim satisfaction and community engagement; • Making communities safer; and • Increasing volunteering; • Reducing police administration time. The model adopted was based on the implementation of Community Justice Panels in Chard, Somerset. Initially conceived as a pilot covering Ecclesfield and Broomhill Safer Neighbourhood Areas, the project was extended in August to cover the whole of Sheffield. Community Justice Panels are a possible disposal for first-time, low-level offences can involve both criminal and anti-social incidents and can be referred from sources including police, and registered social landlords. They bring together the wrongdoer and harmed person, along with supporters, to discuss what has happened, how it has affected them and how all parties can move forward. Outcomes usually involve some form of reparation on behalf of the wrongdoer, to make good for the harm caused. The objectives of the Panels themselves are to: • Provide face to face contact between the wrongdoer and harmed person; • Give victims a voice • Provide an opportunity for the wrongdoer to apologise; • Enable agreement of reparation to mitigate the harm caused to the harmed person Although there are other examples of similar projects in the UK, including the Chard model on which this was based1, the pilot is particularly innovative in the UK context in its implementation in a city of the size of Sheffield. At the time of the evaluation, the project had only been operational for a period of five months. Although clearly at a very early stage, the project has already made some significant achievements including: • Roll out of the project across the whole of Sheffield • Successful engagement at a strategic and operational level of key stakeholders and partners from a range of agencies • Establishment of effective working practices and information sharing protocols • Recruitment and training of 23 high quality facilitators from a diverse range of backgrounds • Recruitment of a professional, committed and effective Community Justice Panels staff team • Achievement of 20 referrals and five panels. This is in line with expectations based on the Chard model and co-ordinators have recently reported significant increases • Well run, and effective Panels which were perceived as fair by participants • Positive responses to most aspects of the Panels process by wrongdoers and harmed persons, including the quality of facilitation and support prior to and during the Panel; • Positive impact of participation on wrongdoers and the majority of harmed persons, including (in the wrongdoers' case) an impact on future behaviour The evaluation identified a number of key areas for development at both a strategic and operational level and these are summarised in the recommendations section below: Details: Sheffield, UK: Hallam Centre for Community Justice, Sheffield Hallam University, 2010. 47p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 18, 2013 at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/7053/ Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/7053/ Shelf Number: 129033 Keywords: Community Justice Panels (U.K.)Restorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Adler School Institute on Public Safety and Social Justice Title: Restorative Justice: A Primer and Exploration of Practice Across Two North American Cities Summary: Restorative justice is a philosophy of justice that seeks to address offenses by understanding the harm that was caused, understanding who was harmed, and deciding what can be done to repair the harm. Within this model, repairing broken relationships caused by crime is paramount. This philosophy can be contrasted with retributive justice, the predominant practice in most western societies. Retributive justice views an offense as a crime against the state rather than the victim and community, and seeks to deliver punishment thought to be proportionate to the crime. Here, less importance is placed on repairing harm and restoring the offender and victim to their highest level of functioning and potential. In fact, the harsh punishment aspect of retributive justice, particularly in the United States, has created an epidemic of incarceration for the most disadvantaged communities. In 1980, approximately 200,000 people in the United States were under some form of correctional supervision. Today that number is close to seven million. This increase has disproportionately affected poor urban communities of color, where large percentages of the population have been incarcerated. Since most who are incarcerated are eventually released, poor urban communities experience a virtual revolving door from neighborhood to prison and back. This cycle of incarceration and re-entry provides further challenges to the stability of neighborhoods already struggling with poverty, violence, and disinvestment. We believe that the United States justice system is overly reliant on harsh incarceration that has questionable effectiveness. The three-year reconviction rate for prisoners in the U.S. is approximately 43%. Approximately two thirds are re-arrested within three years. Correctional supervision is a costly public expense that deserves further scrutiny. In an era of fiscal austerity, government budgets are shrinking and violence remains a key challenge in many urban areas. There has never been a greater need to seek out evidence-based and cost-effective alternatives to more punishment and incarceration. This paper promotes ways in which restorative justice can reach its full potential as a place-based method of reducing violence and strengthening our most disadvantaged communities. Although restorative justice is more than just a strategy to reduce recidivism—it is a philosophical orientation, a set of principles and practices, a communication and learning tool, and more—this white paper explores how restorative practices can be more formally implemented. We believe that strong alignment with formal justice systems is necessary to provide a robust alternative to current sentencing procedures and incarceration as a public safety strategy. We believe that restorative justice has promise to increase safety, reduce the prison pipeline in poor communities of color and lower costs to society. The purpose of this paper is threefold. First, it provides a brief overview of the philosophy of restorative justice, the range of practice, and the evidence base behind the practices. Second, it provides an overview of how restorative practices are currently being used in two very different metropolitan contexts, Chicago, IL and Vancouver, B.C., Canada. This case study approach is used to draw out the different ways that formal systems and policies encourage or limit the potential of restorative practices. Third, it recommends expanded research, policy, and practice agendas that could further mainstream and align restorative justice in more formal ways. Ultimately, we hope this paper will be a useful primer and tool for practitioners, researchers, advocates, lawmakers, lay people and justice professionals alike. We highlight the core elements and philosophies of the practice, provide an initial analysis of how those characteristics and philosophies are currently being implemented, and discuss ways in which they can be expanded. Details: Chicago: Adler School Institute on Public Safety and Social Justice, 2011. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: White Paper: Accessed July 9, 2013 at: http://www.adler.edu/resources/content/4/1/documents/RJ_WhitePaper_Final_13_04_29.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.adler.edu/resources/content/4/1/documents/RJ_WhitePaper_Final_13_04_29.pdf Shelf Number: 129335 Keywords: Alternative to IncarcerationRestorative Justice |
Author: United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children Title: Promoting Restorative Justice for Children Summary: SRSG Santos Pais launched a new thematic report on Restorative Justice for Children in a high level event organized with the Governments of Indonesia and Norway during the General Assembly Debate on the Rights of the Child. The event counted on the participation of experts from Norway and Indonesia, as well as representatives from independent children's rights institutions, academia and civil society organizations. The discussion aimed at sharing models and experiences of child sensitive restorative justice processes and programs and to promote enhanced cooperation in this area at national, regional and international levels. This new SRSG report promotes a paradigm shift in the juvenile justice system moving from punitive to restorative justice approaches that respect and protect the rights of the child. The report highlights how such restorative justice programmes provide significant benefits for the children involved, for the victims and for society in general.The report presents important recommendations to consolidate restorative justice initiatives at the national level. These include strong legislative provisions such as decriminalizing status offences and survival behaviour and establishing legal safeguards to protect the child's best interests, and the child's right to freedom from violence and discrimination. Legislation should also provide law enforcement, prosecutors and the judiciary with options for diverting children away from the criminal justice system; it should foresee alternative and educative measures such as warning, probation, judicial supervision and community work, to be applied in combination with restorative justice processes or when restorative justice is not appropriate. The report also highlights that restorative justice and informal justice mechanisms, while being accessible at the local levels and playing an important role in the protection and reintegration of children, should never jeopardize children's rights or preclude children from accessing the formal justice system. Investing in effective training is equally important, including on children's rights and on necessary skills to promote dialogue and manage emotions and conflict and securing children's safety. Moreover, guidelines and standard operational procedures should be assured to all relevant law enforcement and justice actors, including the police, prosecutors, the judiciary, probation officers, lawyers, social workers, facilitators and mediators. Coordination between restorative justice service providers and justice actors is a key dimension of an effective restorative justice system and should be institutionalized at the national and local levels, and close cooperation should be encouraged between relevant stakeholders, including in informal justice systems. Similarly, well-trained professionals, available resources to support programs and invest in capacity building and bilateral and international cooperation, should be also promoted e.g. to document and gather data. Awareness-raising and social mobilization campaigns should be undertaken at the national and local levels with relevant stakeholders, including traditional and religious leaders and the media, to enhance understanding of restorative justice and promote child-friendly attitudes among justice professionals and service providers, and to sensitize the general public to the importance of restorative justice. Details: New York: SRSG on Violence Against Children, 2013. 67p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2013 at: http://srsg.violenceagainstchildren.org/sites/default/files/publications_final/srsgvac_restorative_justice_for_children_report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://srsg.violenceagainstchildren.org/sites/default/files/publications_final/srsgvac_restorative_justice_for_children_report.pdf Shelf Number: 131635 Keywords: Juvenile Justice ReformJuvenile Justice SystemsRestorative Justice |
Author: Elliott, Ian A. Title: Evaluability Assessments of the Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) Model: Cross-Site Report Summary: According to the U.S. National Reentry Resource Center (NRRC) at least 95% of state prisoners are released back to their communities after a period of incarceration. Both criminal justice agencies and the general public are conscious of the issue of sex offenders returning to the community because of the potentially negative biological and psychiatric outcomes for victims (e.g., Andersen et al., 2008; Chen et al., 2010). Circles of Support and Accountability (COSA) is a restorative justice-based reentry program for high-risk sex offenders with little or no pro-social support. There have been no rigorous large-scale outcome evaluations of COSA conducted to date. A weighted average of three significant estimated reductions attributable to COSA from smaller evaluations suggest a reduction of 77% in sexual recidivism. However, because of the varying quality of these studies it could be argued that this figure should be considered only an estimate of effectiveness. Therefore, at this time there is not enough evidence to confidently state that COSA is proven to be effective in reducing sexual recidivism. This report outlines an evaluability assessment of COSA across five sites with the goal of assessing the readiness of COSA provision in the U.S. for rigorous evaluation. The assessment aimed to clarify program intent, explore program reality, examine program data capacity, analyze program fidelity, and propose potential evaluation designs for future evaluation. An 'intended model' was developed, adapted from the Correctional Services Canada model (CSC, 2002; 2003) that sought to illustrate the espoused theory of COSA. COSA program reality was established via site visits to five locations delivering, or intending to deliver, COSA programs in the U.S.: Fresno, CA; Denver, CO; Durham, NC; Lancaster, PA; and Burlington, VT. During these site visits in-person interviews were conducted with key program personnel, other stakeholders, and any documented materials related to COSA policies and procedures were collected. All of the sites have implemented versions of the CSC model, adapted to suit their needs. The site reports suggest that VT-COSA alone could be considered to have high program fidelity, with COSA Fresno and COSA Lancaster demonstrating adequate fidelity, and Colorado COSA and COSA Durham demonstrating low fidelity. It is concluded that there are five potential obstacles that need to be addressed in order to conduct a successful experimental evaluation of COSA: (1) choice of outcomes; (2) significant differences in program implementation; (3) core member selection issues; (4) sample size, site capacity, and low baselines of recidivism; and (5) ownership of data. It is concluded that there is no methodological or ethical reason why a randomized control trial of COSA provision in the U.S. could not be conducted. The obstacles to an RCT are all such that they can be addressed with a combination of realistic tightening of program implementation, rigorous experimental control, and an increase in real-world resources. Finally, three action recommendations for future evaluative activity are presented: (1) conduct an experimental evaluation of the Vermont COSA program alone; (2) conduct an experimental evaluation that combines the Vermont COSA and COSA Fresno programs; or (3) allow the fledgling sites to develop and conduct a multi-site evaluation of COSA in the future. Details: State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University, 2013. 93p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 23, 2013 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243832.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/243832.pdf Shelf Number: 131686 Keywords: Prisoner ReentryReintegrationRestorative JusticeSex Offenders |
Author: Youth Justice Board for England and Wales Title: National Evaluation of the Restorative Justice in Schools Programme Summary: In May 2000, the Youth Justice Board of England and Wales launched a pilot initiative to test the impact of restorative justice conferences in two Lambeth schools. Following early signs that restorative justice conferences showed promise in addressing bullying and other forms of anti-social behaviour, the Board was successful in attracting funding for three years from the Treasury's Invest to Save fund to extend the programme to other areas of London in April 2001. Borough partnerships were invited to tender for these initiatives through the local Youth Offending Teams (Yots). By the end of May 2001, three other boroughs joined the initiative, following the tender process: Hackney, Hammersmith and Fulham, and Islington. However, by the summer of 2002, only one of the new boroughs (Hammersmith and Fulham) had made any progress towards implementing a programme of restorative justice work in schools, and the Board decided to take back the funds that had been allocated to Hackney and Islington. The remaining funding was repackaged into a national programme, and Yots in England and Wales were invited to apply for funds to implement restorative projects within schools in their local area. Due to the lack of progress in implementing projects in Hackney and Islington, bids had to demonstrate that Yots already had relationships with the schools in their area. Seven Yots were successful in this bidding process: Barnet, Blackpool, Medway, North Lincolnshire, Oxford, Rhondda Cynon Taff and Somerset. The projects spanned a range of different approaches to introducing restorative practices into schools, including restorative justice conferences. Chapter 3 of this report details these approaches. The newly recruited Yots had only 18 months to develop and implement their projects (because of considerably smaller budgets, ranging between $15,000 and $44,000, and the timespan of the Treasury grant) rather than the three years that the Hammersmith and Fulham, and Lambeth projects had had to implement their projects. As such, the Restorative Justice in Schools programme consisted of nine local Yots working across 26 schools (20 secondary and 6 primary). The contract to evaluate these initiatives was awarded to Partners in Evaluation, a specialist agency with a multi-ethnic team of researchers and a national reputation for conducting evaluations in the fields of health, education, social exclusion and regeneration. The evaluation was intended to explore the following research questions: 1. What are the levels of victimisation, bullying and robbery in the schools in the study? 2. How are restorative justice approaches introduced into the schools? 3. To what extent are participants in restorative justice conferences (victims and offenders) satisfied with the process at the time of the conference? Details: London: Youth Justice Board for England and Wales, 2004. 99p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 24, 2014 at: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/national_evaluation_of_the_restorative_justice_in_schools_programme/ Year: 2004 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.restorativejustice.org.uk/resource/national_evaluation_of_the_restorative_justice_in_schools_programme/ Shelf Number: 131797 Keywords: BullyingDelinquency PreventionJuvenile OffendersRestorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool Violence |
Author: Weatherburn, Don Title: A Review of Restorative Justice Responses to Offending Summary: The present review sought to determine on the available evidence (a) whether restorative justice (RJ) is an effective means of reducing re-offending (b) what benefits victims of crime obtain from participation in the RJ process (c) whether the public supports the principles of RJ and (d) how the cost and efficiency of RJ proceedings compare with conventional courts in cost and efficiency (i.e. time taken to finalize cases). The review finds little reliable evidence that RJ reduces re-offending. Victims who participate in RJ are generally satisfied with the experience but it is unclear whether they are more satisfied than victims in similar cases that are dealt with in court. The limited evidence available suggests that the public supports the principles of RJ. It appears to be a less expensive and more efficient way of finalizing criminal cases involving young people but, once again, the evidence on this issue at this stage is rather limited. Details: Sydney: Australia and New Zealand School of Government, 2013. 20p. Source: Internet Resource: Evidence Base, Issue 1: http://journal.anzsog.edu.au/publications/4/EvidenceBase2013Issue1.pdf Year: 2013 Country: International URL: http://journal.anzsog.edu.au/publications/4/EvidenceBase2013Issue1.pdf Shelf Number: 104861 Keywords: RecidivismRestorative JusticeVictims of Crime |
Author: Centre for Innovative Justice Title: Innovative Justice Responses to Sexual Offending: Pathways to better outcomes for victims, offenders and the community Summary: Sexual assault is complex, pervasive and insidious. The criminal justice system is expected to deliver a sense that justice has been done, yet its current response is inadequate for the large majority of sexual assault victims. Victims of sexual assault have historically been met with denial and disbelief, with society failing to develop an adequate response to a crime it did not fully recognise or understand, and to gendered assumptions it refused to relinquish. In recent decades, hard won improvements - called for by reformers and feminists, and implemented by well-intentioned governments - have seen sexual assault taken more seriously in legal and political arenas alike. Investigation, prosecution and court procedures have improved; specialisation has been encouraged; and victims have been provided with fairer treatment and additional support services. Despite this, however, sexual assault remains the most under-reported form of personal violence, while estimates suggest that the crucial evidentiary requirements and standards of proof demanded by the criminal process mean that the chance of a sexual assault incident resulting in a conviction is as low as, and potentially lower than, one in one hundred. Hard hitting policies of tougher penalties, longer sentences and stringent release practices, meanwhile, do little to address the majority of sexual offending, instead making offenders reluctant to take responsibility or their offending and choosing to contest the allegations. This in turn makes victims reluctant to pursue a prosecution, not wanting to be drawn into the protracted adversarial process. In other words, most victims of sexual assault do not report to the police, do not pursue a prosecution, or if they do, do not secure a conviction. This means that the conventional criminal justice system, with its single option of investigation by police and prosecution through the courts, is failing to provide an adequate response to the majority of victims of sexual assault. While the prosecution and collective denunciation of sexual offending should continue to be pursued, and while ongoing efforts to reform the conventional criminal justice system remain critical, alone they will not markedly change this state of affairs. Additional non-criminal law based avenues, meanwhile, such as the pursuit of statutory compensation or damages through the civil jurisdiction, have significant limitations attached. Clearly, victims need more choice in their pursuit of justice - a suite of options from which they can identify the path or paths that best suit their circumstances; options that provide them with the opportunity to tell their story, to have the harm acknowledged, to participate in the process and to have a say in the outcome. Some of these options may, to date, not have been pursued precisely because the area of sexual assault is so complex, yet may improve the justice system's response if implemented in the right way. Accordingly, this report argues that the justice system should be responsive, inclusive, flexible and fair - that justice processes should be designed in a way that make them accessible and a more realistic prospect to more victims of sexual assault, rather than reserved for a select few who happen to have cases which are able to meet high legal thresholds. This report by the Centre for Innovative Justice (CIJ) was commissioned by the Attorney-General's Department (Cth) as one of a series of reports identifying important innovations in the justice system. The CIJ's objective in this report is to identify innovative justice processes that have the potential to meet more of the needs of victims of sexual offending; to address public interest concerns; and to prevent reoffending in ways that the conventional justice system has limited capacity to achieve. In doing so, the report suggests that reform does not depend upon a choice between a 'tough' and a 'soft' response but, rather, upon providing an appropriate response - one that is able to meet the disparate needs of victims, while maintaining the integrity of the rights of offenders. As such, the report builds upon existing theoretical work and proposes a best practice, sexual offence restorative justice conferencing model and framework, influenced by national and international innovations, and which is able to be tailored and implemented in all Australian jurisdictions. Restorative justice conferencing involves a facilitated, safe and structured encounter between the victim and the offender, providing an opportunity to repair the harm caused by the offending. The report explains that, to date, restorative justice conferencing practices have tended to exist on the periphery of Australian criminal justice systems and have not been extended to sexual offending in the adult jurisdiction. This is primarily because of legitimate concerns about victims being re-victimised and sexual assault being re-privatised, rather than condemned in the public sphere. While these concerns must be heeded, the CIJ draws from a range of existing examples and concludes that - with comprehensive safeguards and a coordinated, properly resourced system - sexual offence restorative justice conferencing has the potential to meet more of the justice needs of those victims who are being failed by the existing system. In detailing a best practice restorative justice conferencing model for sexual offending, the report addresses such issues as: - The importance of legislation, overarching principles and operational guidelines - The importance of a restorative justice oversight body, incorporating a specialist gender violence team, to oversee and monitor the implementation of the model - The need for skilled and specialist restorative justice conference facilitators - The need for an expert assessment panel to determine the suitability of individual cases for restorative justice conferencing - The importance of basic eligibility criteria, including that all parties consent, and the need for offender and victim age limits - Pathways into and out of restorative justice conferencing, with appropriate police, prosecution and judicial oversight at different stages of the process - The need for protections around admissions made during a conference - The importance of consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and culturally and linguistically diverse communities around any innovative justice initiatives - The importance of restorative justice processes being responsive to the needs of victims and offenders with cognitive impairments, disabilities and mental illness - The potential outcome agreements and what to do in the event of breakdown - The importance of funded, accessible community based sexual offender treatment programs to complement a restorative justice approach, and - The balance required between victim autonomy and public policy considerations. Details: Melbourne: RMIT, Centre for Innovative Justice, 2014. 100p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 28, 2014 at: http://mams.rmit.edu.au/qt1g6twlv0q3.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://mams.rmit.edu.au/qt1g6twlv0q3.pdf Shelf Number: 132790 Keywords: RapeRestorative JusticeSex CrimesSex Offenders (Australia)Sexual ViolenceVictims of Crime |
Author: Domingo, Pilar Title: Dealing with legacies of violence: Transitional justice and governance transitions Summary: The politics of redress, justice and accountability feature in most post-conflict and post-repression settings. This places transitional justice firmly on the policy agenda of international support to governance transitions. This Background Note reviews some key issues and questions to emerge from the growing literature on transitional justice. It looks at the expansion in the mandate and scope of transitional justice, the range of possible mechanisms and the political factors that influence choices and outcomes in practice. The paper concludes by setting out some key points that international actors need to consider if they are to engage strategically with these processes. Key messages include: - Where domestic political conditions are conducive to transitional justice, there are good reasons for the international community to support these processes. - There is a broad range of transitional justice mechanisms. Their objectives have evolved from an immediate concern with outcomes for victims to more ambitious goals related to state- and peace-building processes. - Transitional justice is a young field of empirical study. More is now known about the political factors that influence the possibility of transitional justice and its subsequent trajectory. - But little is known about both the effectiveness of international support to these processes and their impact on longer-term political and social outcomes. Details: London: Overseas Development Institute, 2012. 11p. Source: Internet Resource: Background Note: Accessed September 15, 2014 at: http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/7686.pdf Year: 2012 Country: International URL: http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/7686.pdf Shelf Number: 133321 Keywords: ReparationsRestorative JusticeRetributive JusticeTransitional Justice |
Author: Harris, Celia Title: Restorative Justice and Health in Merced Schools Summary: Human Impact Partners partnered with Building Healthy Communities (BHC) - Merced, Merced Organizing Project, and The California Endowment on a Health Impact Assessment of restorative justice school discipline policies in Merced, CA. The HIA predicts the impacts of restorative justice on educational and fiscal impacts, suspension and school pushout, school climate, and mental health, and makes recommendations for continued and expanded use of restorative justice in these schools and others in the county. HIA findings suggest that a restorative justice discipline approach supports health by reducing suspensions and drop-out; increasing educational attainment and lifetime earning potential; reducing violence, bullying and arrests; improving school climate and relationship-building; and increasing self-esteem. Details: Oakland, CA: Human Impact Partners, 2014. 59p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed October 2, 2014 at: http://www.humanimpact.org/news/just-released-hia-on-restorative-justice-school-discipline-policies-in-merced-2/ Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.humanimpact.org/news/just-released-hia-on-restorative-justice-school-discipline-policies-in-merced-2/ Shelf Number: 133538 Keywords: Restorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool Discipline (California)School Suspensions |
Author: Muir, Rick Title: Everyday justice: Mobilising the power of victims, communities and public services to reduce crime Summary: This report argues for reforms to the way the criminal justice system deals with victims, communities and offenders, in order to repair the everyday relationships damaged by crime and social exclusion. Crime is both a cause and a consequence of a breakdown in relationships: a lack of positive family and wider social relationships very often lies behind offending behaviour, while crime itself damages relationships, harming victims and fostering fear and mistrust within communities. Yet our criminal justice system does very little to repair the relationships that are damaged by crime and social exclusion. The system is set up as a confrontation between the state and the accused, rather than providing for direct reparation between the victim and the offender; it also gives local communities very little role in achieving justice and tackling the causes of crime. Furthermore, rather than providing the kind of consistent relationships with professionals that would aid rehabilitation, the system passes offenders between a range of different agencies, with too many falling between the cracks. This report proposes means to tackle the everyday, high-volume but relatively low-harm offences that make up the vast majority of crimes by mobilising the collective power of all relevant actors and institutions to ensure reparation for harm done and rehabilitation for the offender. Its recommendations cover three areas. - Offering greater direct reparation from offenders to their victims, including a right to restorative justice, to improve victims' confidence in the system while helping to reduce reoffending by bringing home to the offender the damage they have caused. - Fostering greater community involvement in the justice system, particularly through neighbourhood justice panels, to secure greater public confidence in the courts. - Providing offenders with the kind of stable and consistent relationships with criminal justice professionals that the evidence tells us are likely to promote desistance from crime, by making the justice system more integrated, and placing all young adult offenders aged 18-21 under the responsibility of the successful local youth offending teams. Details: London: Institute for Public Policy Research, 2014. 46p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 19, 2015 at: http://www.ippr.org/assets/media/publications/pdf/Everyday-justice_Jul2014.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.ippr.org/assets/media/publications/pdf/Everyday-justice_Jul2014.pdf Shelf Number: 134980 Keywords: Community ParticipationCriminal Justice Reform (U.K.)Offender RehabilitationRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspectorate Title: The effectiveness of youth conferencing Summary: The report, 'The effectiveness of youth conferencing' examined how the Youth Justice Agency (YJA) used youth conferences to deal with young offenders in supporting them to accept responsibility for their behaviour and its impact on their victims. The inspection revealed that the youth conference process is working more effectively and efficiently than identified in past CJI reports published in 2008 and 2010. Higher risk young people had been appropriately channelled into an Intensive Supervision and Support Programme (ISSP) which provided a more robust method of ensuring young persons' needs are met in a way that helped prevent re-offending. This report identifies that around 40% of referrals involved young people who were looked-after in the care home system, and there were inconsistencies in how these young people are dealt with when they commit offences. The report calls for the development of a joint strategy between the YJA and the Health Trusts aimed at integrating restorative practices within all care homes in support of youth conferences. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspectorate of Northern Ireland, 2015. 37p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 26, 2015 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/c3/c35d6f56-03e9-4b28-be6e-3a948107c6e9.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/c3/c35d6f56-03e9-4b28-be6e-3a948107c6e9.pdf Shelf Number: 135058 Keywords: Intensive SupervisionJuvenile Offenders (Northern Ireland)Restorative JusticeYouth Conferencing |
Author: Dunkel, Frieder Title: Research and Selection of the Most Effective Juvenile Restorative Justice Practices in Europe: Snapshots from 28 EU Member States Summary: The IJJO in conjunction with its think tank the European Council for Juvenile Justice (ECJJ) has just released Volume I of its 'European Research on Restorative Juvenile Justice'. This volume, entitled 'Research and Selection of the Most Effective Juvenile Restorative Justice Practices in Europe: Snapshots from 28 EU Member States' analyses the existing restorative practices across the EU, and is the basis for the best practices recommended in Volume II, the 'European Model for Restorative Justice with Juveniles', soon to be published. The research was led by the team of Professor Frieder Dunkel, Doctor Andrea Parosanu and Doctor Philip Horsfield, of Greisfwald University, who were responsible for individual snapshots of restorative juvenile justice in each of the EU Member States, before concluding with a comparative overview of practices across the EU as a whole. Each snapshot was complied following extensive research and most are written by local experts on subject. There is a total of 30 snapshots, as the UK is broken up into three parts (England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland), due to differences in legal systems and approaches to restorative justice. The aim of the 'Snapshots' is to provide a better understanding as to what makes for a successful restorative justice programme. As such, it takes into account the access and use of restorative practices as determined by its legal base in each country. The implementation of restorative justice itself is also a focus of the 'Snapshots'; this is determined by its organisational structure in each jurisdiction. Finally the work evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of each restorative system. In her foreword to the volume, Marta Santos Pais, Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on Violence against Children, emphasises the importance of restorative justice in both reducing reoffending and protecting child rights. She argues that it provides a successful and cost effective way of rehabilitating and reintegrating child offenders with society. The Special Representative praised the research itself for its emphasis on child rights, without compromising the rights of the victim. The 'Snapshots' provide the background research for the next volume to be released, the 'European Model for Restorative Justice with Juveniles'. Based on the 28 national snapshots this volume analyses the key features of good restorative justice systems. It then picks out three case studies; Belgium, Finland and Northern Ireland, examining in greater detail the practices in each. From the good practices established in the 'European Model', the final volume will provide a toolkit to practitioners involved in juvenile justice and aims to diffuse the most effective restorative justice methods. Details: Brussels: International Juvenile Justice Observatory, 260p. Source: Internet Resource: European Research on Restorative Juvenile Justice Volume 1: Accessed September 2, 2015 at: http://www.ejjc.org/sites/default/files/volume_i_-_snapshots_from_28_eu_member_states.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://www.ejjc.org/sites/default/files/volume_i_-_snapshots_from_28_eu_member_states.pdf Shelf Number: 136649 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersRestorative Justice |
Author: Poynton, Suzanne Title: Rates of Recidivism among Offenders Referred to Forum Sentencing Summary: Aim: To determine whether the NSW Forum Sentencing program is more effective than the conventional sentencing process in reducing recidivism. Method: Offenders referred to Forum Sentencing in 2011 were matched with offenders who were 'eligible' for Forum Sentencing but who were sentenced in a NSW Local Court where Forum Sentencing was not operating. These two groups were matched on a large number of covariates using propensity score techniques and were then compared on the time to first new proven offence using Cox regression. All offenders in both groups were followed up for a minimum of 6 months after finalisation of their index offence. The analysis was conducted using an intention-to-treat research design. Results: Of the 575 offenders referred to Forum Sentencing, 552 could be matched with an 'equivalent' offender in the control group based on the covariates measured at the index court appearance. Cox regression analyses showed that there was no significant difference between the matched groups in the time to first new offence. This lack of an effect remained even after controlling for other relevant covariates. Conclusion: This study finds no evidence that offenders who are referred to the NSW Forum Sentencing program are less likely to re-offend than similar offenders who are dealt with through the normal sentencing process. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2013. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in Crime and Justice, No. 172: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/cjb172.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/cjb172.pdf Shelf Number: 129776 Keywords: ConferencingForum SentencingRecidivismRestorative JusticeSentencing |
Author: Melendez Pereto, Anna Title: Restorative justice and desistance. The impact of victim-offender mediation on desistance from crime Summary: This research aims to examine the capacity of restorative justice to have an influence on desistance from crime, by focusing on mediation processes in order to identify whether there is a relationship between participating in a mediation process and taking the decision to desist from crime as well as to study the offenders' stability in a pro-social life, desisting from deviant behaviour. A particular aim of the research is to explore whether the victims' participation in the process, restoration and the process itself can promote positive changes in the offenders' behaviour after completion of the mediation programme dealt with in this research. First, to examine to what extent the offender can reduce the use of some neutralisation techniques. Specifically, the aim is to analyse whether the offender is able to recognise that there has been a victim, to admit having injured someone and to admit rather than deny responsibility for it. Second, the aim is to analyse whether mediation enables offenders to express guilt, remorse and shame and thus lead them to change their offending behaviour. And finally, to analyse whether the process has an impact on the offender's ability to reflect on what happened and its consequence. The empirical study has two main parts divided in four different moments. The first part of the study has three stages. The first is at the beginning of the process and offenders have to complete a self-administered pre-test questionnaire -at the end of the first individual mediation session- in order to know their expectations of the process. The second takes place immediately after the mediation, and offenders complete a self-administered pot-test questionnaire. During direct mediation -when victim and offender met together with a mediator- non-participant observation is carried out to observe the interaction between parties. In indirect mediation the last session with the mediator is observed. The second part of the study, which takes place 6 months later, consists of a final narrative interview with the offenders who had been observed during mediation in order to learn more about the offenders' life course, their experience in mediation and its possible impact on their lives in the future. Details: Barcelona: Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona. Departament de Ciencia Politica i de Dret Public, 2015. 343p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed October 19, 2015 at: http://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/309139 Year: 2015 Country: Spain URL: http://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/309139 Shelf Number: 136997 Keywords: DesistanceRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Mika, Harry Title: Community-based Restorative Justice in Northern Ireland Summary: The purpose of this report is to present independent evaluation findings regarding the work of Community Restorative Justice Ireland (CRJI) and Northern Ireland Alternatives (NIA) in facilitating and promoting non-violent community alternatives to paramilitary punishment attacks and exclusions relating to alleged localised crime and anti-social behaviour. A continuing legacy of the conflict in Northern Ireland (NI) has been the use of beatings, shootings and exclusions by paramilitary organisations as a response to local crime and anti-social behaviour. Over the period 1998/99 to 2004/2005, more than 1,800 paramilitary-style shootings and assaults have been recorded in NI. This report focuses exclusively on the work supported by Atlantic Philanthropies (1999-2005), particularly during the period 2003 to 2005 (Phase II) which was restricted to eight identified sites and the achievement of decreased levels of punishment attacks, leading to the end of punishment violence directed at alleged anti-social behaviour, and increased levels of reintegration into communities. Details: Belfast: Queen's University, Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2006. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 11, 2015 at: http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/sites/default/files/uploads/HMikaReport_0.pdf Year: 2006 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/sites/default/files/uploads/HMikaReport_0.pdf Shelf Number: 137234 Keywords: Anti-Social BehaviorReintegrationRestorative Justice |
