An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland
(Version 1.10)
2008
The following is a text-only version of most of the accompanying powerpoint presentation. It has been produced on
the assumption that some readers find it easier to read a printed version.
Contents
1. What is it?
1.1
Restorative Justice Values
1.2
Restorative Justice Skills
1.3
Restorative Justice Processes
2. What can it do?
2.1
Person Harmed
2.2
Person Responsible
2.3
Community
3. What works?
2.1
Context
2.2
Suitability
2.3
Best Practice
2.4
Effectiveness
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
2
1. What is it?
1.1 Restorative Justice Values*
In the following, the values with an asterisk have been adapted from “Statement of Restorative Justice Values and Processes,”
New Zealand RJ Network (March 2004).
Empowerment*
Restorative justice recognises that . . .

All human beings require a degree of self-determination and autonomy in their lives; that
harmful behaviour robs those affected of this power, since another person has exerted
control over them without their consent; and that they can be re-empowered by taking
an active role in determining what their needs are and how these should be met;

Those who have caused the harm should be empowered to take personal responsibility
for their actions, to do what they can to remedy the harm they have inflicted, and to
begin a rehabilitative and re-integrative process.
Interconnectedness*
Restorative justice recognises that . . .

Society (or the institution) shares responsibility for its members and for many of the
underlying causes that give rise to harmful behaviour; and that there is therefore a
shared responsibility to help restore those who have been harmed and reintegrate those
responsible;

The person harmed and the person responsible are uniquely bonded together by their
shared participation in the incident, and in certain respects they hold the key to each
other’s recovery.
Non-Retributive
In restorative justice . . .

The process and the outcome makes sense to all participants as helping to repair or
address the harm - materially or symbolically – and not as an attempt to inflict
punishment or retribution (understood as the deliberate imposition of pain and suffering
as a form of ‘payback’ or ‘just deserts’).

The process may be burdensome, uncomfortable or difficult for the person responsible
(e.g. meeting the person harmed or carrying out a restorative task); but that burden
must be treated and understood by all participants as only a side-effect of the
restorative action, not its main point.
Fairness
In restorative justice . . .

All participants feel that the facilitator is impartial, that they are given an equal voice in
the process, that their needs are heard and taken seriously, and that any reparative
agreements are proportionate to the harm done, non-degrading, achievable and
constructive.

Fairness is not, as it is in the legal system, conceived as “the consistent application of
rules and procedures (e.g. the same sentence/process for the same crime)”.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
3
Hope*
Restorative justice. . .

Recognises that no matter how severe the wrongdoing, it is always possible for the
community to respond in ways that lend strength to those who are suffering and that
promote healing and change;

Does not penalise past actions, but instead addresses present needs and equips people
to move forward with their lives;

Nurtures hope: the hope of healing for persons harmed, the hope of change for those
responsible, and the hope of greater civility for society.
Respect*
In Restorative Justice . . .

All participants are spoken to and treated in a way that upholds and enhances their
inherent and equal worth and dignity;

The process does not discriminate or show partiality on the basis of their actions, good
or bad, or of their race, culture, gender, sexual orientation, age, beliefs or status in
society; and

It engenders trust and good faith between them.
Humility*
In Restorative Justice. . .

Empathy, mutual care and the recognition that participants have more in common as
flawed and frail human beings than what divides them are encouraged;

Those who facilitate and recommend the process acknowledge and allow for the
possibility that unintended consequences may follow from their interventions.
Accountability*
In Restorative Justice. . .

The person who has played a role in causing harm chooses to accept responsibility for
their actions; and

This acceptance is demonstrated by acknowledging their role in what happened,
clarifying what happened and why, expressing sincere remorse for their actions,
addressing or repairing the harm that was caused, and taking steps that will help them
to refrain from similar actions in the future.
Reintegration
In Restorative Justice. . .

Taking responsibility, making amends and changing one’s ways are recognised and
supported as ways of enabling a person to be reintegrated, that is, re-accepted or
‘welcomed back’ as a person of equal moral standing;

Any aspect of the process that might continue or increase the isolation, exclusion,
stigmatisation and estrangement of any participant is carefully and deliberately avoided.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
4
Mutuality
In Restorative Justice. . .

The person harmed and the person responsible are given an equal and genuine
opportunity to participate.

The process aims to meet the respective needs, wishes and circumstances of all
participants.
Voluntariness
In Restorative Justice . . .

Participation is freely chosen; otherwise, it will lack the authenticity, trust and sincerity
that is necessary for genuine moral engagement, emotional responses, consensual
decision-making and behavioural change.

