Content uploaded by Kathleen Daly
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kathleen Daly on Apr 29, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
The limits of restorative justice
... Finding a well-agreed upon definition of restorative justice is not straightforward (Daly, 2006;Doolin, 2007). Restorative justice practices are different from traditional justice practices in that it emphasizes the value of relationships, dialogue, and process over the outcome (Bolitho, 2015). ...
... Restorative justice practices are different from traditional justice practices in that it emphasizes the value of relationships, dialogue, and process over the outcome (Bolitho, 2015). According to Daly (2006), restorative justice can be understood as a set of aspirations or core values on how to strive towards a sense of justice. Victims are lenient towards those that harmed them, offenders feel remorse about past behavior and can apologize, communities take an active role in supporting both parties and a facilitator aims at guiding the opposing parties through a rational discussion. ...
The literature on restorative justice practices and more specifically victim-offender mediation in psychopathic individuals is scarce. At first glance, restorative justice practices might not be possible or useful when dealing with psychopathic offenders due to inherent characteristics they possess. The present study examined the possibility and usefulness of restorative justice practices in Flanders (i.e. victim-offender mediation) with psychopathic offenders. It focused on how practitioners think and feel about working with psychopathic offenders during victim-offender mediation. Understanding if and how this practice can be used with psychopathic individuals can contribute to the literature of restorative justice in general. Practitioners are mostly unaware of the presence of mental health problems at the start of the process. However, despite the presence of dysfunctional traits such as psychopathic traits, most facilitators argued that everyone should be able to get involved in victim-offender mediation. Victim-offender mediation is possible and may be useful for everyone involved. Despite the presence of psychopathic traits, it are the expectations of both the victim and offender about the mediation process that is of uttermost importance. Both expectations need to align with one another in order for the mediation to be successful.
... Un control sobre esto es inevitablemente limitado. Por lo mismo, reconocerlo modestamente es fundamental para aprender a acompañar el camino hacia la recuperación de la autoestima, la confianza y la reincorporación a una vida plena y libre de ansiedad, para quienes han sufrido traumas por la victimización o desde la ejecución de las conductas criminales por las cuales han sido censurados (Daly, 2006). Para llegar a esto se requiere desestabilizar narrativas petrificadas y habilitar nuevos sentidos que permitan abordar el sufrimiento social en modos no prede-terminados por las estructuras de poder vigentes. ...
Con el paso del tiempo, las prácticas restaurativas han cobrado mayor importancia ene el campo investigativo a nivel internacional (Watchel, 2013), (McCold y Wachtel, 2016), (Schmitz, 2018) y nacional (Britto, Ordóñez y Díaz, 2006), (Britto, 2010), (Puj y Fundación Paz y Bien, 2007), (OIM y Fundación Paz y Bien, 2015). Son varios los motivos por los que distintos grupos de investigadores de diferentes campos disciplinarios, indaga sobre nuevas prácticas que puedan ser calificadas de restaurativas y entendidas como acciones llevadas a a cabo por dos o más personas, necesarias para subsanar los conflictos y humanizarlas. En este sentido, el conflicto es visto como una oportunidad para fortalecer los lazos afectivos y construir comunidades, gracias a que dichas prácticas han sido diseñadas especialmente para territorios cuya historia ha estado marcada por la guerra, la violencia y la rivalidad de unos contra otros (Schmitz, 2018)
Por consiguiente, la intención de producir prácticas con valor social, se ha visto entrenadas por devenires del contextos, que ubican su necesidad en la restructuración de un tejido social fragmentado por prácticas contraproducentes para la población, las cuales en vez de beneficiar a una colectividad o a una mayoría, terminan por favorecer a unos pocos.
Sobre la base de lo anterior y de los planteamientos que aseguran que mediante políticas contra hegemónicas puede lograrse una reestructuración social, se hace pertinente preguntarnos cuáles son las prácticas restaurativas no formales. Claro está, que para resolver dicho interrogante es preciso especificar qué son las prácticas restaurativas, cuál ha sido su devenir, de dónde provienen y por qué su relevancia social y académica en la actualidad. Además, es menester determinar su relación con la justicia restaurativa y su importancia de aplicación mediante proyectos investigativos, educativos, sociales y culturales, los cuales han impregnado de paz a sociedades caracterizadas por el conflicto-
Por tanto, este capítulo busca reflexionar sobre la incursión de las prácticas restaurativas no formales en el medio social y sus modos de aplicación en territorios de vulnerabilidad social, específicamente en la ciudad De Santiago de Cali, ubicada al Uroccidente de Colombia, ciudad que se ha caracterizado por altas cifras de violencia y criminalidad. Según el Consejo Ciudadano de Seguridad y Justicia de México, Cali se ubica en el puesto 26 a nivel mundial, con una tasa de 1,176 homicidios en el último año (Seguridad, Justicia y Paz, 2020). Por ello, se tomaron en consideración seis investigaciones con perspectivas psicosociales desarrolladas desde 2016, en le marco de la implementación de los acuerdos de paz firmados en Colombia, en escenarios sociales, educativos, y comunitarios.
... In addition, the location of informal restorative justice outside the formal criminal justice system can create a sense of doubt about the legal status of the outcome of any restorative event. Furthermore, Daly (2006Daly ( , 2016 has noted that the lack of an agreed upon definition of what restorative justice actually is can cause problems. This has been repeated in a wide range of research and it remains an enduring concern. ...
