An introduction to:RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
Introduction
Restorative justice is a victim-centered response to crime. It provides
opportunities for those most directly affected by crime to be directly involved in
responding to the harm caused by such crime. Amongst most directly affected by crime
are the victim, the offender, their families, and representatives of the community.
Recent Achievement in Restorative Justice
Restorative justice policies and programs have been developing in the
USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Ireland, Sweden, Finland, Singapore, Australia, New
Zealand and South Africa throughout the 1980s. For example, as the oldest and most
widely developed expression of restorative justice, victim offender mediation and
dialogue programs worked with thousands of cases annually through more than 300
programs in the United States and more than 900 in Europe in 1999.
Vienna Declaration of the Tenth United Nations Congress
The “Tenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the
Treatment of Offenders” was held in April 2000 at Vienna. The Congress adopted the
“Vienna Declaration on Crime and Justice: Meeting the Challenges of the Twenty-first
Century.” This is the first time that the term “restorative justice” was used in a
declaration of the United Nation. Certain articles of the Vienna Declaration mention
restorative justice as follows:We decide to introduce, where appropriate, national, regional and
international action plans in support of victims of crime, such as
mechanisms for mediation and restorative justice, and we establish
2002 as a target date for States to review their relevant practices, to
develop further victim support services and awareness campaigns
on the rights of victims and to consider the establishment of funds
for victims, in addition to developing and implementing witness
protection policies.
We encourage the development of restorative justice policies,
procedures and programs that are respectful of the rights, needs
and interests of victims, offenders, communities and all other
parties.
Brief History of Restorative Justice
Restorative justice is a major development in criminological thinking,
notwithstanding its grounding in traditions of justice from the ancient Arab, Greek, and
D:\533559361.doc
Roman civilizations that accepted a restorative approach even to homicide, and from the
ancient Indian Hindus and the ancient Buddhists.
Restorative justice was rekindled in the West from the establishment of an
experimental victim-offender reconciliation program in 1974 in Kitchener, Ontario. After
that there had been rapid growth of these programs in North America and in Europe, plus
many Southern Hemisphere programs.
The 1990s have seen the New Zealand ideas of family group conferences
spread to many countries, including Australia, Singapore, the United Kingdom, Ireland,
South Africa, Palestine, the USA, and Canada, adding a new theoretical vitality to
restorative justice thinking.
Restorative Justice as focus of attention in Criminal Justice Policy
There are many factors as to why restorative justice has become the
central focus of attention in criminal justice policy. These factors may vary in each
country. In the USA, Van Ness has pointed our that an informal justice movement (from
the 1970s) a movement for the promotion of restitution (from the early 1960s) victim’s
movement (from the early 1970s), introducing and enhancing victim offender mediation
(VOM), from the middle of the 1970s), and family group conference (FGC) and the
social justice movement (form the middle of the 1970s) are major factors highlighting
restorative justice.
In New Zealand, there was serious overcrowding in juvenile correctional
institutions and a mismatching of Maori people to the modern criminal justice system.
The New Zealand Government introduced family group conferences for young offenders
in 1989 for solving this problem. This was a radical change from the former welfare
model of institutionalization to a justice model of offender accountability and family
empowerment. The institutions were closed down and families were asked to take
responsibility for their young. Young persons received special treatment under The
Children and Young Persons Act of 1989.
Restorative Justice versus Retributive Justice
Restorative justice sees crime as a violation of people and relationships. It
involves the victim, the offender and the community in a search for solutions that
promote repair, reconciliation and reassurance (Bowen, 1999).
On the other hand, retributive justice (current practice of criminal justice
system) sees crimes as a violation of the state defined by lawbreaking and the
establishing of guilt. It determines blame and administrators punishment in a contest
between the offender and the state (Zehr, 1990).
Restorative justice seeks to redefine crime, interpreting it not so much as
breaking the law, or offending against the state, but as an injury of wrongdoing to another
D:\533559361.doc
person or persons. The offender and victim are encouraged to be directly involved in
aiming the issues surrounding the conflict through dialogue and negotiation, in the
presence of the offender’s family and the victim’s support people.
Core Elements of Restorative Justice
The restorative justice process aims offender accountability and victim
recognition and healing. This necessitates full participation of both the victim and the
offender. If either party is unwilling to take part, the opportunity for restoration and
healing diminishes.
The participation of victim and offender’s support members (including
family members of both parties) in the community is also important to the restorative
justice process. The acknowledgment of accountability in the presence of these
community members is a significant enhancement to the process of restoration.
When the victim experiences the willingness and preparedness of the
offender to take accountability and to accept the consequences of his / her offence, the
relationship between victim and offender changes. It moves from blaming the offender to
seeing how the victim and the community can assist the offender to cease offending.
Although this system is equally beneficial to both the adults and the
juvenile delinquents yet it is more fruitful for the juveniles provided it is enforced with
sincerity to the welfare to the children in conflict with laws.
[The writer, Mr. Zaka-ur-Rab Rana is the Vice Principal, Central Jail Staff
Training Institute, Lahore, Punjab and can be reached at zakaurrab@yahoo.com]
D:\533559361.doc