bazemore principles of restorative justice
DESCRIPTION
Bazemore Principles Of Restorative JusticeTRANSCRIPT
Principles of Restorative Justice
Wednesday, July 25, 2001
Presented by:
Gordon Bazemore, Ph.D., Project Director, Balanced and Restorative Justice Project, Community Justice Institute,
Florida Atlantic University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Com
mun it
y Pro
tect
ion
AccountabilityC
ompetency D
eve lopment
What is a “Balance?”
Balancing Stakeholder Needs
Victim and family/support group
Offender and family/support group
Community
Juvenile Justice System
Crime Is More Than Lawbreaking
I t also damages relationships.
NEW Values
NEW Stakeholders
New Decisionmaking Processes
NEW Performance Objectives
NEW Programs and Practices
NEW Staff Roles, Resource Allocation, and
Management Approaches
What’s NEW about Restorative Justice?
Three Principles of Restorative Justice?
Crime and Reaction
Paradigms of Justice –OLD & NEWRetributive Justice Restorative Justice
Crime is an act against the state, a violation of a law, or an abstract idea.
Punishment is effective
a. The threat of punishment deters crime
b. Punishment changes behavior
The criminal justice system controls crime.
Crime is an act against another person and the community.
Punishment alone is not effective in changing behavior and is disruptive to community relationships.
Crime control lies primarily in the community.
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)
The Process
Paradigms of Justice –OLD & NEW
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
One social injury replaced by another
Adversarial relationship is primary
Focus on establishing blame or guilt on past (did he/she do it?)
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)
Focus on repair of social injury
Dialogue and negotiation emphasized
Focus on problem solving, on liabilities/obligations, on future (what should be done?)
Victims and Community
Paradigms of Justice –OLD & NEW
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
Victims are central to the process.
Community as facilitator in restorative process.
Restitution as a means of restoring both parties; goal of reconciliation/restoration.
Victims are peripheral to the process.
Community on sideline, represented abstractly by state.
Imposition of pain to punish and deter/prevent.
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)
The Offender
Paradigms of Justice –OLD & NEW
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
Accountability defined as taking responsibility and taking action to repair harm.
The offender is defined by the capacity to make reparation.
Possibilities for forgiveness.
Offender accountability defined as taking punishment.
The offender is defined by deficits.
No encouragement for repentance and forgiveness.
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)
Justice requires that we work to heal
victims, communities, and offenders who
have been injured by
crime
Principle 1 - REPAIR
THREE RJ PRINCIPLES
Defining “REPAIR”Four dimensions:
1. Fixing What Is Broken/Damaged – Compensating Those Harmed
2. Stakeholder Satisfaction
3. Reintegration of Victim and Offender with Community
4. Peace-Building and Relationship Building
- Conflict transformed and resolved by key stakeholders
- Connections made or strengthened between victim/offender/community
“ Victims frequently want longer time for offenders because we haven’t given them anything else. Or because we don’t ask, we don’t know what they want. So [the system] gives them door Number One or Two, when what they really want is behind Door Number 3 or 4.”~ Mary Achilles
Restorative Accountability
Accountability is NOT:
“How Do We Know It When We See It?”
Restorative Accountability
The sanctioning process produces accountability when it ensures that:
Offenders take responsibility for the crime and understand the hurt caused to the victim.
“How Do We Know It When We See It?”
Restorative Accountability
Offenders take action to make amends to the victim by restoring the loss.
Victims and communities have an active role in the sanctioning process by recommending obligations and by
monitoring, mentoring, and supporting compliance.
“How Do We Know It When We See It?”
Restorative Accountability
Communities support offenders who earn it by taking responsibility for completing obligations.
All stakeholders and the system place emphasis on
the wrong done and the obligation to make it right.
