NCJ Number
196412
Journal
British Journal of Criminology Volume: 42 Issue: 3 Dated: Summer 2002 Pages: 578-595
Date Published
2002
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This article argues for further debate about the proper division of functions between state, victims, offenders, and "communities" in the pursuit of apparently beneficial goals of restorative justice, as well as about greater emphasis on procedural safeguards and substantive limits.
Abstract
The article first discusses the responsibilities of the state under the principles of restorative justice. Although justice administered by the state has been plagued by many flaws and failures, the state must, as the primary political authority, retain control over criminal justice and its administration. This is required in order to ensure respect for the rule of law and human rights standards. Regarding restorative justice approaches, the state's responsibility should be to impose a framework that guarantees appropriate safeguards to offenders and victims. The emphasis on community participation in restorative justice practice is often associated with self-regulation, consent, and agreement. This emphasis must be tempered by the awareness that communities are often characterized by social exclusion, forms of coercion, and the differential distribution of power relations. Restorative justice strategies must be careful to balance participation by members of affected communities with a means of ensuring that the ultimate power of decision-making remains in impartial bodies. A third issue in the implementation of the principles of restorative justice is the parameters for ensuring victim reparation. Victim interests should encompass reparation or compensation, appropriate services to meet needs created by the offense, and proper protection from further harm. When it comes to punishment, however, the victim should not have undue influence beyond that of any other citizen. Sentencing should be based in standards set by policymakers who represent all citizens. In conclusion, the author advises that the relationship between the formal justice system and any restorative justice processes must be carefully crafted to avoid inequities. Within restorative justice efforts, clear limits are important for preventing violations of rights behind a mask of benevolence. 65 references