The Criminal Justice Blog

Home » Criminal Justice System » Helpful or satisfying: What will victims of crime make of the new Restorative Justice Action Plan?

Helpful or satisfying: What will victims of crime make of the new Restorative Justice Action Plan?

Report coverIn 2001 Lord Justice Auld recommended: ‘The development and implementation of a national strategy to ensure consistent, appropriate and effective use of restorative justice techniques across England and Wales’ (Auld, 2001, p. 391 para.69).

Last month the ‘Restorative Justice Action Plan for the Criminal Justice System’ was launched. “This action plan is a joint commitment to develop a more strategic and coherent approach to the use of restorative justice in England and Wales. It sets out the steps that will be taken to achieve this aim”.

This is an important step, but I have been reflecting on why it has taken more than a decade from Auld’s original recommendation to publication of the action plan itself.

In his ministerial forward Jeremy Wright MP states, “Restorative justice has the potential to break the destructive pattern of behaviour of those that offend by forcing them [italics mine] to confront the full extent of the emotional and physical damage they have caused to their victims”.

True. But why does Wright use the term “forcing them”?

Contrast this with the definition of Restorative Justice taken from Marshall (1999, p. 5) which is one of the most widely quoted. It states:

 “A process whereby all the parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future”

Earlier in his ministerial forward, Wright says “The benefits of restorative justice are well known by those working within the sector. 85% of victims who go through restorative justice conferences find it helpful [italics mine]”.

Is the best criteria to evaluate restorative justice as to whether it was “helpful” or not? I guess it depends of what is meant by helpful.

This reminds me of Andrew von Hirsh’s comments (Von Hirsh et al, 2003) when he observed participant satisfaction [italics mine] as being a criteria used to evaluate Restorative Justice, yet there was no explanation as to why “satisfaction” was an appropriate and meaningful criteria.

 

References:

Auld, Rt. Hon. Lord Justice (2001) Review of the criminal courts in England and Wales: Report. London: The Stationery Office.

Marshall, T. (1999) Restorative Justice: An Overview. London: Home Office Research, Development & Statistics Directorate.

Von Hirsch, A., Ashworth, A. and Shearing, C. (2003) ‘Specifying aims and limits for restorative justice: a “making amends” model?, in Von Hirsch, A. Roberts, J., Bottoms, A. E., Roach, K. and Schiff, M. (eds.) Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing of Reconcilable Paradigms? Oxford: Hart.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: