Bazemore Principles Of Restorative Justice

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?)


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



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.


The Offender



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.


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?”


The sanctioning process produces accountability when it ensures that:

Offenders take responsibility for the crime and understand the hurt caused to the victim.



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.



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


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.


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


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


Objective – Victim Services and Support

LOCATION• Counseling

• Volunteer support group

• Faith community outreach

• Multiple settings


Objective – Community Building

LOCATION• Neighborhood

discussion groups

• Neighborhood and community


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

Bazemore Principles Of Restorative Justice

Business

Transcript of Bazemore Principles Of Restorative Justice