Author: Fronius, Trevor Title: Restorative Justice in U.S. Schools: A Research Review Summary: This report provides a comprehensive review of the literature on restorative justice in U.S. schools. The review captures key issues, describes models of restorative justice, and summarizes results from studies conducted in the field. The review was conducted on research reports and other relevant literature published, or made publicly available, between 1999 and mid-2014 and was guided by the following questions: - What are the origins and theory underlying U.S. schools' interest in restorative justice? - How does the literature describe restorative justice programs or approaches in U.S. schools? - What issues have been identified as important to consider for implementing restorative justice in the schools? - What does the empirical research say about the impact of restorative justice in the schools? In the literature reviewed for this report, restorative justice is generally portrayed as a promising approach to address school climate, culture, and safety. Although the community of support for its implementation has grown exponentially over the past several years, more research is needed. Several rigorous trials underway will perhaps provide the evidence necessary to make stronger claims about the impact of restorative justice, and the field will benefit greatly as those results become available over the next several years. Details: San Francisco, California: WestEd Justice and Prevention Research Center, 2016. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 1, 2016 at: https://www.wested.org/wp-content/files_mf/1456766824resourcerestorativejusticeresearchreview.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.wested.org/wp-content/files_mf/1456766824resourcerestorativejusticeresearchreview.pdf Shelf Number: 138001 Keywords: Restorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool DisciplineSchool Safety |
Author: Atella, Julie Title: Evaluation of RADIUS: A Program for Justice-Involved Girls in the Twin Cities Summary: Operating continuously since 2000, Radius serves approximately 90 girls in Hennepin County, Minnesota each year. The program has three regions, North Minneapolis, South Minneapolis, and Hennepin County suburbs. Justice-involved girls ages 12 through 18 can be referred to Radius by probation officers or courts. The program combines multiple best practice approaches for working with girls including focusing on strengths, including families, offering a safe space to share experiences, hiring trained and effective staff, and conducting girls-only groups to encourage sharing. The Radius model involves four main components: weekly girls groups, individual counseling and case management, restorative justice talking circles, and resource referrals. Methods From October 2011 through December 2014, Wilder Research collected multiple types of data including: - Key informant interviews with Radius clients and their family members - Annual key informant interviews with Radius staff and county probation - Radius client pre- and post-program surveys - Comparison analysis using data from the Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department (HSPHD) and the Hennepin County Department of Community Corrections and Rehabilitation (DOCCR) The results from these data collection activities were synthesized to produce the key findings and recommendations included in this report. Details: St. Paul, MN: Wilder Research, 2015. 73p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 22, 2016 at: http://www.wilder.org/Wilder-Research/Publications/Studies/Radius/Evaluation%20of%20Radius%20-%20A%20Program%20for%20Justice-Involved%20Girls%20in%20the%20Twin%20Cities.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: http://www.wilder.org/Wilder-Research/Publications/Studies/Radius/Evaluation%20of%20Radius%20-%20A%20Program%20for%20Justice-Involved%20Girls%20in%20the%20Twin%20Cities.pdf Shelf Number: 138371 Keywords: Case ManagementCounselingDelinquent GirlsGender Specific ResponsesJustice-Involved GirlsRestorative Justice |
Author: Quigley, Martin Title: Building Bridges: An Evaluation and Social Return on Investment Study of the Le Cheile Restorative Justice Project Summary: The Le Cheile Restorative Justice Project is Ireland's first and only non-statutory youth restorative justice service. The Project's primary focus is on providing a range of restorative justice interventions to young people from the Limerick area, who have been involved in crime and are being worked with by the Probation service. Le Cheile wanted an external evaluation of how effective their restorative justice programme was, and a Social Return on Investment analysis. What we did We worked with Le Cheile staff, clients, victims, family members and other professionals to develop a clear understanding of the outcomes of the project. We worked with many interagency partners, like Young Persons Probation, An Garda Siochana, Support After Crimes Services and other community agencies to develop a greater understanding what worked well, what could be improved and what happened as a result of the interventions received For the Social Return on Investment analysis, interviews and focus groups were held with a range of stakeholders including children and young people, members of their families, the victims, representatives of criminal justice agencies and other professionals. Details: Le Cheile, Ireland: Le Cheile Mentoring and Youth Justice Support Services, 2015. 126p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 28, 2016 at: http://qualitymatters.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Building-Bridges-Restorative-Justice-SROI-Evaluation-2015.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Ireland URL: http://qualitymatters.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Building-Bridges-Restorative-Justice-SROI-Evaluation-2015.pdf Shelf Number: 138451 Keywords: Restorative JusticeVictim ServicesVictims of Crime |
Author: Weitekamp, Elmar G.M. Title: Developing Peacemaking Circles in a European Context Summary: The first question to be asked, before even beginning with this research, was why do we want to focus on peacemaking circles? What sets them apart that we even want to try to implement them (or at least explore if an implementation is possible) in a European context? To answer this question, we have to look back at the broader context of restorative justice. Restorative justice has grown for the last few decades out of a criticism towards the traditional justice system. Christie, in his article "onflicts as property" was probably one of the first to describe so clearly that this traditional justice system itself took the conflict away from its rightful owners, namely victim, offender and the neighbourhood, and that we should strive to give it back to them (1977). Although this statement does not really focus on every nuance of the whole evolution of why the state came to claim the ownership of dealing with crime and therefore might oversimplify the issue, as a basic premise it still holds its value to this day. It is this premise that restorative justice practitioners still hold high as they try to bring victim and offender together to deal with the crime and its consequences. In the search of how to do this, restorative justice proponents were sometimes inspired by native ways of dealing with conflicts - although some criticized that restorative justice literature did too much "butterfly-collecting": picking native practices that helped build the restorative discourse, without spending too much attention to the context of those practices (Crawford, 2002). As such, restorative justice seems to focus on three large methodological approaches, where especially the latter two find their roots, at least partially, in native practices: victim-offender mediation, conferencing and (peacemaking) circles. The success of restorative justice has led in the last decade(s) to a growth in both the use and regulation, both in international and national law, of restorative justice practices in Europe. Victim-offender mediation is the most wide-spread in Europe, although conferencing is gaining ground (Zinsstag & Vanfraechem, 2012). Circles however, are not used in Europe at the moment. It is in that use of restorative justice practices and the regulation thereof that we tend to see a growing distinction offender mediation is the most wide-spread in Europe, although conferencing is gaining ground (Zinsstag & Vanfraechem, 2012). Circles however, are not used in Europe at the moment. It is in that use of restorative justice practices and the regulation thereof that we tend to see a growing distinction between the restorative justice theory and the restorative justice practice. And that distinction lies entirely in the question that already arose in the previously mentioned article from Christie: who are the rightful owners of a conflict? Details: Tubingen: Institute for Criminology, University of Tubingen, 2015, 833p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 30, 2016 at: https://www.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/einrichtungen/ifk/forschung/sanktionsforschung/abgeschlossen/implementing-peacemaking-circles-in-europe/forschungsbericht Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: https://www.jura.uni-tuebingen.de/einrichtungen/ifk/forschung/sanktionsforschung/abgeschlossen/implementing-peacemaking-circles-in-europe/forschungsbericht Shelf Number: 138481 Keywords: Restorative JusticeVictim-Offender MediationVictims of Crime |
Author: Foussard, Cedric Title: Addressing Juvenile Justice Priorities in the Asia-Pacific Region Summary: The International Juvenile Justice Observatory (IJJO) is proud to present the 'Addressing Juvenile Justice Priorities in the Asia-Pacific Region(link is external)' report. The aim of this report is to identify and analyse the priority issues for juvenile justice systems in the Asia-Pacific region. Accordingly, the report deals with the issues of violence against children in the juvenile justice system, restorative justice, cross-border issues and diversionary and alternative measures. It was produced by the IJJO's Asia-Pacific Council for Juvenile Justice, with the support of the Department for Juvenile Observation and Protection of the Ministry of Justice of Thailand. This report is unique in the sense that it is comprised of a theoretical framework, snapshots from countries in the Asia-Pacific region and policy-oriented workshops. Promising practices are presented to give an overview of what can be done, in practice, to improve the development of juvenile justice systems in line with human rights standards. The report outlines the need to improve the juvenile justice system in accordance with human rights standards, including safeguards and policies in this area. The report is based on the Second Meeting of the Asia-Pacific Council for Juvenile Justice held in Phuket in May 2015. Representatives from governments in the Asia-Pacific region, academia, judiciary and NGO's discussed "Policy Recommendations on Violence against Children; Alternatives to Detention; Restorative Justice in the Asia-Pacific Region". The meeting focused on three areas in particular: violence against children, alternatives to detention and restorative justice. Each of these subjects was tackled using a multilayered approach. The first theme that is discussed in the report is violence against children. As children find themselves in particular vulnerable circumstances when they are in contact with the law, children can be easy targets of different types of violence: psychological pressure, abuse of power, degrading treatment and physical violence are only a few examples. This violence often remains invisible, causing it to be unrecorded and unprosecuted. Tackling this issue is a priority for governments and requires specific safeguards and complaint and monitoring mechanisms. The second theme that is addressed in the report concerns diversionary measures and alternatives to detention. Detention is an overused measure to bring children to justice. Custody for children and young people should only be used as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time. Children are extremely vulnerable when they are in detention, so the necessary safeguards must be put in place. Furthermore, effective diversion and alternative measures based in the community facilitate reintegration into society. Governments should make it a priority to implement effective diversion and alternative measures in order to promote the development of the child and to limit the amount of children deprived of their liberty. The last theme that is analysed in the report is restorative justice. Restorative justice can be used as a diversionary or alternative measure. Restorative justice is particularly interesting because it can be used to address the child's specific needs. Furthermore, restorative justice aims to promote reconciliation between the parties, adding a rehabilitative purpose. The last section of the report specifies the priorities of the Asia-Pacific Council for Juvenile Justice in the region. The APCJJ Subcommittee for ASEAN has established that cross-border safeguards for children in contact with the law should be brought to the attention of the member states. As member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are working towards opening their borders, this issue becomes extremely relevant. The report concludes with some key recommendations on every topic that was addressed. The most important recommendations represented in this report are, in summary: 1.Reducing the number of children in contact with the justice system, for instance, by avoiding criminalization of statutory offences and setting an appropriate age of criminal responsibility, which is an effective way to avoid the risk of secondary victimization within the justice system; 2.Ensuring that deprivation of liberty is only used as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time, by promoting available and effective options of diversion, as well as alternatives to detention; 3.Fostering diversion measures, as it allows to reduce the cost of court proceedings and generally proves to be more responsive to the needs of first time and non-serious offenders; 4.Ensuring that legislation guarantees the recourse to diversion at every stage of the criminal justice proceedings; 5.During restorative processes, both the offender and the victim shall enjoy fair trial guarantees to avoid secondary victimization and ensure fairness of the proceeding. Restorative principles, such as voluntary participation, confidentiality and neutrality of the mediator, should be guaranteed by law; 6.Facilitators shall be offered high quality training, both as a precondition to get in contact with children, as well as throughout their experience in restorative practices; 7.National legislation shall ensure that every child has the right to equal and fair treatment, regardless of their nationality; 8.Legislation shall enshrine the right to privacy of children: any information collected in the course of the proceeding is not to become public, even after the child has reach 18 years of age. Details: Brussels: International Juvenile Justice Observatory (IJJO), 2016. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: accessed April 23, 2016 at: http://www.apcjj.org/sites/default/files/oijj_asia-pacific_council_2016.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Asia URL: http://www.apcjj.org/sites/default/files/oijj_asia-pacific_council_2016.pdf Shelf Number: 138793 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationChild Abuse and NeglectChild ProtectionJuvenile Justice SystemsRestorative JusticeViolence Against Children |
Author: Osterman, Linnea Title: Making Restorative Justice Work for Women Who Have Offended Summary: Restorative justice is about direct communication between a victim and their offender, typically through a face to face conference. It holds offenders to account for what they have done, helps them to take responsibility and make amends, and also gives victims the chance to explain the real impact of the crime. While restorative justice has experienced a surge in both theory and practice of late, there remains "[a] woeful lack of evidence regarding female offenders in restorative justice conferences" (Miles, 2013: 8). The vast majority of evidence around restorative justice is gender-blind (Cook, 2006), and/or uses an all-male sample. This is despite a significant and growing evidence base showing that women1 involved in criminal justice have different offending patterns and come into the system with different backgrounds (Elis, 2005). In view of this, recent years have seen a mounting recognition in both policy and practice of the value of gender-sensitive approaches when working with women in criminal justice. This study critically questioned whether restorative justice is lagging behind other areas for criminal justice service provision in this area. The extremely limited literature that exists suggests that very low numbers of female offender cases go through to conference, and that there is a perception in the field that women who have committed an offence are more reluctant to engage in restorative justice (Miles, 2013). The reasons behind this remain unclear, though it is not wholly unlikely to be related to the particular nature and circumstances of female offending. Moreover, there are tentative suggestions in the literature that restorative justice may have a stronger effect on women who offend, especially those convicted of violent offences (Strang, 2015; Sherman et al, 2006). Again, the reasons behind these suggestions remain unclear, though theories include higher levels of empathy and a particular female 'ethics of care', positive impacts on mental health and new opportunities for engagement with services and positive networks. In contrast, some gendered risks have also been highlighted in the limited literature, including that restorative justice, if not well delivered, may exacerbate mental health problems, linked to particular experiences of shame, guilt, and a higher prevalence of vulnerability, trauma and self-harm. Details: London: Restorative Justice Council, 2016. 68p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 13, 2016 at: http://www.t2a.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/making_restorative_justice_work_for_women_offenders_fullreport.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.t2a.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/making_restorative_justice_work_for_women_offenders_fullreport.pdf Shelf Number: 139008 Keywords: Alternatives to IncarcerationFemale OffendersGender-Specific ProgramsRestorative JusticeVictims of Crime |
Author: Garber, Melissa L. Title: An analysis of restorative justice and intimate partner violence policy and practice: Professionals' perspectives and perceptions Summary: This qualitative research project endeavoured to open up the conversation around RJ and IPV and highlight gaps in policy in order to give voice to an area in the RJ process that has, up to this point, been virtually silent. There were two overarching aims. The first was to identify the underlying practice assumptions and values evident in the New Zealand Ministry of Justice (MOJ) restorative justice (RJ) standards for family violence (FV) cases (MOJ, 2013). These would be viewed from the perspective of working with intimate partner violence (IPV) cases in particular. The intention was to compare these assumptions and values with RJ and IPV international theory and New Zealand practice. The second aim was to clarify the processes and criteria used to determine/assess IPV offender suitability and readiness for RJ, ascertain the ways in which these practices were theoretically justified, and to compare the implementation of practice to the explicit and implicit guidelines present in New Zealand policy. To these ends, a collection of 30 criminal justice professionals (judges, lawyers, police officers) and restorative justice facilitators involved in the referral and assessment process of IPV offenders participated in interviews in person, over the phone, or via Skype, which were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and then subject to analysis in order to create a conceptual framework. The analysis identified 18 main themes that were grouped into four main categories: RJ IPV conceptualization, effective RJ IPV assessor qualities, IPV offender assessment for RJ suitability/readiness, and RJ IPV practice issues. These results were compared with policy and with the international literature in order to identify consistencies and inconsistencies and to discover where gaps in policy may become clarified. Results showed that a great deal of the policy was supported by the international literature, however there were several gaps and inconsistencies. Several issues were of interest - namely the lack of clarity in the framework of RJ for IPV (i.e. where does it sit in relation to the traditional criminal justice system, intervention vs. pathway vs. overarching framework), the timing of RJ assessment in terms of treatment and interventions, siloing of agencies, and funding/resourcing issues. A final question that arose for me during analysis was regarding the purpose and value of assessment in these cases. Rather than making a decision regarding suitability in order to exclude an IPV case from the RJ process, if the process was truly restorative, perhaps the outcome of an assessment of IPV offender/case suitability should, instead, be to determine what resources are necessary in order to support any IPV case through the RJ process. Details: Wellington, NZ: Victoria University of Wellington, 2016. 223p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed June 28, 2016 at: http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10063/5143/thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Year: 2016 Country: New Zealand URL: http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10063/5143/thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Shelf Number: 139521 Keywords: Family ViolenceIntimate Partner ViolenceRestorative Justice |
