Restorative Justice In Australia

During the 1990s, the emphasis and development of restorative justice perhaps reached its summit when both the federal government and the RCMP outwardly problematized conventional justice on the one hand, while they “championed” restorative justice on the other. Victims have generally expressed their satisfaction after participating in restorative justice programs. Moreover, while conventional justice has been plagued by significant reoffending rates, many scholars have found that restorative programs demonstrate success in this regard. Thus, we essentially have a failed experiment by Canada's leading and national police force on the one hand, but widespread academic support for restorative justice both in Canada and internationally on the

Aboriginal circle sentencing in New South Wales (NSW) is a form of restorative justice and was introduced largely to deal with the over representation and incarceration of indigenous people in the criminal justice system. Government programs thus far do not seem to have made a significant impact in addressing this problem. Circle sentencing was first introduced in NSW in Nowra in 2002 and was primarily based on the Canadian model of restorative justice. Research conducted on the effectiveness of circle sentencing in NSW is difficult to decipher due to the different research methods used and the way effectiveness is tested, however circle sentencing has been shown to have some success in the indigenous community. The implications of these findings

In 1991, Judge Barry Stuart of the Yukon Territorial Court introduced the sentencing circle as means of sharing the justice process with the community. The Circle Justice is designed to bring healing and understanding to the victim and the offender. This process has been viewed as a good way of building relationships and strengthening the community. One of the purposes of government is to ensure domestic tranquility. Circle Justice is developed most extensively in the Yukon. Typically in Circle Justice meetings, people speak as they pass around a “talking piece”.

The criminal justice system within Australia is the means through which those who break rules stipulated within legislation and legal regulations are brought to justice in the form of punishment. The legal and non-legal measures implemented are applied across all aspects of crime. The legal measures include all institutions and processes enabled by law to deal with aspects of the criminal justice system. Non-legal measures include diversionary programs such as restorative justice. The use of non-legal measure in achieving justice is generally seen when dealing with young offenders. It is used in an attempt to allow the

These agreements, as negotiated with each state, vary but address the police framework in relation to these criminal justice problems. For example, the Queensland agreement involves reducing the rate in which indigenous come into contact with the criminal justice system to level with the non-indigenous rate (Cunneen 2007). By achieving this they have set out specific goals, which address early intervention and diversionary strategies with the risk factors involving indigenous youth coming into contact with the justice system. Also addressing the policies, procedures and practices within the justice system that are suitable for indigenous communities and increasing participation of these communities by development of their own resolutions (Cunneen

The article discusses the integration of restorative justice techniques into the juvenile justice system in Chicago, Illinois, focusing on U.S. prisons, the efforts to develop an effective alternative to imprisonment, information about recidivism and the input of victims of crimes. Other topics include life sentences for young killers, violence reduction programs, and various methods of punishment in places such as Minnesota. Victim-offender mediation and peacemaking are examined, along with Canadian courts and community

Daly, K, & Marchetti, E 2011, ‘Innovative justice processes: restorative justice, indigenous justice, and therapeutic jurisprudence’, in Crime and justice: a guide to criminology, 4th ed., Thomson Reuters, Pyrmont, pp.455-481

Restorative justice practices is seen as an innovative informal approach to criminal justice and is used as an alternative to the mainstream criminal court procedures. It offers alternate ways to aid in repairing the harm caused by the offenders and involves both the victim and offenders in the process. Surrounding restorative justice lies the debate that the practices are potentially more harmful than beneficial for the victims. This debate is complex and interminable, as there are various factors that can influence the outcome of the procedures. This essay will explore and discuss the concept of restorative justice and the practices that are commonly supported and conducted in Australia. The essay will then explore the debate around restorative

It involves all of the participants including the judge, defense lawyer, prosecutor, police, victim and family, offender and family, and also the community citizens sitting and facing each other in a circle. The discussions in the circle are intended to reach an agreement on the desirable dispose of the case. The process takes in account the need to protect the community, as well as the punishment and rehabilitation of the offender. Circle sentencing is generally only available to those who plead guilty. Offenders may be sent for a period of incarceration, but other sanctions are available. These include house arrest, banishment, and community service. Circle sentencing has the potential to reacquaint individuals, families and communities with problem solving skills, rebuild relationships, promote awareness and respect, coordinate use of government resources, use and create healing resources, address needs of all parties, and focus on

The purpose of the restorative justice involves three basic goals: reestablishing the victims, reuniting offenders to the community, and helping to heal the community (Goodstein, and Butterfield, 2010). After being charged with an offense, the offender will always have that label on them and how everyone acts towards the offender will change. Restorative justice practices gives the offender a chance to change their outlook on life after being charged. These type of practices involve repairing and restoring relationships. Victims have the chance to come face-to-face with their offenders which could possibly lead to closure.

Restorative justice can be defined as a theory related to justice that is concerned on repairing the harm that is caused or revealed by a criminal behavior (Barsh 2005: 359). Over the years, restorative justice has been seen as an effective way of dealing with both social as well as cultural issues of the aboriginal people. Because of these, restorative justice is used in many of the local communities in an effort to correct criminal behavior. This concept is seen as a conceptualization of justice which is in most cases congruent with the cultural and the community values of the aboriginal people. There is numerous evidences which suggests that there are a number of challenges which increase the effective implementation of restorative justice amongst the aboriginal people.

Aboriginal offenders have a diverse set of challenges they face in their community, and in the prison system. There are many cases in which the community is involved directly with Aboriginal offenders such as circle sentencing. Numerous judges have implemented circle sentencing for criminal cases that comprise of Aboriginal offenders (Jeffries & Stenning, 2014, p. 456). The community influence in circle sentencing is an example of challenges they face when dealing with Aboriginal individuals. Jeffries and Stenning (2014) explain that since there is a community contribution, it would be more widely respected by the community (p. 457). While conducting their research, Jeffries and Stenning (2006) found that Aboriginal

Conferencing also benefit the victim by giving them the opportunity to negotiate an agreement to repair the harm as well as allowing them to tell the offender directly the effects the crime had on them.

When looking at the current criminal justice system in Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, it is clear that it has failed in the treatment of aboriginal people. This problem has strengthened the idea of restorative justice as a replacement of the traditional system. When looking at implementing circles into that realm of restorative justice, there needs to be an agreement that their practices are diverse, and therefore not to force the issue. Many traditional practices are very spiritually based, and it needs to be evident that

Restorative justice has some key restorative values that are vital in the restorative justice conference to make the experience ‘restorative’. Concerning addressing victim needs and concerns means for listening, respecting, being non-judgmental, not blaming the victim and apologizing. The RJ system was bought as an alternative to the criminal justice system to give greater emphasis on victim rights and needs, offender accountability and community involvement. Throughout the essay, there will be an insight into how Restorative Justice addresses needs of victims in terms of the different proponents such as Information provided to victim, restitution/compensation, emotional and practical needs met, participation and involvement of victim and protection of victim, which (Wemmers and Marisa, 2002) as essentials to victims participating in the practice. The two countries that will be addressed will have had restorative justice built out of injustices and over-representation of the current criminal justice system to the indigenous peoples of those countries.