Change About the Criminal Justice

¶ … change about the criminal justice system if I had the power to do so? For the criminal justice system to be changed, it seems to me that its very basics need to be altered, and I therefore lean towards the philosophy of Restorative justice. Restorative justice in effect states that the offender will grow not be crushed by his crime and will be induced to atone for, rather than commit more crimes.

It also believes that a constructive dialogue will be fostered between offender and victim where, after atoning, the offender will be brought into, rather than shunned from the community. Furthermore, it believes that the victim will be most appropriately addressed by this system, rather than ignored as he is at the moment. The offense is seen for what it truly is -- a hurt directed at another individual -- rather than a hurt directed at an abstract government.

By addressing it for what it truly is and atoning for that wrong, restitution sees justice better served than by aimless and destructive vindication. Nonetheless, critics claim the approach to be too sentimental and 'pie in the sky' Pollyanna type of thinking. Criticisms include opinions that victims like to see revenge and that many offenders are resilient to feelings of compassion and atonement. The following essay leads us through a summary of the system and its criticisms concluding with suggesting some solutions.

To me, it still seems that Restorative justice may be the best method for addressing some of the problems inherent in the Criminal justice system. The method needs to be equilibrated so that it is worked in conjunction with others, its points are made more specific so that they are understood, and the system is tapered to those who would most benefit from it, whilst the public receives ongoing and uninterrupted protection.

Restorative justice Restorative justice (or 'reparative justice') refers to a system that has become increasingly popular where offenders make amends to the victims directly instead of to the criminal system by either atoning for hurts they have done to victim by placating victim in terms of monetary or other recompense, or involving themselves in community services or in other useful ways.

Restorative Justice focuses around creating a dialogue between offender and victim where offenders are encouraged to become accountable for their actions and is led to recognizing the weight of their error. Although thought of as a comparatively recent addition to the Criminal Justice system, restorative justice actually ahs deep roots stretching way back to the time of Hammurabi where both his Code and the Code of ur-Nammu required restitution for certain offenses.

Similarly, the Bible required restitution for certain property crimes and in Rome; the 12 Tables compelled thieves to pay double the value of stolen goods (the bible's law was similar). Ireland, England, and Germany, under different eras of its earliest of times, required restitution for both violent and non-violent offenses, and in New Zealand, the Maori have long had a system of restitute judgment.

Today, restorative justice is tentatively making its way around the globe and being introduced in various components of the criminal justice system from petty, non-violent crimes to political crimes. Some countries have grater leanings towards the system than others. In America, for instance, some states have more enthusiastically adopted it than others, with other states still skeptical and tentatively experimenting with the system.

In England, however, restorative justice became part of the national policy with its White Paper 'No more excuses' (1977) where they affirmed that the three principles underlying youth justice system were to be the 3 R's: restoration, reintegration, and responsibility. Why Restorative Justice is a good idea for the criminal justice system Restorative justice is ideal for the criminal justice system due to at least four primary reasons: 1. It shifts the perspective of justice to where it belongs -- to the offending person and the person who has been wronged 2.

It transfers crime from offense against the law to offense and wound against another. By seeing crime as such, the offender may be brought to better recognition of the harm that he has done and greater willingness to atone for it. 3. The victim is addressed and recompensed, rather than, oftentimes (as the case is) the state being mollified 4. Retribution serves towards a constructive purpose of -- as Braithwhite calls it -- 'restorative shame' rather than 'stigmatizing shame' We will go through each of these in turn.

(a) Restorative Justice shifts the perspective of justice to where it belongs -- to the offending person and the person who has been wronged Nils Christie (1977) claimed that details of what society prohibits or permits are often difficult to decode and that, in fact, the "degree of blameworthiness is often not expressed in the law at all" (Christie, 1977, 8.).

The State (according to Christie) has "stolen the conflict" between citizens, meaning that it is some detached professor or specialist in his Ivory Tower who makes the law instead of the man in the street who is most familiar with the situation, resulting in the fact that society has been deprived of the "opportunities for norm-classification." Instead of lay people, themselves defining what is permitted and prohibited to a social way of living, professionals and specialists delegate the responsibility to them and claim to be able to best define 'crime' and to provide solutions to punitive solution of reform and education of offender.

These specialists may have received straight as in their subjects and may be Ivy League graduates, but they are often far removed from the rigors and practicalities of life and ill equipped to recognize crime for what it is or to emphasize with the compulsions that draw people to crime. Social conflicts, problems, and troubles, Christie believes, are best dealt with and analyzed by those who originate from and experience those particular travails. Referring them to so-called specialists may easily result in misunderstand and erroneous response.

Restorative justice on the other hand restores judgment to those who can beast understand and articulate the solution to that particular problem. The criminal and his victim are brought face-to-face. They recognize the problem for what it is and work together to righten the situation. (b) Restorative judgment transfers crime from offense against the law to offense and wound against another. By seeing crime as such, the offender may be brought to better recognition of the harm that he has done and greater willingness to atone for it.

In 1980, Howard Zehr claimed that conventional criminal justice system views crime and justice through a retributive perspective where crime is seen as violating laws and justice is seen as condemning the other and demanding retribution (Zehr, 1990). In his own words, he describes "crime" as a "wound in human relationships," that "creates an obligation to restore and repair" (Zehr, 1990, 181). As result, therefore, the conventional criminal justice system demands avenge of hurt and slight of the government and acts with retribution (i.e.

punishes) the offender for the wound that he has inflicted in lacerating the law. In Zehr's own words, the traditional Criminal Justice system articulates crime as "a violation of the State, defined by lawbreaking and guilt. Justice determines blame and administers pain in a contest between the offender and the State directed by systematic rules" (ibid). Restorative justice, on the toehr hand, according to Zehr, is far more encouraging and healthy in that it sees crime as violation of people and interpersonal relationships, rather than violation of a government law.