Author: Bolitho, Jane Title: The Use and Effectiveness of Restorative Justice in Criminal Justice Systems Following Child Sexual Abuse or Comparable Harms Summary: The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse has commissioned an international literature review to examine the research evidence on the use, justification and effectiveness of restorative justice approaches in relation to child sexual abuse, and any problems or concerns arising, particularly in relation to institutional and non-familial child sexual abuse. As this report informs the Commission's criminal justice project, it focuses on restorative justice approaches used within criminal justice systems. This report presents the results of a brief review of international literature and addresses four main areas, which are: - the extent to which restorative justice is currently used in cases of institutional child sexual abuse and other child sexual abuse (or arguably, comparable areas such as adult sexual or personal violence offences, or child-related crimes, to the extent they may inform possible approaches to child sexual abuse or institutional child sexual abuse) - the empirical evidence (if any) to support using restorative justice for child sexual abuse (or comparable areas) - associated issues and criticisms - particular considerations or implications for institutional child sexual abuse. Details: Sydney: University of New South Wales, 2016. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Report for the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse: Accessed July 28, 2016 at: https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/getattachment/9f328928-a343-4c65-b98e-94e3185894c7/Restorative-justice-following-child-sexual-abuse-o Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/getattachment/9f328928-a343-4c65-b98e-94e3185894c7/Restorative-justice-following-child-sexual-abuse-o Shelf Number: 139864 Keywords: Child Sexual AbuseRestorative JusticeSex Offenders |
Author: Great Britain. House of Commons. Justice Committee Title: Restorative Justice: Fourth Report of Session 2016-17 Summary: In this report we consider the effectiveness of restorative justice (RJ) provision across the criminal justice system. The push from the Ministry of Justice has been for high quality restorative justice to be available to victims at every stage of the criminal justice system irrespective of where they are geographically, the age of the offender or the offence committed against them and we support these objectives in this report. We have focused our analysis on the services currently available to victims. We examine the evidence base for the effectiveness of restorative justice. We conclude that while undue reliance should not be placed on the statistic that $8 is saved for every $1 spent on RJ, there are benefits in both reductions in reoffending and in providing tangible benefits to victims. Our attention was drawn to doubts around the use of restorative justice in cases of sexual offences, domestic abuse and hate crime. In particular we received submissions concerned with the appropriateness of restorative justice in cases of domestic abuse. While acknowledging the real and substantial risks, our view is that, while restorative justice will not be appropriate in every case, it should not be excluded simply by reason of the type of offence committed. We found that restorative justice provision is currently subject to a 'postcode lottery' and regional buy-in. While ring-fencing funding to Police and Crime Commissioners may appear superficially attractive, we do not believe budgets for restorative justice could be set in a reliable or sensible manner. Our other principal recommendations and conclusions can be summed up as follows: - Restorative justice is well embedded in the youth justice system, although there is further work to be done, particularly in improving victim engagement. We recommend the Ministry of Justice looks to the example of youth conferencing used in Northern Ireland. - Problems in data sharing have presented a somewhat intractable obstacle to the development of restorative justice. We recommend the creation and dissemination of a national data sharing template to help speed up the agreement of data sharing protocols. - There is evidence of mixed compliance with the requirement under the Victims' Code to make victims aware of restorative justice, and we recommend the introduction of a system to improve compliance. - The entitlements under the Victims' Code should be rationalised so they no longer vary based on the age of the offender. - The Ministry should consult with PCCs and Stakeholders to ensure there is sufficient capacity to feasibly introduce an entitlement to restorative justice under the Victims' Code. - It is too soon to introduce a legislative right to access restorative justice services but such a goal is laudable and should be actively worked towards. We believe a right to access such services should be included in the Victims' Law but that provision should only be commenced once the Minister has demonstrated to Parliament that the system has sufficient capacity. Details: London: House of Commons, 2016. 41p. Source: Internet Resource: HC 164: Accessed September 14, 2016 at: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmjust/164/164.pdf?utm_source=164&utm_medium=module&utm_campaign=modulereports Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmjust/164/164.pdf?utm_source=164&utm_medium=module&utm_campaign=modulereports Shelf Number: 147868 Keywords: Restorative JusticeVictim ServicesVictim-Offender MediationVictims of Crime |
Author: Drost, Lisanne Title: Restorative Justice in Cases of Domestic Violence: Best practice examples between increasing mutual understanding and awareness of specific protection needs Summary: This project, Restorative Justice in Cases of Domestic Violence, Best practice examples between increasing mutual understanding and awareness of specific protection needs (JUST/2013/JPEN/AG/5487), financed by the European Commission and coordinated by the VerweyJonker Institute, aims at filling research gaps and getting together existing knowledge on using restorative justice (RJ) in cases of domestic violence (DV) or rather - more precise - intimate partner violence (IPV). The main question is: How can restorative justice practices like victim-offender mediation (VOM) or conferencing be of use in these specific cases of IPV. Furthermore it aims at exchanging risk points and best practice among practitioners and creating a network of practitioners to increase mutual understanding between different judicial systems and RJ practices in the member states. Partners in this project are from Austria, Denmark, Greece, Finland, the Netherlands and the UK (England & Wales). Current practices and regulations in these countries will be studied in depth, but the project aims to get better insights into the topic in the whole of Europe. This will result in a better understanding of the risks and potentialities of the use of restorative justice in cases of intimate partner violence. This again results in a better protection of victims and society at large in the European member states. This comparative report consists of an introductory chapter (chapter 1) in which we explain the definitions and the aims of the project. We also describe what the international and European legal instruments (conventions, guidelines and recommendations) say about the use of RJ in IPV cases. In the last paragraph we give insight into the more theoretical discussion about opportunities and risks of RJ in cases of IPV, including pro and contra arguments and - if appropriate - requirements. Chapter 2 gives a comparative overview of the situation in the six partner countries. Chapter 3 presents some first conclusions and discussion points. Definitions In this project domestic violence is understood as violence used by (former) adult intimate partners, i.e. intimate partner violence. Restorative justice is focused on reparation of harm in the aftermath of a crime or conflict. The most frequently used restorative justice practice in the context of IPV is victim-offender mediation (VOM). Sometimes conferencing is used. Therefore our main focus is on IPV cases that have been reported to the police and/or have led to criminal procedures and have been referred to VOM. Civil cases are not part of this research project. Aims and products Restorative justice practices have been developed over the last decades in various European countries in different legal and social contexts. Community based organizations, police, probation services or others provide RJ services for victims of violence committed in close relationships. In Finland and Austria, for example, crimes including intimate partner violence have been referred to VOM for many years, even though there are specific restrictions on when this can be done. The dynamics of IPV create particular challenges for the practice of RJ, especially what concerns achieving safety and voluntary participation. Suitability and inappropriateness of RJ for cases of IPV have remained largely unexplored in many countries, therefore in-depth research is needed, as well as the exchange of promising practices and difficulties or problems faced in practice and of regulations throughout Europe. The aim of this exchange and research project is to generate relevant knowledge on practices of RJ and to identify criteria for offering RJ to victims of IPV so that they can benefit to the maximum extent and in accordance with the EU Victims' Directive of 2012. Another objective is to set standards to guarantee the quality of the implementation of RJ practices. Based on this knowledge, a guide for practitioners will be developed and tested. This guide can be used in the training of VOM mediators, but also officials like police officers, prosecutors and court staff can benefit from such a guide. The main questions in order to achieve these objectives are: 1) What are the relevant RJ practices and policies concerning IPV in different European countries? 2) Can RJ be useful in case of IPV, and if so, under what circumstances or conditions? What do victims of IPV need in respect to RJ? 3) Can RJ in cases of IPV be offered at each stage of the criminal procedure (before, during and/or after) and/or should victim-offender mediation (VOM) (or other methods such as conferencing) be carried out by using a different (community) approach outside the criminal justice system? 4) Can networking with regard to IPV be stimulated between practitioners of RJ/mediation both at national and European level in order to support sustainable implementation of RJ in IPV cases? Details: Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Instituut, 2015. 38p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2016 at: http://www.verwey-jonker.nl/doc/2015/7388_restorative%20justice%20in%20cases%20of%20domestic%20violence.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://www.verwey-jonker.nl/doc/2015/7388_restorative%20justice%20in%20cases%20of%20domestic%20violence.pdf Shelf Number: 145113 Keywords: Domestic ViolenceIntimate Partner ViolenceRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Lunnemann, Katinka Title: Victim Offender Mediation: Needs of victims and offenders of Intimate Partner Violence. 2nd Comparative report, interviews & focus groups Summary: Can Restorative Justice (RJ) be used in cases of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), and if so, under what circumstances? This question guides the European project on restorative justice in cases of domestic violence.1 This project, funded by the European Commission (EC), aims to investigate the research gaps and gather existing knowledge on the use of RJ in cases of IPV. Another objective is to gain a better understanding of the risks and potential of using restorative justice (in particular Victim Offender Mediation) in cases of IPV. Partners in this project are from Austria, Denmark, Greece, Finland, the Netherlands and England & Wales (here referred to shortly as the UK) and the European Forum for Restorative Justice (EFRJ). In 2014, under Workstream 1 of the project, a comparative report provided the legal and policy context and practice of restorative justice in cases of domestic violence. 2 In this report, we defined domestic violence as violence used by (former) adult intimate partners. We looked at intimate partner violence and RJ as focused on reparation of harm in the aftermath of a crime or conflict. Different forms of violence were described: situational couple violence and intimate terrorism or coercive control (Johnson, 2006). It was also highlighted that across the European countries, the most frequently used restorative justice practice in the context of IPV is victim-offender mediation (VOM). Therefore our main focus is on IPV cases that have been reported to the police and/or have led to criminal procedures and have been referred to VOM. It should be noted that civil cases are not part of this research project. International standards such as laid down in the EU Victim Directive of 20123 , the Istanbul Convention (2014) and recommendations and Principles on RJ are guiding the research. In this second comparative report we focus on the methodology of the research, the expectations, the experiences and needs of victims and offenders who have been involved in VOM. In addition to speaking to practitioners, we also held a focus group in each country for practitioners who are working in this field. The country reports that formed the basis for the comparative report are integrated as annexes in part 2 (addendum) of this report (Annex 1- 6). Information on experiences with RJ in IPV cases as used by the German institute Waage in Hannover, that hosted the first expert meeting, can be found in Annex 7. Structure of the report Chapter 1 gives background information on the situation of RJ and IPV in the different partner countries. Chapter 2 is focused on the research and the methodology employed for recruiting research participants. Chapter 3 and 4 present the results of the interviews with the participants. In chapter 3, we describe the background of the respondents and the level and type of violence in their relationship. In chapter 4, we describe why the respondents chose to join VOM, how they experienced VOM, what the results of the mediation procedure were and what happened after VOM. Chapter 4 ends with a conclusion on the needs of victims and offenders and analyses the potential variation in needs for each participant group. Chapter 5 examines the outcomes of the focus groups with professionals in the different countries. Chapter 6 presents the conclusions. Details: Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Institute, 2015. 35p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2016 at: http://www.irks.at/assets/irks/Publikationen/Forschungsbericht/Comparative_reportII.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://www.irks.at/assets/irks/Publikationen/Forschungsbericht/Comparative_reportII.pdf Shelf Number: 145112 Keywords: Domestic Violence Intimate Partner Violence Restorative Justice Victim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Lauwaert, Katrien Title: Desistance and restorative justice. Mechanisms for desisting from crime within restorative justice practices Summary: The project 'Desistance and restorative justice. Mechanisms for desisting from crime within restorative justice practices' focuses on the benefit offenders can get in a desistance perspective from participating in a restorative justice (RJ) process. The research was developed as a complement of an earlier study the European Forum for Restorative Justice coordinated on 'Victims and restorative justice' and as a response to an increasing interest of in particular policymakers in knowing what the effect of participation in restorative justice processes is on offending behaviour. Recidivism research has looked into the link between RJ and reoffending. The results are not conclusive, but show that at least there is a potential for RJ to reduce crime. Recidivism research, with its mainly quantitative approach, does not, however, provide insight in why this influence occurs. Therefore this project has investigated 1) how participation in restorative justice processes influences the desistance journey of people who have offended, and 2) which factors within restorative justice practices support subjective and social changes that help initiate or maintain desistance from crime. A qualitative approach was used in order to answer the research questions. We interviewed 80 desisters who had taken part in a restorative justice process. The interviews were conducted in in Austria, Belgium, and Northern Ireland. In Austria the juvenile and adult desisters had participated in victim-offender mediation which is organised as a pre-trial diversion measure for not so serious offences. In Belgium the adult desisters had participated in victim-offender mediation which runs parallel to the criminal justice procedure and involves (rather) serious offences. In Northern Ireland the juvenile desisters had participated in diversionary and court-ordered conferencing for offences of varying seriousness as part of the regular procedure. The findings of the research confirm that victim-offender mediation and conferencing as practiced in Austria, Belgium and Northern Ireland have the potential to influence desistance; sometimes as a trigger for change, but more often as a support for an ongoing desistance process. The research uncovered a number of recurring factors and dynamics. However, every desistance account was highly individual and therefore no generalisations should be made. In all three countries the work of the mediator created an atmosphere of openness and respect, and this set the right context for other effects to happen. Adopting a non-judgmental attitude, showing a willingness to listen, and not labeling the participants as criminals was conducive to a constructive spirit and open communication in which participants felt comfortable to speak freely, to explain their whole story and to take responsibility. Although the flexibility of the restorative justice process differs in the three countries, it was clear that the possibility to tailor the process to the needs of the parties also helped to make it a useful experience for the desisting offender. The communication with the victim was a dominant element in terms of impact on change. Facing the situation of the victim, experiencing the sometimes constructive attitude of the victim, the fact that the offender could explain things, apologise, express regrets and show changes in his life since the offence, these had all been helpful elements. The restorative justice process enabled the offenders to change their perspective, to develop empathy with the victim, or to acknowledge the real impact of their behaviour. After the restorative justice process the offenders had felt relieved, they had felt courageous and proud or it had helped them to turn the page. In Northern Ireland in particular the rehabilitative elements in the reparation plans, which were prepared during the conference, were beneficial to many participants, especially to the juveniles who had been persistent offenders. Moreover, these young persons benefitted strongly from the relationship they were able to develop with the Youth Justice Agency worker who supervised the completion of their reparation plan, and from the ethos and humanising response they received from the Youth Justice Agency as a whole. Financial reparation as a result of a mediation, came to the fore as an element supporting desistance in a few Belgian narratives. How were these factors helpful for desistance? Through these factors, the restorative justice processes helped desisters to deal with emotions of shame, blame, guilt and culpability. They instilled hope, provided an opportunity to find closure or to confirm the desister's pro-social identity. In specific situations the restorative justice process helped repairing relationships. Furthermore, it was seen as (very) helpful by the participants that the restorative justice process prevented a case to go to court, or that the restorative justice process supported a positive decision for an early release from prison. Finally, the efficacy of victimless conferences and conferences with drug addicted offenders are areas which merit further attention, as our findings indicate that these situations may prevent restorative justice processes from influencing desistance. Details: Leuven: European Forum for Restorative Justice, 2015. 190p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2016 at: http://www.euforumrj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Research-report-desistance-and-RJ-total-doc-24-11-final.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://www.euforumrj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Research-report-desistance-and-RJ-total-doc-24-11-final.pdf Shelf Number: 145115 Keywords: DesistanceRecidivismReoffendingRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Bolivar, Daniela Title: Victims and Restorative Justice: An empirical study of the needs, experience and position of the victim within restorative justice practices: Country Reports Summary: This report covers the final findings of the two-year research project "victims and restorative justice" coordinated by the European Forum for Restorative Justice and implemented in The Netherlands, Finland and Austria. This research aimed to study the position of the victim in restorative justice (RJ). To do so, two main issues were addressed: on the one hand, the experiences of victims of crime who had participated (or not, for whatever reason) in victim-offender mediation and, on the other hand, the opinions and views of practitioners from the fields of victim support and RJ. This report focuses on the empirical findings on victims' experiences. Researchers from the three countries that took part in this study (Austria, Finland and The Netherlands) describe and analyse their findings through three informative chapters. Finally, some conclusions are drawn and some implications for practice and research are discussed (chapter 4). A more detailed and analytical account of specific aspects of our research in addition to other findings not included in this report can be found in the publication Vanfraechem, I., Bolivar, D. and Aertsen, I., eds., 2015. Victims and Restorative Justice. London: Routledge. This publication offers a theoretical and empirical overview of the position of the victim within European RJ practices so it can be considered as a necessary complement to this country reports. Details: Utrecht: European Forum for Restorative Justice, 2015. 143p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2016 at: http://www.euforumrj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/report_victimsandRJ-2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Europe URL: http://www.euforumrj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/report_victimsandRJ-2.pdf Shelf Number: 145114 Keywords: Restorative Justice Victim ServicesVictim-Offender MediationVictims of Crime |
