The Meaning Of Restorative Justice

The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) defines restorative justice (RJ) as “the process that brings those harmed by crime, and those responsible for the harm, into communication, enabling everyone affected by a particular incident to play a part in repairing the harm and finding a positive way forward.” It further states that the fundamental element of restorative justice is a dialogue between the victim and offender. RJ can provide victims an opportunity to be heard, have input in the resolution of an offence and achieve closure. It provides offenders the chance to face the consequences of their offending and in some cases make amends.

According to the MOJ, RJ can be delivered in many ways, including:

1. Victim-offender conferencing - this involves bringing the victim(s), offender(s) and supporters (such as a partner or family members) together in a meeting. This may be facilitated over distance by the use of telephone or video conferencing.
2. A community conference - this includes bringing together the members of a community which has been affected by a particular crime and some or all of the offenders.
3. “Shuttle RJ” - this consists of a trained restorative justice facilitator passing messages back and forth between the victim and offender. The participants do not meet.
4. Neighbourhood justice panels - this involves trained volunteers from a local community facilitating meetings between victims and offenders for low level crime and antisocial behaviour.
5. “Street RJ” - also known as “level 1 RJ” is usually facilitated by police officers between offenders, victims and other stakeholders in attendance at the time of the incident. This is often used in combination with a community resolution or a conditional caution.

McCold & Wachtel (2003) report that RJ is a process involving the primary stakeholders in determining how best to repair the harm done by an offence. The three primary stakeholders in RJ are victims, offenders and their communities of care, whose needs are, respectively, getting reparation, taking responsibility and achieving reconciliation.

The degree to which all three are involved in meaningful emotional exchange and decision-making is the degree to which any form of social discipline can be termed fully “restorative.” The very process of interacting is critical to meeting stakeholders’ emotional needs. The emotional exchange necessary for meeting the needs of all those directly affected cannot occur with only one set of stakeholders participating.

The most restorative processes involve the active participation of all three sets of primary stakeholders. When criminal justice practices involve only one group of primary stakeholders, as in the case of governmental financial compensation for victims, the process can only be called “partly restorative.” When a process such as victim-offender mediation includes two principal stakeholders but excludes their communities of care, the process is “mostly restorative.” Only when all three sets of primary stakeholders are actively involved, such as in conferences or circles, is a process “fully restorative.”