Reconnecting…Crime weakens
relationships
Restorative justice reconnects
Victim
Victim
Com
munity
OffenderOffenderCommunity
“if you are dealing with people whose relationships have been built on power and abuse, you must actually show them, then give them the experience of, relationships based on respect…[so]…the healing process must involve a healthy group of people, as opposed to single therapists. A single therapist cannot, by definition, do more than talk about healthy relationships.”
What is the harm?
What needs to be done to repair
the harm?
Who is responsible for this
repair?
Asking Different Questions
Victims, communities and offenders should
have opportunities for active involvement in the justice process as
early and as fully as possible.
Principle 2 - Involvement
THREE RJ PRINCIPLES
I ncreasing Stakeholder
Decisionmaking I nputs:
Restorative Justice Conferencing Models
Family Group Conferencing
Reparative or Accountability Boards
Sentencing and Peacemaking Circles
Victim Offender Dialogue (Mediation)
Community Conferencing
Merchant Accountability Boards
Mutually Exclusive Interests
Offender Interests
Community Interests
Victim Interests
Finding Common Ground
Offender
Community
Victim
We must re-think the relative role and responsibilities of the
government and the community. Government is responsible for preserving
order. The community is responsible for establishing
peace.
Principle 3 – Changing Community/ System Roles & Relationships
THREE RJ PRINCIPLES
“Crime (control and prevention) should never be the sole, or even primary business of the State if real differences are sought in the well being of individuals, families and communities.
The structure, procedures, and evidentiary rules of the formal criminal justice process coupled with most justice officials’ lack of knowledge and connection to (the parties) effected by crime, preclude the state from acting alone to achieve transformative changes.”
~ Judge Barry Stuart
“Children grow up in communities, not programs. Development is most strongly influence by those with the most intensive, long-term contact with children and youth – family, informal networks, community organizations, churches, synagogues, temple, mosques and schools. Development is not achieved only through services, but also through supports, networks and opportunities.
What IS “Community”?
From: John Gardner, On Leadership
Geographically defined units (cities, towns)
Families and extended families
Religious congregations
Schools and colleges
Workplace
Union locals
Clubs, lodges, hobby groups
Professional groups
Political groups or parties
Voluntary groups, e.g., youth service organizations
Neighborhoods
Why IT WorksGrounded/Community Theory in the Case of
Neighborhood accountability boards“We aren’t getting paid to do this.”
“We can exercise the authority that parents have lost.”
“We live in their community.”
“We give them input into the contract.”
“We are a group of adult neighbors who care about them.”
“They hear about the harm from real human beings –us and the victims.”
“We follow up.”
“Where subtle methods of social regulation and control have been transformed or forgotten, the state is required to intervene with unsubtle methods of arrest and incarceration. (The State) may continue to promote collective norms, but…ultimately lacks the emotional resources to maintain – let alone strengthen – the moral order.”
~ David Moore
(Formal justice system procedures) “deprive people of opportunities to practice skills of apology and forgiveness, or reconciliation, restitution, and reparation . . . The modern state appears to have deprived civil society of opportunities to learn important political and social skills.
~ David Moore
Restorative Justice: Redefining the Government’s RoleTraditional
Justice SystemRestorative
Justice System
(Justice Intervention) (Justice Intervention)
OffenderCommunity
VictimOffenderServices
Surveillance
Sanction
Facilitation
Community Building
Justice system operates separately from the community
Justice system provides more information to the community
about its activities.
Justice system provides information to the community about
its activities and asks for information from the community.
Justice system asks for guidance from the community,
recognizes a need for community help, and places more
activities in the community.
Justice system follows community leadership.
Community & The Justice System: The Changing Relationship
Justice System and Communities: An Evolving Relationship
Justice System Operates Separately From, Independent of, the Community
Specifics:
Expert model, “We (justice system) have the answers.”
Community contact a nuisance, gets in the way of real work
Professional system defines and solves the problem
Source: Kay Pranis, Minnesota Department of Corrections
Justice System and Communities: An Evolving Relationship
Justice System Follows Community Leadership While Monitoring Community Process
Specifics:
Expert systems as support systems
Justice system operates in support of community in achieving community goals while protecting rights of individuals and ensuring fairness
Community defines and solves problems with help from justice system
“…communities should not measure the success of any…community based initiative upon what happens to the offender…
(Rather, they should measure)…the impact of community based initiatives on victims, strengthening families, building connections within the community, on enforcing community values, on mobilizing community action to make the community safer…”
~ Judge Barry Stuart
“So we make mistakes – can you say – you (the current system) don’t make mistakes…if you don’t think you do, walk through our community, every family will have something to teach you…By getting involved, by all of us taking responsibility, it is not that we won’t make mistakes…
But we would be doing it together, as a community instead of having it done for us. We need to find peace within our lives…in our communities. We need to make real differences in the way people act and the way we treat others…Only if we empower them and support them can they break out of this trap…”
~ Rose Couch, Community Justice Coordinator
NEW Values
NEW Stakeholders
New Decisionmaking Processes
NEW Performance Objectives
NEW Programs and Practices
NEW Staff Roles, Resource Allocation, and
Management Approaches
What’s NEW about Restorative Justice?
Objective – Conflict Resolution, Prevention, & Peacemaking
LOCATION
• Community mediation
• Alternative dispute resolution
• School and neighborhood conferencing
• Victim awareness education
• Youth development
• Schools
• Neighborhoods
• Churches
• Civic groups
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Objective – Victim/Community Input to Court/Formal Decisionmaking
LOCATION• Written/ oral impact statement to court or other entity • Court
• Probation
• Residential facility
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Objective – Provide Decisionmaking Alternative to formal Court Process
LOCATION
• Family group conferencing
• Victim offender dialogue
• Peacemaking and sentencing circles
• Reparative board, etc.
• Police/community diversion
• Court diversion
• Dispositional/sentencing alternative, etc.
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Objective – Provide Reparative Sanctions in Response to Crime or Harmful Behavior
LOCATION
• Restitution
• Community service
• Service to victims/surrogate victims
• Payment to victim
• Diversion
• Court sanction
• Probation condition
• Residential program
• Post incarceration
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Objective – Offender Treatment/ Rehabilitation/Education
LOCATION• Victim impact panels
• Victim awareness education
• Community service learning projects
• Strengthening relationships with law-abiding citizens
• Probation
• Residential facilities
• Diversion program
• Jails
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Objective – Victim Services and Support
LOCATION• Counseling
• Volunteer support group
• Faith community outreach
• Multiple settings
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Objective – Community Building
LOCATION• Neighborhood
discussion groups
• Neighborhood and community
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
Restorative Justice Theories-in-useEquity/Exchange Theory
Accepting responsibility
Making things right
Repair…fixing what’s broken
Restoring Balance
Earned Redemption
Restorative Justice Theories-in-useInterpersonal Dialogue
Empowering and giving “voice” to victims and other Stakeholders
Gaining information and reassurance
Apology and acknowledgement of harm and wrongdoing
Human connection
Expression of feeling/emotions –process over outcome
Restorative Justice Theories-in-useReintegrating Shaming1. Individual Level
- Denounce the behavior, not the offender
- Strong disapproved of act and norm affirmation, with expression of support for offenders and victim by family and others who matter to them
- Avoid stigmatizing “shaming”…voice of victim is sufficient to induce feelings of shame in offender
- Community members committed to reintegration of offender and victim
2. Community/ Collective Level
- Low crime communities are those where people don’t mind their own business
- Community members set limits on behavior and provide informal social control without exclusion
Restorative Justice Theories-in-useCommunity Healing/Capacity Building
Collective responsibility for crime and repair/healing
Inclusion and connection important in their own right
The resolution and healing lies in the group
Sanctioning, rehabilitation, community safety interventions seamless and integrated – blurred distinctions between quality of life, community needs, criminal justice and social justice
Emphasis on private and parochial control and mutual support vs. professionals and justice system – “community as driver”
FIGURE 3:Percentage of Counties with Restorative Conferencing/Dialogue Programs by State for Nine Leading States as of October 2000
V T A K D E M A C A H I M N O R N Y
0
2 0
4 0
6 0
8 0
1 0 0
States
Perc
enta
ge
Restoration of human dignity
Restoration of property loss
Restoration of injury to the person or health
Restoration of damaged human relationships
Restoration of communities
Restoration of environment
Emotional restoration
Restoration of freedom
Restoration of compassion or caring
Restoration of peace
Restoration of empowerment, self-determination
Restoration of a sense of duty as a citizen
Four Justice Policy Lenses
Crime ControlMinimize Community Risk:
Justice and Due Process is Secondary
Deterrence and Incapacitation
Minimal Interference and efficiency
Professional Focus and Distrust of Community: “We are the Experts”
Just DessertsEmphasis on Punishment as Just
Response
Proportionality: Punishment Must Fit the Crime
Emphasis on Uniformity and Distrust of Informality and Community
Decisionmaking
Determinancy and Guidelines for Sentencing Based on Severity of
Offense vs. Offender Need and Risk
LibertarianMinimize Government Involvement
Intervention May Do More Harm Than Good
Emphasis on Due Process Rights
Many Crimes will be resolved without Formal Intervention
Justice is Secondary
Social WelfareBelief in Rehabilitation Through Offender Treatment
Intervention and Early Intervention is a Benefit
Professional Focus and Distrust of Community: “We Are The Experts”
Focus on Individual Needs of Offender
Many Crimes will be Resolved without Formal Intervention
Justice is Secondary
A Communitarian Model:
Restorative Community Justice
“if you are dealing with people whose relationship have been built on power
and abuse, you must actually show them, then give them the experience
of, relationships based on respect…[so]…the healing process
must involve a health group of people, as opposed to sing therapists. A single therapist cannot, by definition, do more
than talk about healthy relationships” (Papert Ross).
Mutually Exclusive Interests
Offender Interests
Community Interests
Victim Interests
“In Hollow Water, ex-offenders are not shunned forever, but seen as important
resources for getting under the skin of other offenders and disturbing the webs of lies that have sustained them. Better
than anyone, they understand the patterns, the pressures and the ways to
hide. As they tell their personal stories in the circle, they talk about the lies that
once protected them and how it felt to face the truth about the pain they
caused” (Ross 1996).
“Community Justice”…All variants of crime prevention and justice activities that explicitly include the community in their processes and set the enhancement of community quality of like as an explicit goal. Community justice is rooted in the actions that citizens, community organizations, and the criminal justice system can take to control crime and social disorder. I ts central focus is community-level outcomes, shifting the emphasis from individual incidents to systemic patterns, from individual conscience to social mores, and from individual goods to the common good. Typically, community justice is conceived of as a partnership between the formal criminal justice system and the community [but often] communities autonomously engage in activities that directly or indirectly address crime.
~ Todd Clear and David Karp
FAU Community Justice Institute
Justice-related
Curriculum Development
Vermont Juvenile
Programs Evaluation
National Institute of
Justice Conferencing
Evaluation
Robert Wood Johnson
Foundation Conferencing
Evaluation
Other research and training
projects
Balanced and Restorative
Justice Project (BARJ-OJJDP)
Center for Advanced Criminal
Justice Studies (w/BSO)
Research
Technical Assistance & Training
JAIBG Restorative Justice Academy
Publications Clearinghouse
JAIBG Restorative Justice Trainer’s Clearinghouse
Examples
Fort Lauderdale Gun Crime Research BSO Sex Crimes Evaluation BSO Boot Camp Evaluations
Criminal Justice
Executive Leadership
Program
Seminars, Workshops
Cohort Degree
Programs
Research