Author: Barabas, Tunde Title: Responsibility-taking, Relationship-building and Restoration in Prisons. Mediation and Restorative Justice in Prison Settings Summary: This publication includes the research studies, results, observations, experiences and proposals relating to the work carried out by the participating partners over the three years of the MEREPS project (JLS/2008/JPEN015-30-CE-0267156/00-39), co-funded by the Criminal Justice Programme 2008 of the European Commission. Following the introduction by Martin Wright, first the chapters written by Tunde Barabas and Szandra Windt presents the background of the empirical research of several years carried out by the National Institute of Criminology, the summary of the different target groups and methods of the survey and, on the basis of all this, the possibilities of mediation in Hungarian prisons. In the course of this, we will present the results of the examinations conducted in the penal institutions in Balassagyarmat and Tokol, you can get to know the feelings and circumstances of inmates as well as their attitude to repentance, what the Hungarian prison system has to offer and the attitude of those working in the prisons. You can also read about the needs of victims, based on victims' forums and the relevant research. This is followed by the evaluation study of Dora Szego and Borbala Fellegi (Foresee Research Group) of the one-year pilot project implemented in Hungary: the disclosure of the difficulties, (partial) successes and the tasks arising in the everyday life of prisons, which have to be addressed and solved and which will lay the foundation of the domestic application of prison mediation. The pilot project tested the applicability of the restorative justice (RJ) approach in the Hungarian prison system: how can practices representing restorative principles be introduced in prison settings? What are the institutional, legal and personal conditions that serve as supportive circumstances, and what are the specific challenging circumstances? Based on in-depth interviews and participant observations, the study shows a thorough picture about the internal dynamics and mechanisms of the prison, about the attitudes of staff and about the ways in which RJ can be integrated into this world. The Hungarian chapter ends with the evaluation of a practicing public prosecutor, Andras Szucs (High Prosecution Service) of the opportunities offered by the legal and institutional framework which are necessary for the application of penal mediation and which can be realised in the current legal framework. The presentation of the research carried out by our foreign partners begins with the study conducted in England, concentrating on juvenile offenders. According to this chapter, written by Theo Gavrielides, director of IARS, in Britain there are fewer legal barriers to the introduction and application of restorative practices (compared to the continent), and so they are significantly ahead of us in the field of introducing and applying restorative tools. This may facilitate the experiences of the British being regarded as exemplary when introducing penal mediation in Hungary. The essay, however, looks further ahead, and presents a much broader range of the programmes of a restorative approach applied in the different prisons of the world, primarily in respect of juvenile offenders. The essay mentions the research carried out among English experts and makes recommendations concerning the application of the restorative approach in prisons. After that you can read about the results achieved in the German study and pilot project, led by Arthur Hartmann (professor of the University of Bremen). You can become acquainted with the complex system of the German federal rules and the rules of the state of Bremen, as well as the general conditions and current practice of Restorative Justice in Germany. The chapter details the research carried out by the University of Bremen and the results of the model experiment subsequently conducted in the penal institution in Oslebshausen (Bremen). The closing study written by Ivo Aertsen (professor at the University of Leuven) in the volume describes the history and possibilities of prison mediation already implemented and operating efficiently in Belgium. On the one hand, it outlines the Belgian legislative environment and current regulatory framework; on the other hand it presents the structural barriers and difficulties as well as the good practices and other development trends. A special feature of the book is that its last part contains three case studies (a mediation case written by Els Gossens, mediator of the Belgian Suggnome, and two family group conferencing cases by Vidia Negrea (director of the IIRP Hungary) and by Dora Szego and Borbala Fellegi) that illustrate the resolution of "real-life", successfully closed and very serious cases, from preparation to closing, through a restorative approach. This seemingly small volume may represent an important milestone in the adaptation and introduction of restorative practices such as mediation and group conferencing in prison settings. We are hopeful that the studies in this book will contribute to the communication of the various programmes and models of a restorative approach. And maybe they can also make us reflect on programmes that make it possible to get those affected by a crime to sit down and discuss the issues that are important to them, so that they can develop a mutually acceptable solution together. Details: Budapest: P-T Muhely: Commissioned by the National Institute of Criminology, 2012. 330p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 8, 2016 at: http://mereps.foresee.hu/uploads/tx_abdownloads/files/MEREPS_FinalPublication_EN.pdf Year: 2012 Country: Europe URL: http://mereps.foresee.hu/uploads/tx_abdownloads/files/MEREPS_FinalPublication_EN.pdf Shelf Number: 145116 Keywords: PrisonersPrisonsRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Laxminarayan, Malini Title: Accessibility and Initiation of Restorative Justice Summary: The project Accessibility and Initiation of Restorative Justice developed in response to the understanding that while restorative justice mechanisms provide a positive means of dealing with crime, both for the victim and the offender, such procedures are not often being utilised. Both international and national legislation on restorative justice has emerged in the past years, providing countries with a framework to look to as a guide for the implementation of restorative justice. Yet accessibility issues have existed for the past 20 years, hindering a greater number of cases from being dealt with through restorative justice approaches. This project aims to identify these barriers and investigate how to best deal with them, from a comparative perspective. The report answers two primary questions. First, when and under what conditions are restorative justice processes accessible to citizens? Factors related to accessibility include those that impede or assist parties in getting to a restorative procedure (i.e. those that can increase or prevent referrals). Therefore, important topics include the referral procedure, namely at what moment in time a referral is made and by whom parties are referred. A framework is designed based on international legislation, access to justice literature and existing empirical research on the topic. Subsequently, 10 factors are determined to conceptualise accessibility and are the focus of the empirical research: availability, legislation, exclusion criteria, awareness, attitudes, cooperation, trust, institutionalisation, good practices and costs. Second, how are restorative justice processes initiated under different jurisdictions and in different models? Factors related to initiation include those that stimulate or discourage beginning a restorative procedure by the parties, and are related to the moment a victim or offender is invited or informed about restorative justice. There are several important elements to consider when informing parties about the option to participate in a restorative justice programme. These include the level of influence and authority of the initiator, the information provided, the mode of the offer, the language of the offer and the frequency of the offer. To answer these questions, empirical research was conducted comprising several methods. A questionnaire was disseminated to both referral bodies and restorative justice practitioners to better understand barriers in their own countries. It was observed that numbers of cases are limited, ranging most often between a few hundred to roughly 10,000 per country. Exceptions included countries such as Austria, Germany and Finland (representing countries with higher cases). Perhaps unsurprisingly, all participants from the 17 countries who completed the questionnaire appeared to report similar issues. Most often mentioned was the lack of awareness and punitive attitudes that limited a greater number of referrals to restorative justice. Qualitative interviews were also conducted to examine the different initiation models that could be found in each of the five countries: Croatia, Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania. Interviews with 'initiators,' namely those who had some type of role in informing or inviting victims and/or offenders to participate in restorative justice illustrated the diverse methods used and the issues that arose during the initiation phase. Approaches included initiation through letters, phone calls, and face-to-face conversations. It may be the case, for example, that the judge adjourns a case while a probation officer informs the offender about the possibility for restorative justice (e.g., Ireland); employees of the prosecution service invite the juvenile offender to discuss how they will deal with his or her case, where one possible scenario is that he will be offered to participate in victim-offender mediation (e.g., Croatia); a selection table will filter out cases and send a letter to the parties that qualify, who may then get in touch with the mediator (e.g., the Netherlands); or police, prosecutors and judges may inform parties where they can go to get more information from the mediation service, often through information points in courts or leaflets (e.g., Romania). Interviews with victims and offenders were conducted to examine their perspective on the way the offer was made. Information was gathered on coercion, authority, manner of the offer, awareness, language of the offer, dealing with concerns and timing. It was found that, in some instances, offenders felt they had little choice about participating; the positive approach of the initiator had a direct influence on their decision to participate; parties were often unaware of restorative justice before they were provided with such information; support and flexibility when dealing with the parties' concerns was influential in the decision to participate in restorative justice programmes. The letter that is sent to victims and offenders was also given attention in the empirical research. Several aspects were identified as important in the letter: making the language easy to understand; avoiding certain terms (e.g., mediation); personalising the benefits of restorative justice; recognising the victim’s harm; being authoritative; making the letter interactive; providing examples of successful relevant mediations. Furthermore, a small-scale experiment with Criminology students examined whether two aspects in particular – authority and social norming – were associated with one’s decision to participate. The findings concluded that social norming, or the belief that similar others are involved in some type of behaviour (i.e., participating in mediation), does impact the likelihood of participating in mediation. The comparative nature of the project allowed for an assessment of different models, in addition to an examination of good practices. It is evident that countries adopt different approaches in their procedures surrounding restorative justice. Despite these differences, all countries face issues and aim to increase their referral procedures. Without making both the public and referral bodies aware of restorative justice, however, accessibility will remain limited. Attitudes also must change, where a restorative philosophy can be adopted in the best case scenario, and at the least legal authorities must begin to believe in the advantages of restorative justice. Undeniably, these two factors – attitudes and awareness – are largely intertwined. Greater awareness is likely to lead to more positive attitudes towards restorative justice. Furthermore, other elements such as cooperation, costs, legislation, and exclusion criteria must be given consideration. Details: Leuven: European Forum for Restorative Justice, 2014. 190p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 7, 2016 at: http://euforumrj.org/assets/upload/Accessibility_and_Initiation_of_RJ_website.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Europe URL: http://euforumrj.org/assets/upload/Accessibility_and_Initiation_of_RJ_website.pdf Shelf Number: 145396 Keywords: MediationRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Adler, Joanna R. Title: Evaluation of the Forgiveness Project within prisons Summary: The Forgiveness Project (TFP) is a UK based charity that uses real stories to explore how ideas around forgiveness, reconciliation and conflict resolution can have a positive impact on people's lives. One aspect of the charity's work is a programme run within prisons, targeted at the early stages of a sentence. TFP describe their prison programme as an intensive, group based intervention that encourages prisoners to explore concepts of forgiveness and reparation in a framework that fosters greater accountability and responsibility. Every course is co-facilitated by at least one ex-offender and a victim/survivor of serious crime. The intervention can be seen as being restorative and preparatory; those who take part in the programme will tend to be relatively early on in their sentence. TFP centres on the personal testimonies of both victims and perpetrators of crime and violence. TFP is unlike many other restorative initiatives in that it has no political or religious affiliation and TFP's prison programme is similarly secular in its approach. TFP aims to facilitate changes in attitude and thinking styles of offenders. That is, to encourage prisoners and young offenders in finding their own pathways to change. In finding those pathways, they may draw on many different resources and insights. These could include personal, communal, spiritual or religious beliefs that they may have, whether or not they have previously seen those beliefs as relevant to their offending behaviours. TFP run programmes via both education and psychology units. The emphasis on individual change is also intended to differentiate TFP from prison or National Offenders Management Service interventions. This person centred, facilitative but non prescriptive approach was adopted with the intention that prisoners and young offenders would be more responsive to the intervention than they may be to other, more standardised, manual based programmes. ii Design and Participant Information This evaluation was commissioned to build on a previous qualitative examination of the work of TFP within prisons and to provide information that would begin to evaluate its impact. The aims included consideration of the extent to which TFP is meeting its objectives and assessment of whether adequate safeguards are in place for the young offenders and adult prisoners who participate in the intervention. We adopted a triangulated approach using quantitative and qualitative methodologies with: 1. A prospective, longitudinal sample of male young offenders and older male prisoners and matched control groups (a total of 20 research and 20 control group participants across two institutions, followed up over 3 months). 2. A sample of 7 prison staff drawn from the same two institutions. 3. A retrospective, cross-sectional sample of 4 adult, male prisoners from a third institution. Our key hypotheses for this evaluation were: H1: That TFP will encourage greater awareness of victims and victim empathy. H2: That TFP will encourage enhanced cognitive processing and improved thinking skills. H3: That participants will face psycho-social challenges that result in additional needs, currently unmet. These needs include increased anxiety, challenges to self-esteem and increased negative attitudes. Details: London: Middlesex University, 2012. 87p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 7, 2016 at: http://www.thebromleytrust.org.uk/Indexhibit/files/Restore%20evaluation%20final%20report.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.thebromleytrust.org.uk/Indexhibit/files/Restore%20evaluation%20final%20report.pdf Shelf Number: 150549 Keywords: MediationPrisonsRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Shapland, Joanna Title: Developing restorative policing in Humberside, South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire Summary: The project 'Developing restorative policing' is being taken forward by the Universities of Sheffield and Leeds, together with Humberside Police and the PCC for Humberside, South Yorkshire Police and the PCC for South Yorkshire, West Yorkshire Police and the PCC for West Yorkshire, and Remedi. It started in September 2015 and will finish in June 2017. This report reflects the position in the three forces in May 2016, when the fieldwork was carried out. The aims of the project are to: develop greater understanding of restorative justice (restorative justice) principles relevant to policing and the research evidence base that informs good practices that are sensitive to the needs of victims; foster the means and capability to institutionalise processes and mechanisms to deliver restorative justice in relation to policing, including self-evaluation of police restorative justice practices and work with partner organisations; assist the police in identifying means for front-line officers to assess which paths to use to facilitate restorative justice and how best to introduce restorative justice to victims. The project is hence very much concerned with developing good practice in delivering restorative justice in relation to policing. We have interpreted that to mean restorative justice at the level of the police and prosecution, in which police officers involved in mainstream policing are directly involved. This is therefore primarily concerned with restorative justice pre-court, rather than restorative justice delivered pre-sentence or post-sentence. Police officers may be involved in providing information to others delivering restorative justice in later stages of the criminal justice process, but we have not included these practices in our research. The project is concerned both with adult and young offenders. There are three inter-connected stages to the project. The first stage, which has been underway since September 2015 and is the subject of this report, involves fieldwork in all three police force areas, to set out the contemporary nature and extent of restorative policing across each area. The second stage entailed comparative work in Belgium and Northern Ireland, to inform the work with the three English forces. It was the subject of a separate report delivered in August 2016 (Shapland et al. 2016). The third stage draws on both previous stages. The intention is for each police force to develop one or more new initiatives in part (or the whole) of their force area, in the light of the proposals from the research team, and to implement these initiatives from October 2016. The research team will then evaluate selected initiatives, as far as that can be accomplished in the time-frame of the project, with fieldwork running until March 2017. The final report of the project drawing together the overall findings will be submitted at the end of June 2017. As is well known, restorative justice incorporates a variety of practices and there has been considerable discussion about how it should be defined. We have therefore needed to consider how we define restorative justice for our purposes in this project. We see restorative justice as different from the broader concept of restorative practice. We have adopted the definition, similar to that proposed by Marshall (1999), as 'a deliberative process governed by principles of procedural fairness in which the parties with a direct stake in a particular offence (or incident) come together (preferably face-to-face) in a encounter collectively to resolve how to respond to the offence (or incident) such that the harm caused is acknowledged and the implications for the future of the parties are considered with an emphasis on reparation and reintegration' . This definition implicitly includes the recognition that restorative justice should be in relation to an offence, which means a criminal offence (though we are aware that conduct can be difficult to classify between a criminal offence and anti-social behaviour). This report therefore concentrates upon criminal offences, though we also mention, where relevant, measures and structures for anti-social behaviour. We also note that the Ministry of Justice defines restorative justice as 'the process that brings those harmed by crime, and those responsible for the harm, into communication, enabling everyone affected by a particular incident to play a part in repairing the harm and finding a positive way forward'. Our definition of restorative justice therefore bounds the kinds of practices we are considering to those which involve the direct victim and offender of a particular offence. We are therefore not concerned with practices or disposals which involve only action directed to the benefit of the community as a whole, or action in relation to victims or offenders of other offences, though these may have restorative intent or outcomes. We shall use the term 'restorative practices' to refer to this more indirect work. Our definition therefore includes practices such as mediation (with victim, offender and mediator/facilitator involved), conferencing (with, additionally, victim and offender supporters present at a meeting, as well as possibly police), and panels. It includes both direct face-to-face meetings and also indirect or 'shuttle' mediation where a facilitator/mediator passes communications between victim and offender of the same offence. A brief glossary of terms and definitions is set out at the end of this chapter. Details: Sheffield, UK: University of Sheffield; Leeds, UK; University of Leeds, 2017. 82p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 27, 2017 at: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.682936!/file/developing-restorative-policing-stage1-report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.682936!/file/developing-restorative-policing-stage1-report.pdf Shelf Number: 141220 Keywords: Police-Citizen InteractionsPolice-Community RelationsPolicingRestorative Justice |
Author: Native Counselling Services of Alberta Title: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Hollow Water's Community Holistic Circle Healing Process (APC 20 CA (2001) Summary: The Solicitor General's Aboriginal Community Corrections Initiative (ACCI) and Justice Canada's Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS) have both implied that improvements to justice and corrections in Aboriginal communities would result in cost savings to governments. Although a cost-benefit analysis can be undertaken, it is particularly difficult to ascertain the costs associated with community wellness strategies, and, therefore, any potential savings to policing, administrating justice and corrections. The Hollow Water First Nation Community Holistic Circle Healing (CHCH) strategy is the most mature healing process in Canada. While integrating elements for a number of federal and provincially funded services (i.e., policing, justice, corrections, health and social services) CHCH provides a unique opportunity to explore the costs associated with its various components. Clearly, Aboriginal culture, value-system and process differ significantly from the dominant society. In order to perform research that is ethical, careful and thorough, comparable linkages between Justice and Aboriginal criteria must be explored in different ways. The real value of CHCH work can only be identified by the community members impacted by the healing process; typically, however, the benefits of this process have not been acknowledged nor measured by the dominant society. Yet, the benefits of the CHCH activity have touched all aspects of life in Hollow Water, many of which, cannot be given a specific dollar value. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to adequately place a dollar value on the depth, quality, commitment and sustainability of the substantial healing work achieved in Hollow Water, and the impressive track record CHCH holds. To overcome what appears to be a significant obstacle, the research team collaborated with the community to develop a common understanding of the CHCH research & healing process with community members and to express the core elements/dynamics/process of CHCH healing activity. This collaboration resulted in a clear comparison of some aspects of the CHCH process with mainstream judicial, victim and family services available in Manitoba. In addition, it provided an indication of many value-added benefits of the CHCH program, which are difficult to measure, unique and have far-reaching community healing implications. Details: Ottawa: Aboriginal Corrections Policy Unit, Solicitor General of Canada , 2001. 166p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 11, 2017 at: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/cst-bnft-hllw-wtr/cst-bnft-hllw-wtr-eng.pdf Year: 2001 Country: Canada URL: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/cst-bnft-hllw-wtr/cst-bnft-hllw-wtr-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 147213 Keywords: Aboriginal PeoplesCost-Benefit AnalysisRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Shapland, Joanna Title: Developing restorative policing: using the evidence base to inform the delivery of restorative justice and improve engagement with victims. Learning lessons from Belgium and Northern Ireland Summary: Restorative justice (RJ) is well established in Belgium where interventions are widely available for both adults and juveniles with regard to both pre-court and post-court provision. There is a particularly well-embedded recent history of restorative justice in the Flemish-speaking region of Belgium, most notably in the city of Leuven dating back (at least) to the late 1980s. With the support of the Catholic University of Leuven (KU Leuven), a scheme of restorative mediation was set up with the explicit focus on providing restorative justice for more serious crimes where the public prosecutor had already made a decision to prosecute. It was felt that much of the international success in restorative justice - from New Zealand and Australia notably - had focused more directly on less serious crime and on juveniles. So, the aims of the new initiative in Leuven at the time were: first, to elaborate and develop a model of (victim/offender) restorative mediation in cases of adult serious crimes; and secondly, to explore the implications for the wider criminal justice system of the operation of the two different processes; namely restorative justice on the one hand and criminal prosecution on the other hand. In particular, the scheme's proponents were interested in the ways in which restorative principles might influence and prompt key actors - notably judges, prosecutors and police - 'to rethink in some way the objectives and rationales of the criminal justice system' (according to one of the KU Leuven proponents interviewed). This initial approach has influenced many of the developments, informing policy and practice both within and beyond Leuven, over the ensuing years. Examples of this include the establishment of a pilot project in 1998 in six prisons (in collaboration with the universities of Leuven and Liege) (Robert and Peters 2003; Aertsen 2005). In 2000, the Minister of Justice decided to implement the model across all prisons in Belgium supported by the appointment of a full-time 'restorative justice advisor' in each prison operating at the level of prison management to develop a culture, skills and programme to support victims' needs and restorative responses. Similarly, in the field of juvenile justice, the university was instrumental in establishing an action research conferencing pilot project in 2000 in four locations. The pilot was based on the experiences of the New Zealand model of Family Group Conferencing, but as well as the above mentioned adult scheme, it focused specifically upon more serious crimes (Vanfraechem 2005; Vanfraechem and Walgrave 2004). In many ways, Leuven has been a generator and beacon of good practice in the field of restorative justice over a number of years, with models of practice developed in Leuven being adopted and adapted elsewhere in the country. The role of the university has been quite pivotal in this, serving as an international hub of research and theorisation in the field of restorative justice and as a key centre for the diffusion of evidence-based practice and application of practical innovations. For instance, the European Forum for Restorative Justice, which promotes the application of restorative practices across Europe, has its base and its secretariat in the Department of Criminal Law and Criminology at KU Leuven (since it was established in 2000). The university has played an important role in stimulating practice-based and policy innovations as well as informing citywide multi-agency partnerships in promoting restorative approaches. In 1996 the mediation service of Leuven (Bemiddelingsdienst arrondissement Leuven - BAL) was established as a cooperation between the office of the Counsel for the Prosecution (the public prosecutors), the police, the city board of Leuven (municipal authority), the board of lawyers, the local Judicial Welfare Service and the probation service (working with offenders), Victim Support, a NGO juvenile justice service provider (then Oikoten, but subsequently Alba), a mediation service provider for adults (then Suggnome but subsequently renamed Moderator), the prison service and the university. Consequently, developments in Leuven have benefited from this longstanding history of inter-organisational collaboration informed by an acute awareness of the evidence-base and conceptual clarity regarding the principles of restorative justice. Details: Sheffield, UK: Centre for Criminological Research, University of Sheffield, 2017. 49p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 5, 2017 at: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.714948!/file/Comparative-report-publication.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Europe URL: https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.714948!/file/Comparative-report-publication.pdf Shelf Number: 147561 Keywords: MediationPolice TrainingRestorative JusticeVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Beaudette, Janelle Title: The Impact of Offender Participation in the Restorative Opportunities Program Summary: Restorative justice (RJ) has been part of the Canadian criminal justice system for over 30 years. Today, RJ programs exist in all provinces and territories and can be accessed at multiple points in the criminal justice process from pre-charge to post-sentence. The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) began providing victim-offender mediation (VOM) services to address serious crime on a limited basis in 1992. In 2004, VOM was provided nationally and was officially-recognized as the Restorative Opportunities (RO) program in 2006. The purpose of the current study was to compare offenders who participated in facilitated face-to-face meetings organized by RO to a sample of matched non-participants on their rates of revocation while on conditional release. A total of 122 offenders who had taken part in RO and 122 matched offenders comprised the study sample. A facilitated face-to-face meeting could take place while incarcerated or while under conditional release in the community. Consequently, this study reported the results by time of face-to-face meeting (i.e., facilitated meeting prior to release or post-release) to account for differences between these groups and to allow for more meaningful interpretations of the findings. Survival analyses were conducted to compare rates of revocation for offenders who participated in RO to non-participants and to relate the time of revocation with the offenders' participation in RO. Results indicated that for the participants who had their meetings while incarcerated, there was no significant difference between participants and non-participants on rates of revocation, although the trend was that RO participants did better on release. When the meetings were held in the community post-release, participants were significantly more likely to spend a longer period of time under supervision in the community and were less likely to be revoked than their matched counterparts. The findings from the study demonstrated support for RO participation in the community. The results suggest that while participating in facilitated face-to-face meetings during incarceration may not decrease rates of revocation after release, providing offenders with mediation sessions during the period of community supervision does promote better outcomes. While our models controlled for variables associated with risk, it should be cautioned that factors not controlled in the matching procedure could have contributed to this effect. Research that employs a wait list design could control for the possible effects of self selection for participation in the program. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2015. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: 2015 No. R-364: Accessed November 17, 2017 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-364-eng.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-364-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 148211 Keywords: Restorative JusticeRevocationVictim-Offender Mediation |
Author: Gavrielides, Theo Title: Young, marginalised but not radicalised: A comparative study of positive approaches to youth radicalisation Summary: Prevention and control have been dealt with as top down responsibilities of governments, but young people believe that it is now time that they have their say. YEIP was created in response to the lack of effective youth policies that can enhance young people's social inclusion and minimize the risk of radicalization with greater 'buy in' from youth themselves. The conference will launch the book "Young, marginalised but not radicalized: A comparative study of positive approaches to youth radicalization". This is the outcome of research that was carried out in the UK, Italy, Romania, Portugal, Cyprus, Greece and Sweden. It features the national findings written in native languages as well as their comparative analysis and summaries written in English. Details: London: IARS International Institute, 2018. 359p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 9, 2018 at: http://yeip.org/awareness-raising-material/yeip-ebooks/ Year: 2018 Country: Europe URL: http://yeip.org/awareness-raising-material/yeip-ebooks/ Shelf Number: 149412 Keywords: At-Risk Youth Counter-terrorism ExtremismRadicalization Restorative Justice Violent Radicalism Youth Empowerment |
Author: Anyon, Yolanda Title: Taking Restorative Practices School-wide: Insights from Three Schools in Denver Summary: Through interviews and focus groups with staff members at three Denver schools that have successfully implemented restorative practices (RP), four essential strategies for taking this approach school-wide were identified: strong principal vision and commitment to RP; explicit efforts to generate staff buy-in to this conflict resolution approach; continuous and intensive professional development opportunities; and, the allocation of school funds for a full-time coordinator of RP at the site. Additional approaches that supported school-wide implementation of RP are described in the full report. Principal Vision & Commitment Taking restorative practices school-wide was possible because administrators held the following beliefs: - Exclusionary discipline practices, such as expulsion and suspension, generally fail to change student behavior. - Students' time in class is a key factor in determining their educational success. - Proactively teaching students social, emotional, and conflict resolution skills improves their behavior and promotes their academic achievement. - Standing by the philosophy of restorative practices when faced with resistance to change is worth the effort. Staff Buy-In Widespread buy-in to restorative practices among stakeholders was generated using the following strategies: - Involving teachers, service providers, and community members in development of policies and protocols that guide the delivery of restorative practices and their integration into discipline processes. - Soliciting regular feedback from staff throughout the implementation process. - When hiring new staff, including teachers, assess their support for the restorative practices philosophy. Professional Development Capacity to implement restorative practices throughout the school was supported by: - Initial commitment of substantial professional development time to new discipline policies and protocols, restorative practices, and allied relationship-building approaches. - Availability of "booster sessions" for revisiting discipline processes and restorative practices. - Allocation of additional resources for individualized coaching among staff members who have difficulty aligning their practices with a restorative philosophy. Full-Time RP Coordinator To sustain all the other essential strategies for success, schools had to dedicate funding for a person with the following responsibilities: - Develop positive relationships with students, teachers and families. - Facilitate formal conferences and mediations. - Monitor student agreements to repair harm caused. - Provide coaching and training to other staff members Details: Denver, CO: Denver School-Based Restorative Practices Partnership, 2016. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 20, 2018 at: https://www.du.edu/socialwork/media/documents/taking_restorative_practices_school-wide.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://www.du.edu/socialwork/media/documents/taking_restorative_practices_school-wide.pdf Shelf Number: 149869 Keywords: Restorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool DisciplineSchool Suspensions |