Restorative justice is, therefore, more practical, more optimistic, and more constructive in that the offender is brought to see the other as a human, akin to himself, and, by making amends, repairs ties with the other person and restores the fabric of society. The differnce between the two perspectives of crime and justice is immense: conventional legal system sees the offender as violating government-implemented laws. Restorative justice, on the other hand, focuses on violation of social relationship and seeks to repair fractured interpersonal relationships.

© the victim is addressed and recompensed, rather than, oftentimes (as the case is) the state being mollified Assessing some of the central interventions employed in restorative judgment that include victim-offender mediation, healing or sentencing circles, and conferencing, James Dignan's 'Restorative Justice and the Law: The case for an integrated, systematic approach" (2002) praises restorative judgment as addressing a void in the conventional criminal justice system in that it forces attention to the victim rather than to the offender and does a far better job of placating and making amends to the victim, than the present criminal justice system does.

To Dignan, Restorative Justice should be viewed form the victim's perspective and further treatments more officious to the victim could be introduced and popularized. Dignan's entire approach shifts the field of criminal Justice from focus on offender to focus o n victim. When you see it in that way, perspective towards crime shifts and the entire field of Criminal justice becomes a less retributive, vengeful system gearing more towards fixing' 'cracks' in society than towards distributing blame and condemning individuals for particular acts thereby entrenching them in a certain pattern.

(d) Retribution serves towards a constructive purpose of -- as Braithwhite calls it -- 'restorative shame' rather than 'stigmatizing shame' In 1988, John Braithwaite published "Crime, shame, and Reintegration" where he introduced his idea of restorative shaming (Braithwaite, 1997). The conventional criminal justice stigmatizes the individual in that it not only makes him a pariah of society thereby making it harder to reform himself, but also crushes his esteem, causing others to deride and shun him, accordingly often making him react in a reinforcing manner.

Seeing himself as 'offender' and finding it extremely difficult to readjust and gain acceptance in society, the offender may be compelled to return to crime as way of livelihood to support himself and as a way of gaining the prestige and status that he m ay need and that he may, otherwise, not gain.

Restorative justice, on the other hand, helps offender atone for his crime by helping him literally and figuratively shake the hand of his victim and enter into a discourse where each acknowledges the harm done by the other and the harm felt, allows the offender to apologize and make amends, and after constructive steps have been taken, to move on to a brighter and wiser future than would likely have, otherwise been the case. In this way.

'Stigmatizing shame' that is practiced by the Criminal Justice system causing community to view offender with disgust, thereby creating distance and likelihood of replication of crime is replaced with 'restorative shame' where offender feels remorse for his hurting others and pledges to make amends. This type of shame strengthens bonds between offender and community with each drawing closer to the other.

Braithwaite's recommendation is that one "should hate the sin but love the sinner," giving the offender the opportunity to expiate for his crime and to rejoin the community should he so wish. In order to rejoin, however, offenders should be given the chance to express remorse for their crime, apologize to victims, and repair the harm caused by their violation.

These four elements of restorative justice -- building rather than destroying; focusing on the victim rather than on the offender; perceiving crime as social hurt rather than hurt committed against the Law; and restoring penalty to those who are best equipped to prescribe and describe it -- are the four key philosophies to Restorative Justice and to why I consider restorative Justice to be a far better system than the current Criminal Justice system is.

The multi-facet ness of Restorative Justice Restorative Justice is popularly thought of as offender making amends to victim as restitution for crime, but actually the reality is far more complex and not so clear. Its system is evidence in various ways some of which include the following: 1. Victim-offender mediation _ This is restorative justice in its classical sense where offender seeks to redress harm perpetrated against victim 2. Family group conferencing -- family, friends, and other participant are added to the victim-offender scenario in order to arrive at the most fitting solution 3.

Restorative conferencing -- family, friends, and participants of both sides sit together to discuss the best possible form of action 4. Community restorative boards -- small boards meet with offender and victim and arbitrate or mediate until both arrive at a specific action and a deadline for agreement to take effect. 5. Restorative circles and systems - Neighborhoods and schools are also involved in victim-offender mediation and, sometimes, these may include other prisoners too.

Other slices of restorative justice exclude offender-victim mediation and focus on the offender attending a special school where he continues his education whilst receiving mental help; or participating in community service; or recording his attempts to reform himself and sharing these attempts with victim or with a certain official. Problems of Restorative Justice It is the very fact that restorative Justice is so inchoate that leads to one of its criticisms. People have a hard time figuring out what it is.

One of its most vociferous critics, Acorn (2008), points to other shortfalls 1. Rather than the wishful scenario of victim forgiving offender and offender apologizing to victim, it is quite unlikely that any effect will occur but that both will turn their back on the other 2. Offender may pretend to be reformed by restorative justice, but it is far more likely that offender continues with crime 3. That offender will change his reasoning and show remorse merely upon meeting the victim is 'Pollyanna- type thinking and irrational 4.

Hope for revenge is a primitive and elemental desire in many victims. It is unlikely that they will forgive offender or his crime In short, Acorn believes that the position of RJ is built on sentiment and wishful thinking and has no reality in actuality. Conclusion and Personal Opinions for bettering Restorative Justice Restorative Justice is a system that to me makes sense and promises to bring hope to a punitive and unforgiving criminal justice system that only seems to exacerbate crime, rather than to ameliorate it.

Its problems may be manifest in the Mission statement of the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) who promises as regards its youth justice division: "The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC),.