No participant is coerced, pressured, or induced by unfair means to take up the
invitation to have the process explained to them, to (continue to) participate in any
process, to enter into any agreements as part of the restorative outcome.
Participation*
In Restorative Justice . . .

The person harmed and the person responsible for the incident are given the
opportunity to be the principal speakers and decision-makers.

Members of their respective communities of care are given the opportunity to play a
supportive role.

All participants are regarded as having something valuable to contribute to the process.
1.2 Restorative Justice Skills
Active Listening

Giving people a safe space to say what they need to say

Showing that you are listening by your body language

Allowing them to be angry and upset without ‘fixing’, ‘rescuing’ or ‘blaming’ them

Asking appropriate and encouraging questions

Feeding back accurately
Self-Awareness

Paying attention to your own feelings and behaviour

Being aware of your personal ‘hooks’ (things that stop you in your tracks) and ‘triggers’
(things that set you off)

Being aware of your own strengths and weaknesses
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
5
Problem-Solving

Finding the facts

Identifying the problems

Clarifying the solutions

Working out plans of action
Assertiveness

Being able to present your role and needs in the process clearly and respectfully

Being prepared to establish ground rules

Being willing to intervene if these rules are not adhered to
Impartiality

Demonstrating that you are not siding with any one participant

Showing that you are concerned to ensure that the needs and interests of all
participants are met in the process
Genuineness

Being oneself (open, transparent, authentic)

Not hiding behind a mask of professionalism

Being sincere, warm and non-defensive.
Building Rapport

Presenting yourself as a professional person who takes the issue seriously

Creating an atmosphere in which the participants feel they can trust you and that you
genuinely care about their views and feelings

Giving the participants a chance to make their own decisions at their own pace
Non-Discriminatory

Understanding how issues such as racism, ageism, homophobia and sexism play a part
in conflict or offending behaviour

Being aware of different cultural needs and perspectives

Being able to work with a diversity of people, ensuring that they are treated equally
Conflict Management

Staying calm

Distinguishing between arguments and disagreements

Encouraging communication, even when emotions are running high

Defusing anger

Suggesting ‘time out’

Using I-messages
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
6
Professionalism

Taking the work seriously

Being well prepared

Devoting as much time and energy as is necessary

Always looking for ways to improve and develop

The ability to learn from your experiences (good and bad)
Creating Safety

The ability to create a ‘place’ or an atmosphere in which people feel they can be open
and honest

To ensure that people don’t feel shamed, humiliated or put down in any way

To honour and respect the feelings and words of each participant
Flexibility

The ability to change the process in order to meet the needs of each situation

Always putting people’s needs before rules or ‘the way we have always done it’

Listening carefully to how people are experiencing the process, and responding quickly
to their requests or concerns
Facilitation

Assisting the participants to communicate, to listen to each other, to express facts,
feelings and concerns

Making sure that you speak or intervene as little as possible in any restorative meeting

Creating a space in which participants feel that the dialogue is owned by them and that
it is as natural as possible
Presentation

Communicating ideas in direct and simple ways

Having all the relevant written materials with you (e.g. leaflets)

Knowing the material thoroughly, so that you can speak confidently and authoritatively

Being aware of how your own body language and gestures can communicate your
thoughts and feelings to others
Reframing

Being able to re-word what someone has said so that the other participants can hear
what they really meant (e.g. ‘So what you are saying is . . . )

Taking out negatives, accusations, confusing grammar etc., and making what is said
clear, positive and constructive
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
7
Creativity

The ability to come up with new ideas or compromise solutions that no one has thought
of

To try different ways of working where necessary

To be adaptable to changing situations
Empathy

The ability to step into a participant’s world or frame of reference – as if you are in their
shoes – without losing your objectivity

To be open to understanding how they might be feeling from their point of view
1.3 Restorative Justice Processes
Every restorative justice process aims to provide a ‘safe place’ where all those involved in an
incident that has caused harm can speak openly and honestly about three topics:
FACTS
What happened?
Who was responsible?
Why did it happen?
CONSEQUENCES
Who was harmed?
How were they affected?
How do they feel now?
FUTURE
How can the harm be addressed or repaired?
How can this behaviour be prevented?
There are a range of restorative justice processes, each of which is designed to meet the
needs and wishes of participants.
Use of terms
There is a broad consensus in Scotland that ‘restorative justice’ refers to processes that seek
to address or repair harm.
Consensus on the use of the term ‘restorative practices’ has not (yet) been established.

Some hold that ‘restorative justice’ and ‘restorative practice’ are synonymous.*

Others hold that ‘restorative justice’ is a subset of ‘restorative practices.’ For example,
in the context of some schools ‘restorative practice’ is used to encompass not only
restorative justice processes (in blue) but also a wide range of other processes (in
red).
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
8
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
Different contexts and terminologies
Schools
Police Warnings
Youth Justice
Diversion from
Prosecution
Prisons
Restorative Justice
Conferences
Restorative Police
Warning Conferences
Restorative Justice
Conferences
-
Restorative Justice
Conferences
Restorative Meetings
-
Face-to-Face Meetings
Face-to-Face Meetings
Restorative Meetings
Shuttle dialogue
Restorative Police
Warnings
Shuttle dialogue
Shuttle dialogue
Shuttle dialogue
Victim Awareness
-
Victim Awareness
-
Victim Awareness
Support for Persons
Harmed
-
Support for Persons
Harmed
-
Support for Persons
Harmed
Restorative
Conversations
-
-
-
Restorative
Conversations
Restorative Justice
Circles
-
-
-
Restorative Justice
Circles
-
-
Restorative FGCs
-
-
The term ‘restorative practice’ is currently used in the context of schools to encompass not
only restorative justice processes, but also conflict resolution, informal decision-making,
relationship-building, and other similar processes.
Schools
Youth
Families
Neighborhood
Employment
Civil or
Commercial
Prisons
Mediation
Youth Homelessness
Mediation
Family
Mediation
Community
Mediation
Workplace
Mediation
Alternative
Dispute
Resolution
-
Peer
Mediation
-
-
-
Peer Mediation
-
-
ProblemSolving
Circles
-
-
-
-
-
CommunityBuilding
Circles
Check-in
Circles
-
-
-
-
-
Family Group
Conferences
Family Group
Conferences
Family Group
Conferences
-
-
-
CommunityBuilding
Circles
Family Group
Conferences
Restorative Justice Conferences
Description:
Restorative Justice Conferences are normally led by two facilitators and are attended by the
person(s) harmed, the person(s) responsible, their respective support persons and other
affected persons. Support persons can include family members, friends and/or professionals
(e.g. social worker, school staff, youth worker, victim support volunteer, and so on).
The facilitator carefully prepares all participants before they meet so as to ensure it is a safe
and productive process. The conference may result in an Action Plan in which the person
responsible agrees to do a reparative task and/or take steps to address the underlying causes
of their behaviour (which may involve the assistance and agreement of professionals).
Conferences are ordinarily used only where the incident has caused significant harm to an
identifiable person(s) and when the involvement of family members or other support persons is
seen as critical to a positive outcome.
Some schools have set up partnerships with local Restorative Justice Services so that if a
conference is required, the Service can provide one of its RJ workers to serve as the facilitator.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
9
Example:
The young person was charged with shoplifting from a small business, run by a husband and
wife team. The facilitator met with all those involved to explain their options. They all agreed to
participate in a conference, including the young person’s parents. The facilitator then spent
several sessions with each participant, helping them to prepare for the meeting.
At the conference the young person began by saying what he had done and why he had done
it. The shop owners expressed how it had made them feel – their fear, the anger and their
suspicion when young people were in their shop. The young person listened and then
apologised for what he had done. His parents said how sorry they were too, and that they were
trying to resolve issues at home.
The shop owners felt that the young person had understood the impact of his actions, and that
the apology was sincere. So they suggested that, as reparation, he could work at their shop for
four Saturdays. Two of the Saturdays would pay for the stolen items, and he could keep his
pay for the other two days.
The young person completed his four Saturdays. The shop owners felt that their loss was
restored. They were so pleased that they offered him a job at the shop. He couldn’t accept,
because he was starting college. But he did get a good reference.
See http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk/YJ1.htm for the full version of this case.
Face-to-Face Meetings
Description:
Face-to-Face Meetings can be led by either one or two facilitators and are attended by only
the person(s) harmed and the person(s) responsible. The facilitator carefully prepares both
participants before they meet so as to ensure it is a safe and productive process.
The meeting may result in an Action Plan in which the person responsible agrees to do a
reparative task and/or take steps to address the underlying causes of their behaviour.
This kind of process is used when both participants agree that the incident can be effectively
resolved without bringing support people to the meeting. For example, they may feel that the
incident was not serious enough, or they would prefer to talk in private, or they feel that
bringing support people could complicate the issue or threaten the safety of the process.
Face-to-Face Meetings are often used in cases where people have harmed each other as a
result of conflict (e.g. a fight). In such cases, the process can be used both to resolve the
underlying conflict, as well as address the harm done.
Example:
The young person was involved in breaking numerous school windows deliberately. The young
person and the person harmed (the janitor) agreed to participate in a face-to-face meeting.
During the Preparation the janitor said he wanted the young person to stop breaking the
windows and to stop the abusive gestures and comments when he was going about his
janitorial duties.At the Meeting the janitor challenged the young person on his truanting. The
young person explained he had not been given a new school since his exclusion some months
previously. He took full responsibility for leading the other young people into the vandalism.
The janitor said how he felt about the abuse. The young person made a sincere apology and
promised not to break the windows again. The Action Plan was to greet each other with
respect and for the young person to stick in at school and make something of his life.
The janitor assumed that the young person was truanting when he was not. The young person
did not understand that the janitor’s feelings were hurt by his abusive gestures. Both gained
respect for each other through their honesty, their understanding of the other person’s position,
and their commitment to getting a resolution to a difficult situation, face to face.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
10
Shuttle dialogue
Description:
Shuttle dialogue involves a facilitator acting as a go-between for the person(s) harmed and the
person(s) responsible. The facilitator carefully prepares both participants before they exchange
communication, so as to ensure it is a safe and productive process.
This process may result in the participants agreeing on an Action Plan in which the person
responsible agrees to write a letter of apology, complete a reparative task and/or take steps to
address the underlying causes of their behaviour. This process is used when one or both
participants do not wish to communicate in a meeting, or it is felt that it would be unsafe or
impractical to do so.
The communication can be take place by letters, audio/visual tape recordings, or by the
facilitator reporting directly.
Example:
It began with a group of young people throwing stones at a house window. Inside was a 13
year old girl and her parents. All the young people attended same school as the girl, and had
been bullying her constantly. The behaviour progressed into threats and intimidation. The
abuse continued for almost an hour until the parents called the police.
Two of the young people were referred to restorative justice. Both showed remorse for their
actions from the start and wanted the opportunity to make amends. They completed victim
awareness material and wrote letters of apology to the parents and the girl.
The facilitator then met with the persons harmed to discuss their involvement with the service.
They expressed their feelings of anger and fear. Since the incident they felt that they had been
labelled "the neighbours from hell" through no fault of their own. Their daughter had to move
school for fear of future bullying and intimidation, and found it difficult to go out. The facilitator
asked if there was anything that could make their lives a bit easier. After some discussion, an
agreement form regarding future behaviour was written up. Prior to this, the apology letters
were read to the parents. They stated that they would accept the apology. They said it felt
better that they were at least trying to do something.
The future behaviour form was then shown to the two young people. Both agreed to comply
with the request and also felt relieved that their apology had been accepted. The facilitator
returned to the parents to show them the signed and agreed form. The parents said they felt
much better and appreciated the support.
Victim Awareness
Description:
Victim Awareness Programmes involve only the person responsible in one-to-one or groupwork sessions with a facilitator.
The process may include voluntary reparative tasks and/or cognitive behavioural courses or
modules (e.g. ‘gains and losses of offending’ exercise, anger management, substance misuse,
etc.).
In a restorative context, this process is used if (and only if) one participant does not wish to
communicate with the other, or it is felt that doing so would be unsafe or inappropriate, or if the
person harmed cannot be contacted or identified.
Example:
The incident involved a young male (age 14) assaulting another male (12) on the way home
from school. It was reported to the police, and the Children’s Reporter referred the case to the
local Restorative Justice Service.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
11
The facilitator met with the young person responsible for the offence, with his parents, to
explain the service. The young person said he was really sorry for what he had done, and said
he would like to apologise to the person harmed, if that would help.
The facilitator then met with the person harmed and his parents. The parents were pleased to
hear that the person responsible wanted to apologise, but – after talking it through with the
facilitator - were not convinced that a meeting would help their child at this time. The facilitator
explained that the person responsible would do a victim awareness programme instead, and
the parents said they would like to know the outcome.
So the facilitator helped the person responsible to work through the victim awareness material
which took three half-hour sessions over two weeks. This involved him thinking about what
happened and why, what the consequences were likely to have been for the other boy and his
family, and what he needed to do to make sure it didn’t happen again.
At the end, the facilitator informed the person harmed and his parents that the programme had
been completed successfully.
Support for Persons Harmed
Description:
Support for Persons Harmed is a process that, at present, is only used in prisons – but it could
be used in any other context.
The process involves a discussion between the facilitator and the person harmed, with the aim
of addressing the hurt, fear and anger experienced by person harmed. The process also seeks
to raise their awareness of how to protect themselves in the future, and to assess whether they
require professional help in their recovery process.
In a restorative context, this process is used if (and only if) the person harmed doesn't know,
or doesn't want to reveal the identity of the person responsible, or doesn't want to
communicate with them.
Example:
The person harmed (18 yrs old) had only been in the prison for 2 weeks. It was her first time
inside, and she was not coping. Her cell mate was threatening to beat her up because she
refused get her friend to bring in more ‘supplies’ when she came to visit; and now she was
being given the silent treatment by the other girls in her unit. She was in such a state that she
would start crying over almost anything, and was very fearful and anxious for her safety.
She went to speak with her personnel officer about it, but only on condition that the officer
would not report her cell mate, since that would only make her life worse.
The officer found a private, safe place – a room in the chapel – to talk with her. The officer
encouraged her to talk about what had happened, her responses and how she was feeling
now – all the time affirming and validating what the person harmed was saying. The officer
then asked her to reflect on what she could do to manage the situation, and how the prison
establishment could help. They talked about anticipating feelings, responding assertively, and
the possibility of re-location to another unit – which the person harmed quickly accepted.
The discussion helped the person harmed to feel reassured that her responses were not
uncommon, and that there was someone who she could turn to if she needed help again. The
relocation also made an enormous difference, and the confidentiality of the process ensured
there were no repercussions for her from her previous cell mate.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
12
Restorative Conversations
Description:
Restorative conversations are only used in an institutional context (schools and prisons).
They are a five to ten minute discussion between a staff member and the person responsible.
They are used immediately after a minor breach of rules that may have affected others, but
which did not directly harm an identifiable person.
Conversations are designed to create a learning experience. Instead of simply telling the
person responsible what to think or how to behave, the facilitator leads them through a simple
but structured dialogue, using open questions and reflective listening.
The process is designed to enable the person responsible to think through the reasons for
their behaviour, to reflect on how it might have affected other people, and to discover for
themselves alternative ways of behaving in the future.
Example:
The incident involved a student coming 10 minutes late to class - for the third time. The
teacher asked him to stay after class. Once all the other students had left, they both sat down.
The teacher explained that she wanted to talk to the student about his coming late to class.
She asked him what was happening – whether there was a reason for the lateness. The
student explained that he ‘just needed to take some time out in between classes to get some
fresh air’. The teacher explored why he was needing this, and it turned out that he was
catching up with some of his friends from a different year.
The teacher then asked the student how his being late was affecting him. He thought for a
moment, and said that he was probably missing out on things in the class. The teacher asked
how it might be affecting the class. He shrugged; and then, after a while, said that he guessed
he was interrupting the other students’ concentration, and that it was probably annoying for the
teacher.
The teacher asked what him what he could do to make sure it didn’t continue. The student said
that he would try to meet up with his friends during lunch instead. The teacher affirmed his
decision and his willingness to talk it through.
Restorative Justice Circles
Description:
Restorative Justice Circles are only used in an institutional context (schools, residential units
and prisons); but they could also be used to address anti-social behaviour in the community.
They are normally arranged when there has been an incident involving a number of individuals
which has caused significant harm to themselves, other members of the institution (including
staff) and the establishment (e.g. a riot, destroying facilities, etc.)
As with any restorative process, the facilitator will carefully prepare all participants before they
meet so as to ensure it is a safe and productive process. The circle process allows all those
involved to discuss the incident openly and honestly in a safe and structured context.
Restorative Justice Circles differ from other uses of the circle format (e.g. problem-solving
circles, ‘check-in circles or circle-time) insofar as the explicit aim is to enable the participants to
address the harm that has been caused by a specific incident.
In other words, like every other restorative practice, the circle discussion is structured by a
focus on the facts (what happened), the consequences (who has been affected) and the
future (how can we stop this from happening again).
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
13
Example:
Twelve young people were in a youth centre, participating in a group session. During the first
part of the morning the fish started dying. By the following Monday, they were all dead. The
staff arranged a restorative circle, and explained that they wanted to get an understanding of
why this happened and to explore with the young people the consequences that this had on
everyone.
The circle lasted an hour and a half, which gave them plenty of time to reflect and explore the
behaviour. Without being asked, the young people told the staff exactly what had happened,
who took part and how the fish were poisoned. At the end, the young people concluded that
they were all responsible because they were all in the youth centre but that some played a
greater role than others (i.e. some did it, some watched and did nothing to stop it, and
everyone else laughed or knew about it). It was agreed that some would pay £10 and others
£1 to pay for the fish. The staff typed up a contract to this effect, and each young person
signed.
The process enabled staff to challenge the young people openly and use peer pressure in a
positive way, by encouraging participants to take a lead role. The youth centre also gained £47
toward purchasing new fish that would not otherwise have happened.
Restorative Family Group Conferences
Description:
Restorative Family Group Conferences are normally led by two facilitators and are attended by
the the person responsible, his or her support persons, and professionals who are working
with or may have some involvement with the person responsible. The facilitator carefully
prepares all participants before they meet so as to ensure it is a safe and productive process.
If there is an identifiable person harmed, the facilitator will ensure that they have the
opportunity to convey to the person responsible (through the facilitator): (a) how the incident
has affected them, and (b) any requests for a letter of apology, an explanation or reparation in
the meeting. The facilitator may, if the person harmed wishes, feed back to them the outcome.
In the meeting, the facts, the consequences and any reparative requests or arrangements are
discussed first. Then the facilitator begins the standard three-part FGC process. Information
Sharing: Professionals will present their perspective on the underlying causes of the offending
behaviour and make clear what resources they can make available to the family to help them
address these causes. Private Family Time: The family then meet privately to come up with a
plan that will help to prevent the person responsible from re-offending (taking into account
what the professionals have said) Agreeing the Plan: When they return to the meeting, they
present their plan to the group, and it is then refined and written down.
Example:
The incident involved a young person (13) throwing stones at a passing GNER train. The
police were called, and the case was referred by the Children’s Reporter to the local
Restorative Justice Service.
The Reporter indicated to the facilitator that there was an underlying care issue in this case
that needed to be dealt with – preferably in an informal setting. The young person already had
a social worker, and had been referred to the Hearing system for previous offences. Hence,
the Reporter asked the facilitator to see whether a Restorative FGC might be a useful way of
addressing the offence as well as helping the family to come up with a plan that might address
the lack of adequate parental supervision - due to them working on Tuesday evenings and
Saturdays.
The facilitator met with the young person and his family, and they agreed to take part. GNER
was contacted and they requested that the facilitator convey to the young person the
potentially deadly consequences of stone throwing. They said they would accept a letter of
apology, if the young person agreed to write one voluntarily.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
14
The meeting was held, with the young person, his parents, his grandparents, his uncle, his
social worker and a youth worker present. The young person was genuinely sorry for what he
had done. So the Action Plan included his agreeing to write a letter of apology to GNER. The
family also agreed to make arrangements for the youth worker to take him to the youth club on
Tuesday evenings, and for his grandparents and uncle to look after him on alternate
Saturdays.
Restorative Warning
Description:
Restorative Warnings are facilitated by trained police officers and are designed to deal quickly
with minor first or second offences. The person responsible for the offence, together with their
support persons, meet with a police officer for 20-30 minutes. The role of the police officer is to
ensure that everyone can speak without interruption, in an open and honest manner, about the
facts, the consequences, and the future. Whilst the person harmed does not attend a warning,
they do have the opportunity to be informed of the outcome and, if all participants agree, to
receive a letter of apology and, in some cases, appropriate reparation. Whilst most areas now
offer restorative warnings, the aim is that they will replace Senior Police Officer warnings
throughout Scotland by April 2006.
[Note: “Police Restorative Warning Conferences” can also be held, but this process is identical
to a Restorative (Justice) Conference, with the only difference being that the conference is
either facilitated by a police officer or a police officer is present at the conference.]
Examples:
1. Hoax 999 call
Fourteen year old female made a hoax phone call requesting the Fire and Rescue Service
attend a dwelling-house that was on fire. The RJ warning was administered jointly by Police
and Fire and Rescue Service. The Fire Service showed a video to the youth. (The video
involved a female placing a hoax 999 phone call to the fire service. The Fire engine arriving at
the hoax call, and at the same time her friend has been trapped in a car crash, and needs the
fire service to cut her out; because the fire service have attended the hoax phone call, which is
at the other side of town, they don't make it in time and the girl dies.) The fire service also let
her hear a hoax 999, and took her to the Control Room and explained the process when a
hoax 999 call is received. Both the young person and mother felt the warning went well.
2. Breach of the Peace
Fourteen year old male youth in possession of BB gun. Youth was pointing it to members of
the public. Cautioned and charged with Breach of the Peace. Police administered RJ Warning.
The youth was very remorseful for his actions. He thought what he was doing was not a crime.
When informed of the consequences of his actions he could clearly see the wrong in his
actions. It is in the opinion of the submitting officer the accused is a well behaved youth and
will not re-offend.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
15
2. What can restorative justice do?
2.1 Person Harmed
Needs of the person harmed that restorative justice can meet:
Confidence

To be able to trust the person(s) who are facilitating the process.

To be satisfied with the way the incident was dealt with.

To increase their confidence in the moral legitimacy and fairness of the institution or
the justice system that has incorporated a restorative approach.
Decision-Making

To feel that they have a genuine, non-pressured and informed choice about whether to
participate, based primarily on whether the process is likely to assist their own
recovery.

To regain a sense of control over their lives, especially where they feel this has been
taken away from them - initially by the incident itself and then, perhaps, by the way in
which the institution or justice system responded to the incident.

To have their views about what needs be done taken into account in the decisionmaking.
Procedural Justice

To be treated in a fair and respectful way.

To have a trained and competent facilitator who is impartial, ethical and unbiased.

To participate in a carefully structured process that is designed to uphold the individual
dignity and basic equality of all participants at every stage.

To know that the process is flexible and open to revision, correction or modification by
participants if appropriate.
Information and Preparation

To be given prompt and sufficient information about the way the incident is to be dealt
with, the options available to them and possible outcomes.

To feel that they are fully prepared for their role in the process.
Answers and Impact

To obtain answers to questions they have about what happened, who was responsible
and why it happened.

To have an opportunity to convey to the person responsible the emotional suffering
and distress that their actions have caused.

To feel that their experience and their responses have been validated.

To know that telling their story is likely to have an impact on the person responsible, in
terms of them facing up to what they have done, learning from the experience and
changing their behaviour in the future.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
16
Apology

To receive a sincere apology from the person responsible for the harm that they have
caused.
Material Restoration

To have the financial and emotional value of their material losses acknowledged.

To have these losses actually restored or amends made by the person responsible,
including the return or repair of property and/or reparative tasks.
Emotional Restoration

To experience relief from or a reduction of the type of suffering and distress that is
often caused by victimisation, including anger and bitterness, self-blame, diminished
self-confidence, fear, anxiety, mistrust, vulnerability, the sense of being violated or
disrespected and physical symptoms (headaches, sleeplessness, nightmares, etc).

To feel empowered and strengthened by their involvement in an emotionally
challenging and (potentially) unfamiliar process.

To feel that they did what they needed to do to move on with their lives.
2.2 Person Responsible
Needs of the person responsible that restorative justice can meet:
Confidence

To be able to trust the person(s) who are facilitating the process.

To be satisfied with the way the incident was dealt with.

To increase their confidence in the moral legitimacy and fairness of the institution or
the justice system that has incorporated a restorative justice approach.
Decision-Making

To decide for themselves that they will take responsibility for the harm they have
caused.

To have their views and agreement taken into account in deciding what needs to be
done to address or repair the harm.
Procedural Justice

To be treated in a fair and respectful way.

To have a trained and competent facilitator who is impartial, ethical and unbiased.

To participate in a carefully structured process that is designed to uphold the individual
dignity and basic equality of all participants at every stage.

To know that the process is flexible and open to revision, correction or modification by
participants if appropriate.
Information and Preparation
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
17

To be given prompt and sufficient information about the way the incident is to be dealt
with, the options available to them and possible outcomes;

To feel that they are fully prepared for their role in the process.
Moral Development

To learn that their actions have potentially harmful consequences for others.

To develop their capacity to empathise with other people’s feelings.

To more readily anticipate (and thus take steps to avoid) the shame and remorse they
would feel if they harmed another person.

To learn how to take responsibility and be accountable for their actions.

To learn what it means to uphold the dignity and value of others, regardless of the
cost.

To learn what is involved in trying to repair relationships (courage, honesty, listening,
vulnerability, apologising, and so on).

To challenge the cognitive distortions that may have led up to the incident (excuses,
blaming, justifications, revenge).
Reintegration

To be given the opportunity to take responsibility and make amends – and, as a
consequence, to then be re-accepted or ‘welcomed back’ into the community.

To engage in a process that sets out to diminish or put an end to the painful isolation,
exclusion, stigmatisation and estrangement that they may be experiencing as a result
of their actions.
Material Restoration

To gain a clear sense of the value that material possessions can have for others, in
both financial and personal terms.

To learn that moral responsibility and achieving reintegration can be difficult and costly
– but at the same time fair and appropriate: e.g. addressing material harm may involve
burdensome reparative tasks or the return and/or repair of property.
Emotional Restoration

To gain a powerful and persuasive impression of the suffering and distress that their
behaviour caused to other people.

To engage in a process that may help the person harmed in their process of recovery
(e.g., answering questions about what happened and why can help the person harmed
to let go of any self-blame; a sincere apology can have a positive affect on levels of
anger or resentment, etc.).

To engage in a process that may assist their own emotional recovery (e.g. release
from personal guilt and shame, being ‘re-accepted’ by those around them, etc.).
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
18
2.3 Community
Needs of the community* that restorative justice can meet:
*The term ‘community’ is notoriously difficult to define. In this context, it is used to refer to a
wide range of groupings: i.e. it can refer to the immediate family and friends of the persons
harmed/responsible; and/or the wider circle of individuals/groups who are aware of or have
been indirectly affected by the incident; and/or the social contexts or institutions in which the
incident took place (e.g. neighborhood, school, prison, workplace, shopping center, etc.)
Confidence

To increase the community’s confidence in the moral legitimacy and fairness of their
institution(s) or the justice system(s) that incorporate restorative justice approaches.

To increase the confidence and capacity of communities to resolve their own conflicts
and troubles, rather than resort to a ‘consumer’ approach to the police, formal
disciplinary measures, courts and social services.
Empowerment

To have available an informal process in which relevant community members can
directly participate and in which their views be taken into account in deciding what
needs to be done.

To have available methods of social control that do not divide, alienate and disable
communities (e.g. coercion, threats, exclusion).

To be able to draw on and strengthen community-based resources and solutions (e.g.
appeals to conscience, the building and repair of relationships, support networks, and
the free choices of those involved).
Safety

To recognise that community safety cannot be exclusively dependent on external
deterrents (police presence, CCTV, wardens, etc.).

To have (or be aware of) experiences that affirm the view that ongoing safety depends
on internal / community-based deterrents: i.e. building relationships, treating others
with respect, drawing upon local support networks, and repairing harm in a
constructive way.
Restoration

To know that there is a process that will give those who cause material damage or
emotional distress in the community the opportunity to repair or restore the harm done.

To know that there is a way of responding to those who cause harm that does not
humiliate, stigmatise or ‘outcast’ them, but rather aims to draw them back into the
community and to support and encourage them in their efforts to make amends and
change their behaviour.
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
19
3. What works?
3.1 Context
Restorative Justice works best when they it is used alongside a range of other approaches that
share the same values and skills, as in the diagram below
Interpersonal Skills
Active listening, empathy,
assertiveness, courtesy, dealing with
conflict, communication skills,
accepting criticism, encouraging,
supporting, respecting differences,
taking responsibility, apologising,
emotional literacy, cooperation, etc.
Building and
sustaining
relationships
Strengthening
relationships
Solving problems
and challenges
Resolving
conflict
Addressing
harm
Mentoring, Buddy Systems
Checking-in Circles
Problem-Solving Circles
Pupil Councils, Family Led Decision Making
Mediation, Peer Mediation
Restorative Justice *
Disciplinary Processes
* Restorative Justice processes can be used either as an alternative to or in parallel with disciplinary processes.
Please note that, in the model above, there are a number of clearly defined processes that
should only be used in the situations for which they were designed – with the foundation stone
being the consistent and widespread use of interpersonal or social skills.
Restorative Justice has a distinct role to play in this model. They should be considered only
when (a) there is significant harm done to others (e.g. bullying), and (b) those responsible are
willing to apologise and make amends for their actions. What type of restorative justice
process is then used will depend on the needs and wishes of all those involved.
Many of the values (e.g. respect) and skills (e.g. active listening) that underpin restorative
justice are shared by the other approaches; but it does not follow that they are the same
process. Confusion on this point can (and has) led to serious consequences, including the
suicide of a student who attended a ‘no-blame’ circle as a victim of bullying - with the bullies
present (see web article).
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk
An Overview of Restorative Justice in Scotland 2008 (Version 1.10 Text Only)
20
3.2 Best Practice
Restorative Justice works best when the incident, the context and the participants are all
suitable for a restorative justice approach. The following basic criteria are normally used to
determine whether a case is suitable for restorative justice:*
 The incident has (or could have) caused harm to an identifiable individual(s).
 The relevant participants understand the nature and aims of the process, and are willing
and able to participate on that basis.
 The process is likely to meet the needs and wishes of both the person(s) harmed and the
person(s) responsible.
 The participants require the assistance of a third party and a structured process to resolve
the matter.
 There is no significant risk to the well-being of any participant.
* See the section on ‘Where is it used?’ for the specific referral criteria (‘Triggers’) currently used in various contexts.
3.3 Best Practice
Restorative Justice works best when the process is facilitated in accordance with recognised
best practice guidance. “Best Practice Guidance for Restorative Justice Practitioners”
can be downloaded from: www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk/practitioners.htm
3.4 Effectiveness
If the above apply, the process is more likely to achieve the aims of restorative justice.
The following basic criteria* will determine whether or to what extent restorative justice has
achieved its aims:
 The process has addressed or repaired the harm caused by the incident;
 The process has identified and contributed to the reduction of criminogenic need or other
risk (and, to that extent, is likely to have thereby contributed to a reduction in re-offending
or harmful behaviour);
 The process is not associated with an increase in re-offending or harmful behaviour.
* See the section on ‘What can it do?’ for a more detailed list of criteria.
Research papers on the effectiveness of restorative justice can be downloaded from this
web page: www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk/research.htm
The Scottish Restorative Justice Consultancy and Training Service, 2007
http://www.restorativejusticescotland.org.uk