Author: Yu, Lilly Title: Alternative Forms of Justice for Human Trafficking Survivors: Considering Procedural, Restorative, and Transitional Justice Summary: Alternative forms of justice show promise for human trafficking survivors, who often do not find resolution (such as conviction and incarceration for their traffickers) through the traditional criminal justice system. The Bending Towards Justice: Perceptions of Justice among Human Trafficking Survivors study is the first to ask survivors of human trafficking whether nonpunitive forms of justice would complement or compensate existing remedies. Drawing from qualitative interviews with 80 survivors of sex and labor trafficking, this brief documents survivors' experiences with and perceptions of alternative practices, including procedural, restorative, and transitional justice. While all survivors have extensive experience with procedural justice practices, only some survivors have experienced restorative and transitional justice practices. Those who had not experienced restorative and transitional justice found them desirable and promising. Service provider and criminal justice stakeholders may help survivors achieve justice for their victimization experiences by incorporating these alternative forms of justice in their practices. A key finding from the Bending Towards Justice study is human trafficking survivors' difficulty in achieving justice through the traditional criminal justice process. Various factors, including challenges survivors face participating in criminal cases against their traffickers and the inability of retributive justice outcomes, primarily the conviction and incarceration of a trafficker, impede justice for all survivors (Love et al. 2018b). As a result, practitioners, policymakers, and survivor advocates are rethinking how survivors of human trafficking can achieve justice for their experiences. Several alternative forms of justice have been shown to be viable additions or alternatives to traditional criminal justice. Three models show promise when applied to human trafficking cases: (1) procedural justice, (2) restorative justice, and (3) transitional justice. - Procedural justice models argue that the process by which justice is achieved is more important than the outcome of a case. More specifically, theories of procedural justice maintain that survivors' perceptions of justice are influenced by opportunities to be involved in the decisions made in service provision and criminal justice processes and the opportunities to participate in both by having a voice and expressing their side of the story (Thibaut and Walker 1975; Tyler 1988, 1990). An overarching element of procedural justice, therefore, is the respectful treatment of survivors as they pursue services for themselves and/or criminal justice outcomes for their traffickers. - Restorative justice models argue that criminal justice outcomes, including convictions and imprisonment, are not always the best response to crimes against a person (Bolivar 2013; Mika et al. 2004). In the case of human trafficking, nonpunitive, survivor-defined responses, including an acknowledgment of wrongdoing or an apology from traffickers, survivor confrontation of their traffickers, and the payment of reparations might significantly affect perceptions of justice. - Transitional justice models argue that larger community efforts to respond to crimes by acknowledging the harms that have occurred and preventing them from occurring again are most likely to promote peace, provide a sense of justice, and result in longer-term impacts (David and Yuk-Ping 2005; Teitel 2003; van Zyl 1999; Waldorf 2006). Transitional justice for human trafficking survivors primarily focuses on reforms to institutions and policies and educational and memorial initiatives, such as human trafficking awareness campaigns and speaking with policymakers regarding human trafficking-related legislation. While research on the effects of alternative forms of justice has largely been limited to people who are accused of crimes, these models could improve survivor perceptions of justice and reform traditional responses to human trafficking. In response, this brief explores how procedural, restorative, and transitional justice can lead to justice for survivors of human trafficking and complement or compensate for traditional justice system remedies. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2018. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 2, 2018 at: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/97341/alternative_forms_of_justice_for_human_trafficking_survivors_0.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/97341/alternative_forms_of_justice_for_human_trafficking_survivors_0.pdf Shelf Number: 149978 Keywords: Human Trafficking Procedural JusticeRestorative JusticeTransitional JusticeVictim Services Victims of Crime Victims of Trafficking |
Author: Liu, John C. Title: The Suspension Spike: Changing the Discipline Culture in NYC's Middle Schools Summary: Research findings have established that a middle school pattern of even mild behavioral issues, either alone, or in conjunction with several other factors including absenteeism and academic performance in English and Mathematics, is an early warning that a student may be on the path to potentially dropping out of school. The Department of Education's current disciplinary approach, rooted in "zero-tolerance" philosophy, relies heavily on punitive measures, including suspensions, as a response to a wide array of behaviors. In the 2011- 2012 school year, more than 18,000 suspensions were meted out to students in grades 6 through 8 attending standalone middle schools. Yet, lengthy and repeated suspensions for disruptive behavior such as speaking disrespectfully to a teacher or fellow student result in lost learning days, contribute to students' feelings of alienation from school, and perhaps most importantly, do little or nothing to address the root causes of the behavior. Moreover, there are significant racial, ethnic, and other disparities in suspension rates. Maintaining a calm, respectful, and secure school climate is critical to the success of New York City's approximately 210,000 middle school students. Middle school is the last chance to "catch up" on both the academic and social-emotional skills needed to be successful in high school. Accordingly, concerns about improving New York City's middle school grades are well-deserved. Despite the myriad studies and good intentions, however, the middle school years have not received the same sustained focus and resources as educational reforms targeted at younger children. In particular, the interplay between school climate and behavioral issues and its relationship to academic achievement merits greater attention at a time when graduating from high school and pursuing post-secondary educational attainment is more important than ever. Violent, disruptive behavior that compromises the safe and supportive learning environment that all students deserve is not acceptable. The proposals in this report identify a range of positive approaches to promoting a safe and considerate learning environment for middle school students, teachers, and administrators that recognize the social-emotional and behavioral issues of this age group, particularly for students most at risk of eventually dropping out. A pilot program to introduce a whole-school climate change program based on the principles of restorative justice offers new tools for addressing and repairing the harm created by behavioral issues. Increasing the availability of school counselors and social workers would provide critical front-line support for struggling students. To advance these recommendations, system-wide changes should be made to the Department of Education's Discipline Code, the oversight of School Safety Agents, and the collection of data on suspensions and arrests. Details: New York: New York City Comptroller, 2013. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 7, 2018 at: https://comptroller.nyc.gov/wp-content/uploads/documents/NYC_MiddleSchools_Report.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://comptroller.nyc.gov/wp-content/uploads/documents/NYC_MiddleSchools_Report.pdf Shelf Number: 150080 Keywords: Restorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool DisciplineSchool SafetySchool SuspensionsZero Tolerance Policies |
Author: Trammell, Rebecca Title: Mutual Respect, Conflict and Conflict Resolution in Prisons: A Response to the Commission on Safety and Abuse in America's Prison Report Summary: Summary of Findings - 45% of inmates sampled experienced some form of non-sexual violence in prison. Inmates have assaulted 33% of the staff members interviewed for this study. - 4.1% of inmates sampled were involved in some type of sexual assault while incarcerated. - Disrespectful behavior was identified as a major cause of violence in these facilities. - Violence between inmates and between inmates and staff is more likely to happen at the Lincoln Correctional Center, the Nebraska State Penitentiary and the Tecumseh State Correctional Institute. - Fights or assaults are more likely to be reported in the Nebraska Correctional Center for Woman than any other prison. - Inmates at the Lincoln Correctional Center, the Nebraska State Penitentiary, and the Nebraska Correctional Center for Women who stated that they were members of a street gang before entering prison were statistically more likely to report fighting with another inmate. Inmates from the Nebraska State Penitentiary and the Tecumseh State Correctional Institute who claimed to be a member of a prison gang were statistically more likely to claim that they fought another inmate. Only the inmates from the Tecumseh State Correctional Institute who claimed to be members of a prison gang were more likely to state that they assaulted a staff member. - Inmates who were sentenced for a violent offense were more likely to report fighting inmates in three facilities: Omaha Correctional Center, the Nebraska Correctional Center for Women, and the Nebraska State Penitentiary. Violent offenders at the Tecumseh State Correctional Institute were more likely to admit to assaulting a staff member. - Inmates and staff members blame both inmates and staff, to varying degrees, for conflict and violence in these facilities. Details: Omaha, NE: The University of Nebraska at Omaha The School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2012. 94p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 11, 2018 at: https://corrections.nebraska.gov/sites/default/files/files/46/trammell_2012_1.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: https://corrections.nebraska.gov/sites/default/files/files/46/trammell_2012_1.pdf Shelf Number: 140163 Keywords: Conflict ResolutionInmate MisconductInmate ViolencePrison ViolencePrisonsRestorative Justice |
Author: Maroney, Thomas T. Title: Recidivism Measurement and Sanction Effectiveness in Youth Diversion Programs Summary: With the rapid growth of juvenile offender diversion programs, which use many nontraditional sanctions, the effectiveness of sanction combinations in juvenile diversion programs and in each individual program needs to be evaluated. Those making sanctioning decisions currently do so based on intuition rather than using an evidence- or theory-based approach. Considerable research has examined the relationship between offender risk factors and recidivism (who is more likely to reoffend?) and between offender risk factors and sanctions (who is more likely to receive what sanctions?), but little is known about the relationship between sanctions and recidivism (which sanctions best reduce recidivism and for whom?). Furthermore, recidivism studies vary drastically in how they measure or quantify recidivism. This variability of approach makes comparing studies difficult and provides a less-than-complete picture of recidivism in general. The present study used data from one specific youth diversion program to test certain hypotheses of sanctioning by developing and testing a model for assigning sanction combinations to certain offenders on the basis of their individual characteristics. The study first developed measurement models for Offender Risk Propensity, Multiplicity of Sanctions, and Recidivism using structural equation modeling (SEM). Then predictive models were developed to test specific relationships. Understanding the effectiveness of certain sanction packages on certain offenders can form the basis for effective sanctioning in youth diversion programs. This study sought to answer three research questions: What is the best way to measure recidivism? Does completion of a restorative justice program reduce recidivism? Which sanctions, if any, reduce recidivism for specific offender types? To answer the first question: a iv multi-indicator latent construct of recidivism did a very good job of measuring variation in recidivism. Multiple indicators analyzed simultaneously produced a robust tool that can be used in other recidivism studies and help to reduce comparability issues between studies. The recidivism construct, when tested as a function of completion of the restorative justice program, was seen to produce a significant model having an overall good fit with the data. Thus to answer the second research question: offenders' completion status for the restorative justice program was shown to be a significant predictor of the latent construct of recidivism at the 0.05 level (two-tailed), with those who failed to complete (or chose not to participate) having higher recidivism than did those who completed the program. To answer the third research question: the assignment of specific sanctions (both those suggested by research and theory and those traditionally assigned by this and similar programs) on the entire data set (and on various subsets) of this study have no statistically significant impact on recidivism at the 0.05 level (two-tailed). The findings suggest many policy implications. Consistency is all but nonexistent in recidivism measurements in the academic literature and in program review studies. A multi-indicator latent construct of recidivism, such as the one proposed and proven effective in this study, provides a more complete picture than simply conceptualizing recidivism by one dummy variable. This recidivism model can be used as the endogenous variable to evaluate programs and their practices and could reduce the problem of study comparability. This could lead to a better understanding of program characteristics and their impact on offender success. This study also found that completion of the Neighborhood Restorative Justice Program was a significant predictor of recidivism, yet none of the eleven most commonly assigned v sanctions were seen to have a significant impact on recidivism for any subgroup. Proponents of restorative justice argue that it is the programs' characteristics and not their specific activities that make the programs successful. Reintegrative Shaming Theory and Labeling Theory support this claim and suggest the best approach to address youth criminal behavior is to admonish the act and not the actor, have the offender and community agree on a plan to make the community whole after that criminal act, and prevent repeated interaction with the formal criminal justice system which encourages the youth to see themself as a deviant and engage in further deviant behavior. These characteristics should be further examined and widely employed if confirmed. Details: Orlando: University of Central Florida, 2012. 262p. Source: Internet Resource: Dissertation: Accessed June 6, 2018 at: http://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/2476/ Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/2476/ Shelf Number: 150485 Keywords: Juvenile Diversion Programs Juvenile Offenders Recidivism Restorative Justice |
Author: Niedzwiecki, Emily Title: Massachusetts Juvenile Diversion Assessment Study Summary: On behalf of the Massachusetts Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee (JJAC), in collaboration with the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS), ICF International (ICF) conducted an assessment of District Attorneys' (DAs') offices' pretrial juvenile diversion practices across the Commonwealth. Findings from this assessment are intended to provide a snapshot of DAs' juvenile diversion practices in Massachusetts and make recommendations regarding the enhancement and wider use of promising diversion practices. The purpose of the assessment is also to provide DAs, their staff, and other juvenile justice stakeholders with a better understanding of the state of practice in order to make informed decisions regarding their diversion programs. Methodology In order to gain a better understanding of DAs' pretrial juvenile diversion practices, this assessment included three primary tasks: (1) Background Review, (2) Literature Review, and (3) Key Informant Interviews. This assessment is largely descriptive in nature and is meant to provide an initial look at DA-based pretrial juvenile diversion in Massachusetts. To inform the development of the interview protocol and reduce burden on interview participants, researchers first conducted a background review of public data sources to collect information on jurisdictional characteristics (e.g., population demographics, youth demographics), crime statistics, juvenile court statistics, school statistics, youth initiatives, and existing diversion programming within the community. In conjunction with the background review, the research team conducted a literature review that addressed juvenile justice trends in the United States, juvenile diversion philosophies, model diversion programs and strategies, and background information on juvenile justice in Massachusetts. Finally, the research team conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with staff within each of the 11 DAs' offices who were most knowledgeable regarding juvenile diversion programs and practices within their office. The interviews were designed to collect detailed information on diversion programs and practices, including: key program elements (e.g., target population, eligibility criteria, and decision-making and referral protocols); services provided as part of the diversion program; perceived challenges and limitations; and offices' data collection practices. Over a two-month period, the research team conducted interviews with 14 participants, representing all 11 DAs' offices, which generally included DAs, Assistant District Attorneys (ADAs), diversion program staff, juvenile unit staff and attorneys, and other special programs staff. Details: Fairfax, VA: ICF International, 2015. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 6, 2018 at: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ea378e414fb5fae5ba06c7/t/593709d2197aeac077e3f2f9/1496779220634/MADiversion_FinalReport_2015+01+14-FINAL.PDF Year: 2015 Country: United States URL: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ea378e414fb5fae5ba06c7/t/593709d2197aeac077e3f2f9/1496779220634/MADiversion_FinalReport_2015+01+14-FINAL.PDF Shelf Number: 150491 Keywords: DiversionJuvenile Diversion ProgramsPretrial DiversionRecidivismRestorative Justice |
Author: Anyon, Yolanda Title: Spotlight on Success: Changing the Culture of Discipline in Denver Public Schools Summary: This mixed methods study draws on district discipline data, interviews, and focus groups to identify characteristics of DPS schools who met the district's discipline goals of a 0-3% suspension rate for their student population overall and for Black students in particular during the 2014-2015 school year. Quantitative Findings Statistical analyses comparing schools who met the district's discipline goals to those who did not revealed that low-suspending schools had the following features: - More racially and economically integrated - Fewer serious discipline incidents (type 2-6) reported by school staff - Greater use of Restorative Practices in response to discipline incidents - Less frequent use of in- and out-of-school suspension among disciplined students Qualitative Findings Principals and school staff from a subset of low-suspending schools reported the following common strategies, conditions, and district resources were used to meet the district's discipline goals: Positive Behavior and School Culture Systems - Relationship Building - Behavioral Recognitions and Rewards - Social-Emotional Skill Building - Restorative Practices Inclusive Policies and Protocols for Responding to Misbehavior - Start with Classroom-Based Interventions - Connect Misbehaving Students to Support Services - Use Punitive and Exclusionary Discipline Practices as a Last Resort Supportive Implementation Conditions - Robust School-Based Student and Family Services - Professional Learning, Training and Coaching - Strategic Hiring for Culture Fit Awareness of Racial Inequalities and Bias - Strengthen Staff Members Knowledge about Racial Disparities - Prioritize Relationship Building with Black Families and Students District Supports - Policy & Intervention Consultations with Discipline Coordinators - Professional Development Units on Restorative Practices and Equity Details: Denver: University of Denver (DU) Graduate School of Social Work (GSSW) and the Office of Social-Emotional Learning at Denver Public Schools (DPS), 2016. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 21, 2018 at: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3022172/Spotlight-on-Success-Changing-the-Culture-of.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3022172-Spotlight-on-Success-Changing-the-Culture-of.html Shelf Number: 150622 Keywords: Racial DisparitiesRestorative JusticeSchool CrimeSchool DisciplineSchool Suspensions |
Author: Mills, Linda Title: An In-Depth Examination of Batterer Intervention and Alternative Treatment Approaches for Domestic Violence Offenders Summary: The criminal justice system is the most important response to domestic violence (DV) in the United States (US). Every state currently criminalizes DV and most courts rely on Batterer Intervention Programs (BIPs) as their primary form of treatment to address this crime and minimize future incidents of violence among intimate partners and/or family members (Crockett et al., 2015). This study addresses one of the most significant developments in the system's response to DV - the 2,500 or so BIPs to which hundreds of thousands of convicted offenders are mandated to treatment each year by US judges (Boal & Mankowski, 2014). BIPs claim that their focus is on changing sexist attitudes and related behaviors and holding offenders accountable for their crimes. Rigorous studies of BIPs have shown high attrition rates (Aaron & Beaulaurier, 2017; Babcock, Green, & Robie, 2004; Price & Rosenbaum, 2009; Jewell & Wormith, 2010), little evidence of attitudinal and behavioral change (Gondolf, 2000; Jackson et al. 2003), and inconsistent contact with victims (Mills, Grauwiler, & Pezold, 2006; Price & Rosenbaum, 2009). Despite this growing acknowledgement and acceptance that BIPs are minimally effective, our study is the first to use a rigorous research design (a randomized controlled trial) complemented by an in-depth qualitative study in examining the effectiveness of an alternative treatment approach using restorative justice (RJ). In an attempt to address the shortcomings of BIP treatment programs, a number of states now allow alternative approaches, aside from the standard BIP, for DV crimes (Barocas, Emery, & Mills, 2016). These alternatives include restorative justice and conjoint or couples treatments. Some states require that these alternative programs be offered after a period of BIP treatment (e.g., Utah); other states allow these alternative options to be offered instead of BIP treatment (e.g., Arizona). This National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded study was designed to provide an in-depth examination of BIP and an alternative treatment approach using RJ for DV offenders. The study design provides an in-depth content analysis to complement a National Science Foundation (NSF)-funded randomized controlled trial (RCT) in Salt Lake City, Utah that uses an intention to treat method of analysis to determine which treatment program has the lowest arrest outcomes: a traditional BIP or a BIP plus RJ approach called Circles of Peace (CP). Utah requires a minimum of 16 weeks of treatment for domestic violence offenders mandated to treatment. BIP, a 16-week group-based treatment approach for offenders only, is largely didactic (as opposed to interactive) and focuses on changing sexist attitudes for the purpose of altering the behavior of offenders. BIP plus CP provides 12 weeks of offender-only group sessions (with RJ principles infused throughout), encouraging offenders to focus on behavioral and attitudinal change. Following the initial 12 group sessions, offenders participate in four weeks of individual circles with a willing victim or a victim advocate (if the victim does not want to participate), family members or other support people, and trained community volunteers. The NSF study is a two-part study; this NIJ study builds on Part II. Part I of the NSF study compared BIP only and BIP plus CP for all DV cases (intimate partner and family violence). Part II of the NSF study and the NIJ study focused on intimate partner violence cases only. Using a variety of data collection methods, this NIJ study offers critical findings that go beyond what the NSF quantitative study can provide (results from Part II of the NSF study are still pending). Interviews with offenders and victims over multiple points in time, video-recordings and observations of treatment sessions, and a case record review allowed the researchers to test emerging theories that BIP plus CP may be a viable alternative to treatment, while ensuring that safety concerns are addressed when using this approach. Details: NYC: New York University, 2018. 17p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 18, 2018 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/252265.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/252265.pdf Shelf Number: 154067 Keywords: Alternative ApproachesBatterer Intervention ProgramsCircles of PeaceCouples TreatmentDomestic ViolenceFamily ViolenceRestorative JusticeSexist AttitudesUtahViolence Against Women |
