Restorative justice and crime (Part 1)

The prison authorities have started talking about introducing more restorative justice programmes in the prison system and by extension within the criminal justice system. The Justice and Security Committee of the Vision 20/20 Plan has also listed restorative justice as a key aim of justice reform. This article seeks to outline some of the major concepts in restorative justice and to consider some of the more significant implications of implementing such a programme in the criminal justice system. Restorative justice is part of a wider movement aimed at introducing mediation into the criminal justice system. Mediation generally aims at resolving disagreements between parties “in which an impartial third party helps people in a dispute to find a mutually acceptable resolution” (Mediation UK). As it applies to the criminal justice system such mediation aims at considering the harm a crime has caused and finding the best way to address that harm. 

A report of the United Nations Economic and Social Council produced in January 2002, defined a restorative justice process as being any process in which the victim and the offender, and even the community affected by a crime, participate together, actively, in the resolution of matters arising from the crime usually with the help of a facilitator. The outcomes of such a process might include reparation, restitution and community service aimed at meeting the needs of the parties and the reintegration of the victim and the offender where possible. The traditional criminal justice system aims to punish the offender without any real consideration of the victim. It does not allow the victim to walk away with anything more except a feeling perhaps, that the offender has been punished, and with a sense of retribution.  Restorative justice aims at a positive rather than a negative outcome. 

A main principle underlying any such programme is that it is a voluntary process.  The victim cannot be forced into it but must have a genuine interest to participate in it. Further, while restorative justice can be an alternative sentencing mechanism it is not necessarily a substitute for another sentencing type.  Thus restorative justice can be used where a fine or even a custodial sentence is imposed. There are many practical applications of such a programme. At the very least it allows both victim and offender to express themselves to each other or even through a mediator. Typically, most victims cannot understand why they were chosen to be a victim of crime. A victim might ask an offender simply why was the crime committed.  The victim may also gain some reassurance that the offender would not seek to repeat the offence against him or her.  The victim can have an opportunity to tell the offender how the crime affected him or her.  It is therefore not a “soft approach” to crime as an offender is confronted by the victim face to face and in some measure accountable. 

From the offender’s perspective he may have an opportunity to offer an apology or to explain why the offence was committed.  It is a chance to take responsibility for one’s actions or to even offer some kind of compensation. There is really no limit to the types of crime that restorative justice may apply to, even in the most serious offences such as murder or rape.  In such cases a long time should ordinarily elapse between the act and any meeting between the victim or the victim’s family and the offender.  It is to be stressed that this would not preclude any other form of punishment such as a long custodial sentence.  What is hoped is to achieve a positive result even from a vicious and negative act.  The victim may be able to put some closure to a traumatic event, and for the offender, it is a step that may ultimately lead to reform or rehabilitation.

Ronnie Boodoosingh
Attorney-at-Law

(Law Association of Trinidad and Tobago)