Author: Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse Title: Consultation Paper: Criminal Justice Summary: The importance of a criminal justice response Criminal justice for victims In Chapter 2, we discuss the importance of a criminal justice response for victims and survivors of institutional child sexual abuse. Criminal justice involves the interests of the entire community in the detection and punishment of crime in general, in addition to the personal interests of the victim or survivor of the particular crime. Survivors have told us of a variety of responses they have sought from the criminal justice system, and they have expressed a range of views on what they would have regarded as 'justice' for a criminal justice response. We recognise that a criminal justice response is important to survivors not only in seeking 'justice' for them personally but also in encouraging reporting of child sexual abuse and preventing child sexual abuse in the future. Past and future criminal justice responses In private sessions and in personal submissions in response to Issues Paper No 8 Experiences of police and prosecution responses (Issues Paper 8), we have heard accounts from survivors of their experiences with police, particularly from the 1940s onwards, and of their experiences with prosecutions from the 1970s and 1980s onwards. Survivors have told us of both positive and negative experiences with police and prosecution responses. In general terms, many of the negative experiences we have been told about were experienced in earlier periods of time through to the early 2000s. In our policy work on criminal justice responses, our main focus must be on understanding the contemporary response of the criminal justice system to institutional child sexual abuse and on identifying how it can be made more effective. Criminal justice and institutional child sexual abuse The criminal justice system is often seen as not being effective in responding to crimes of sexual violence, including adult sexual assault and child sexual abuse, both institutional and noninstitutional. Research identifies the following features of the criminal justice system's treatment of these crimes: - lower reporting rates - higher attrition rates - lower charging and prosecution rates - fewer guilty pleas - fewer convictions. There are also features of institutional child sexual abuse cases that may affect the ability of the criminal justice system to respond effectively to these cases. These include: - 'word against word' cases, where there are no eyewitnesses to the abuse and no medical or scientific evidence - the importance of the complainant being willing to proceed, particularly where their evidence is the only direct evidence of the abuse - lengthy delays, where many survivors take years, even decades, to disclose their abuse. This can make investigation and prosecution more difficult - particularly vulnerable victims may be involved, including young children or people with disability. There are also many myths and misconceptions about sexual offences, including child sexual abuse, that have affected the criminal justice system's responses to child sexual abuse prosecutions. The myths and misconceptions have influenced the law and the attitudes jury members bring to their decision-making. The following myths and misconceptions have been particularly prominent in child sexual abuse cases: - women and children make up stories of sexual assault - a victim of sexual abuse will cry for help and attempt to escape their abuser that is, there will be no delay in reporting abuse and a 'real' victim will raise a 'hue and cry' as soon as they are abused - a victim of sexual abuse will avoid the abuser that is, a 'real' victim will not return to the abuser or spend time with them or have mixed feelings about them - sexual assault, including child sexual assault, can be detected by a medical examination that is, there will be medical evidence of the abuse in the case of 'real' victims. Operation of the criminal justice system There has been much academic debate about what might be said to be the purposes of the criminal justice system. In addition to the purpose of punishing the particular offender, the criminal justice system also seeks to reduce crime by deterring others from offending. The criminal justice systems in Australian jurisdictions function through an 'adversarial' system of justice, where the prosecution (representing the Crown) and the defence (representing the accused) each put forward their case and any evidence in relation to whether the act was committed, by whom, and with what intent. Theoretically, this 'contest between the parties' is designed to produce the most compelling argument as to what the truth of the matter is. Given that the investigation and prosecution of criminal matters is undertaken by the state, there is seen to be an imbalance between the prosecution and the accused. In recognition of this imbalance, a number of principles have emerged through the development of the common law to ensure that trials are conducted fairly. These include the following: - The prosecution must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused committed the crime or crimes charged. The corollary of this principle is that the accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. - The accused has a right to silence. This means that the accused cannot be compelled to give evidence or confess guilt. - The criminal trial should be conducted without unreasonable delay. - The accused has the right to examine witnesses in order to test the credibility of the witness and their testimony. - The prosecution is obliged to act independently and impartially and to conduct the case fairly. - If an accused is charged with a serious offence and lacks the financial means to engage legal representation, he or she should be provided with a lawyer. Many survivors have told us that they feel that the criminal justice system is weighted in favour of the accused. Some survivors who have participated as complainants in prosecutions have told us that they felt almost incidental to the criminal justice system and that they had little control over matters that were very important to them. Recognition of victims has increased over the last 50 years. States and territories introduced victims' compensation schemes from 1967 onwards. In the 1990s, emphasis shifted towards providing greater support services for victims. Victim impact statements were also introduced, and Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) guidelines required prosecutors to consult with victims. In 2013, Australia's Attorneys-General endorsed the National Framework for Rights and Services for Victims of Crime. Other responses to institutional child sexual abuse A number of stakeholders have argued that the Royal Commission should consider the use of restorative justice approaches (involving a range of processes to address the harm caused to victims) in connection with, or instead of, traditional criminal justice responses to institutional child sexual abuse. It appears that restorative justice may not be available for or of assistance to many survivors of institutional child sexual abuse, including: - because of the power dynamics and seriousness of institutional child sexual abuse offending, restorative justice approaches may only be suitable in only a small number of these cases. - many survivors do not wish to seek a restorative justice outcome with the perpetrator of the abuse - given the frequent delay before reporting, many offenders will be unavailable or unwilling to participate in restorative justice approaches. The Royal Commission provided for elements of restorative justice approaches in institutional child sexual abuse through the 'direct personal response' component of redress. The recommendations we made in our Report on redress and civil litigation (2015) are not intended as an alternative to criminal justice for survivors. Ideally, victims and survivors of institutional child sexual abuse should have access to justice through both criminal justice responses and redress and civil litigation. Some survivors have also told us that they found real benefit in state and territory statutory victims of crime compensation schemes because the decisions made by the relevant tribunals or administrators gave them official recognition of the crimes committed against them. Our approach to criminal justice reforms It must be recognised that the criminal justice system is unlikely ever to provide an easy or straightforward experience for a complainant of institutional child sexual abuse. However, we consider it important that survivors seek and obtain a criminal justice response to any child sexual abuse in an institutional context in order to: - punish the offender for their wrongdoing and recognise the harm done to the victim - identify and condemn the abuse as a crime against the victim and the broader community - emphasise that abuse is not just a private matter between the perpetrator and the victim - increase awareness of the occurrence of child sexual abuse through the reporting of charges, prosecutions and convictions - deter further child sexual abuse, including through the increased risk of discovery and detection. We also consider that seeking a criminal justice response to institutional child sexual abuse is an important way of increasing institutions', governments' and the community's knowledge and awareness not only that such abuse happens but also of the circumstances in which it happens. We consider that all victims and survivors should be encouraged and supported to seek a criminal justice response and that the criminal justice system should not discourage victims and survivors from seeking a criminal justice response through reporting to police. We are satisfied that any necessary reforms should be made to ensure that: - criminal justice responses are available for victims and survivors who are able to seek them - victims and survivors are supported in seeking criminal justice responses - the criminal justice system operates in the interests of seeking justice for society, including the complainant and the accused. Regulatory responses to child sexual abuse However, it is unrealistic to expect that all true allegations of institutional child sexual abuse will result in a criminal conviction of the accused, even if the criminal justice system is reformed to achieve these objectives. We recognise the importance of ensuring that regulatory responses focusing on child protection can interact effectively with criminal justice responses, particularly in cases where there is no criminal conviction. These regulatory responses include reportable conduct schemes, Working with Children Check schemes and industry regulation. Details: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, 2016. 709p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 20, 2019 at: https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/consultation-papers Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/file-list/Consultation%20Paper%20-%20Criminal%20justice.pdf Shelf Number: 154273 Keywords: AbuserAustraliaChild AbuseChild Sexual AbuseDirector of Public ProsecutionsInstitutional ResponseNational Framework for Rights and Services for VicRestorative JusticeSexual AssaultSexual ViolenceSurvivorsTestimonyVictim |
Author: Egurbide, Jose Title: Neighborhood Justice Program: What have We Learned?: Year-One Analysis of a Restorative Justice Movement Inside the Los Angeles Criminal Justice System Summary: The City Attorney is leading an effort in Los Angeles to compel our criminal justice system - from judges, law enforcement, prosecutors, and probation, to the community stakeholders who experience the effects of crime daily - to examine how each can individually and collectively respond to the dilemma caused by the interacting forces of poverty, quality of life crime and an overburdened justice system. Last year we launched the Neighborhood Justice Program (NJP) as one potential resolution to this paradigm. This report is a one-year analysis of NJP detailing: - The programmatic structure of NJP as it was formulated with the support of The California Endowment, the County's Dispute Resolution Program and the Department of Justice; - Our first-year goals and achievements; - A brief description of participants and their outcomes; - The impacts this new restorative justice strategy has upon the criminal justice system; and - Policy recommendations that will enhance NJP and support its expansion throughout criminal justice administration in Los Angeles. Details: Los Angeles, California: City of Los Angeles, 2016. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 8, 2019 at: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/NJPFirstYearAnalysis.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/documents/NJPFirstYearAnalysis.pdf Shelf Number: 154299 Keywords: CommunityDispute Resolution ProgramLos AngelesNeighborhood Justice ProjectRestorative Justice |
Author: Fornasari, Gabriele Title: Giustizia Riparativa: Responsabilita, Partecipazione, Riparazione (Restorative Justice: Responsibility, Participation, Repair) Summary: This volume contains the proceedings of an international conference held in Trento, at the Faculty of Law, 20-21 January 2017, and the result of the collaboration that has long linked the Faculty itself and the Region of Trentino-Alto Adige /Sudtirol: this is certainly the case of a positive relationship, which in this way reconfirms itself as a harbinger of tangible acquisitions destined to leave a trace, over time, of the existence of a common horizon of action. The fact that this horizon really exists, both scientifically, both on the practical side, it is further testified, in itself, by the theme that the contributions published here deal with all its complex declinations. In fact, restorative justice is at the center of attention only of scholars, but also of all institutional actors, who, directly or indirectly, perform functions capable of interacting with the very delicate matter of the execution of the sentence. In part, in fact, it is a matter of giving substance and effectiveness to what provided for by art. 27, paragraph 3 of the Constitution, especially where it is established that penalties "must tend to the rehabilitation of the condemned". It can be said that we are faced with a goal that has become, for the legislator as for the judiciary, for the penitentiary administration and for legal doctrine, a real challenge; a puzzle in some way, since, in recent years, and more and more often, the public and political debate in particular has always tried to endorse a sort of splitting, to the point of making them almost irreconcilable, between the need for "certainty of punishment" and the need for "recovery" of the person found guilty and therefore punished. It is true that the two dimensions must necessarily communicate and that, therefore, reasoning set of restorative justice and possible models (also on the plane comparative) can provide useful solicitations to rationalize a speech which, otherwise, risks spreading very dangerous convictions in operators as in citizenship. But one cannot even hide that, seen in the frame of a broader horizon, the perspective of restorative justice goes even beyond the needs now briefly recalled and postulates a more intense and deeper revision of the most widespread conceptions of punishment; at the very least, it requires a review of the conceptions, typical of legal modernity, which, emphasizing the guaranteeing instance of the absolute neutralization of the time of execution of the sanction, prevented the formation of a potentially profitable communication channel between the convicted and the victim. There are those who do not see, on the other hand, that a real recovery of the former - with its substantial re-acceptance into the ranks of the social community of reference - has a greater chance of being fulfilled when it is also the latter that recognizes and bears witness to the path to reconciliation. And there are those who do not see, from this specific point of view, that it is more than ever beneficial to broaden the spectrum of principles and criteria that must "govern" the execution of the sentence to the operation of the principles and criteria that govern the public administration under the art. 97 of the constitution: impartiality and good performance can only be the first references to recover objectivity and efficiency in a context that contemplates the exercise continuative of very incisive public powers and that one would like, by definition, to participate if not shared. It remains, therefore, only to hope that the ideas emerging from the works published here will constitute a step in a research path and even greater commitment. Certainly the Trentino Faculty can only thank my colleagues Prof. Gabriele Fornasari and Dr. Elena Mattevi for have been able to cultivate this research trail with skill and passion for always having distinguished themselves as precious interlocutors of the relationship of cooperation with the Trentino-Alto Adige/Sudtirol Region; a synergy that the Faculty considers valuable and that will surely continue to be mutually beneficial. Details: Trento, Italy: Universita Degli Studi di Trento, 2019. 268p. Source: Internet Resource (in Italian): Accessed June 17, 2019 at: https://iris.unitn.it/retrieve/handle/11572/234755/260405/COLLANA%20QUADERNI%20VOLUME%2040.pdf Year: 2019 Country: Italy URL: https://iris.unitn.it/handle/11572/234755 Shelf Number: 156467 Keywords: Italy Prison Punishment Rehabilitation Restorative Justice |
Author: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland Title: Northern Ireland Alternatives: A Follow-up Review of the Community Restorative Justice Schemes Operated by Northern Ireland Alternatives Summary: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJI) conducted a preliminary inspection of Northern Ireland Alternatives (NIA) in 2007. At that time the inspection was assessing NIA's readiness for accreditation and its potential to meet the standards set in the Government's Protocol for community-based restorative justice (CBRJ). The report recommended that NIA was ready for accreditation subject to their agreement to a number of conditions, and the deliberations of the Government's Suitability Panel who conducted background vetting into those involved with NIA. The outcome was that all five schemes were accredited by February 2008. 1.2 CJI had made a number of recommendations at the time of the original inspection and progress against these is assessed in this review. In addition the Inspectorate has now developed criteria for inspection of CBRJ schemes and has applied the criteria in this review. Inspectors undertook a full examination of all files opened by NIA since the last inspection to ensure that where criminal offences were identified, they were being correctly referred through the Protocol to the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) for Background CHAPTER 1: investigation and submission to the Public Prosecution Service for Northern Ireland (PPS) for consideration of restorative caution. Inspectors also sought to determine the current standing of NIA with the criminal justice agencies and whether the necessary confidence was being maintained. Details: Belfast, Ireland: Northern Ireland Alternatives, 2010. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 15, 2019 at: http://www.alternativesrj.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Northern-Ireland-Alternatives-CJI-review-2010.pdf Year: 2010 Country: Ireland URL: http://www.alternativesrj.org/publicationsreports/ Shelf Number: 157007 Keywords: Community-Based Services Inspection Ireland Restorative Justice |