This article will examine understandings that underpin restorative justice outcomes for participants in order to propose that restorative justice conferences may provide better outcomes for participants than the formal courts of the criminal justice system. The analysis will attempt to shed light on the benefits of the restorative justice conferencing process. These benefits will be shown to include positive individual and community outcomes, which ‘restore’ participants in a manner which may be closer to concepts of ‘justice’ than the formal court process.
... En todos estos aspectos coincido con Christie. La realidad es que las historias de la justicia restaurativa están algo lejos del panorama prometedor que ofrecen sus simpatizantes (Daly, 2006). ...
Cezalandırıcı ve dağıtıcı adalet sistemlerinden kavramsal ve pratiksel olarak farklılaşan onarıcı adalet sistemi, bir suç karşısında adaletin tesis edilmesi için failin cezalandırılmasından öte mağdurun zararının tazmin edilmesini esas alır. Onarıcı adalet anlayışına göre suç, devlete ve kanuna karşı değil; bireye ve topluma karşı işlenmektedir. Dolayısıyla, onarıcı adalete göre, failin ve mağdurun aynı düzlemde bir araya getirilip diyalog ve anlaşma çerçevesinde uzlaştırılması esastır. Onarıcı adalet anlayışına göre, diyalog ve uzlaşma çerçevesinde sadece mağdurun zararının tazmin edilmesi yeterli değildir. Aynı zamanda failin iyileştirilerek gelecekte bu suçu bir daha işlememesine yönelik kökten bir çözüm arayışı temel alınmaktadır. 1970’li yıllardan itibaren modern hukukta yer edinmeye başlayan onarıcı adalet anlayışına başvuran en önemli mekanizmalardan biri hakikat ve uzlaşma komisyonlarıdır. Hakikat komisyonları, otoriter rejimlerden, iç savaşlardan, soykırımlardan ve ağır insan hakları ihlallerinden çıkan toplumların geçmişleriyle yüzleşmeleri ve demokratik bir geleceğe ulaşmaları için bir geçiş dönemi süreci sunmaktadır. Bu çalışma, onarıcı adalet anlayışının uygulama alanı bulduğu hakikat komisyonlarının insan hakları ihlallerinin incelenmesindeki işlevini irdelemekte ve bu komisyonların kurulmasının gerekliliğini sorgulamaktadır. Onarıcı adalet anlayışına ve hakikat komisyonlarına yöneltilen eleştirilerden ve bugüne kadar onarıcı adalet anlayışıyla kurulan hakikat komisyonları deneyimlerinden hareketle, bu çalışma cezalandırıcı adalet sistemiyle onarıcı adalet sisteminin bir arada işletilmesini önermektedir.
In the Introduction the author explains her own interest for researching out-of-court settlement (victim-offender mediation) from the participant’s perspective.
The second chapter titled Restorative justice- the Philosophical and Conceptual Discourse brings explanation of restorative justice (RJ) compared to traditional criminal justice approach. The author discusses restorative justice definitions, term, principles and goals as well as four different restorative justice models (victim-offender mediation, family conference, circles, reparative panels/boards) in the world for youth in conflict with the law. The author concludes that restorative justice is relatively new and substantially different approach toward offenders but also toward crime victims. Restorative justice programs, according to its principles and theories, should lead to numerous benefits for the victim, offender and the community.
Therefore, the following chapter Theoretical Assumptions of Restorative Justice describes and analyses theories of restorative justice regarding expected outcomes and objectives which must be accomplished in the process of out-of-court settlement (OCS) in order to achieve theoretical goals and outcomes. Analysed theories are: Theory on Healing Justice, Theory on Healing Dialogue, Theory of Social and Moral Development, Neutralisation Theory, Theory of Apology and Procedural Justice Theory. The author offers logical model of out-of-court settlement based on its process, theories, and results. In order to achieve restorative justice outcomes, every segment must be in accordance with other elements as well as theoretical postulates.
In the fourth chapter the author gives an overview, describes, sums up and discusses foreign studies of restorative justice on specific aspects of restorative justice programs from the perspective of victims and offenders.
In the chapter Out-of-court Settlement in Croatia the author brings basic information (development of the model in Croatia, characteristics of the model, legal framework of the model, criterion for imposement, process of the model, statistical data on OCS in Croatia, conducted studies on the efficiency of OCS so far) on Croatian restorative justice model which is the only RJ program in the criminal justice system in Croatia. OCS is victim- offender mediation programme focused on the joint victim and offender meeting who voluntarily, under the guidance of specially educated mediator, talk about aftermath of crime as well as possible ways to repair, restore or compensate the damage caused by the offense. The solution and agreement must be acceptable to both parties.
11
In the chapter titled Study Problem, Purpose and Aims the author states that the biggest difference between RJ approach (and OCS) and existing system of social reactions to crime lies in completely different role of the victim and offender. Despite the fact that relatively solid fond of studies exists which aimed at exploring perspectives of victims and offenders and their experiences with RJ, the fact is that they used different methodologies. Therefore, it is hard to compare or generalize the researches results. In addition, there are even contradictory study results present. Various victim-offender mediation programs are conducted differently in practice which is also one important aspect when interpreting results. Besides that, perspective of OCS participants in Croatia has not been explored so far.
Despite the fact that large number of restorative justice studies in the world brings evidence on different benefits of restorative justice programs for its participants, Croatian model is checked in relation to only some aspect of its effectiveness so far while participants (victim's and offender's) experiences with out-of-court settlement is not empirically verified. Therefore this research expands the current knowledge on restorative justice. In addition, it provides an answer to the question what makes out-of-court settlement successful from the victim's and offender’s perspective and how participants experience and interpret the out-of- court settlement process.
This study aimed to explore and describe victims' and offenders’ experiences with OCS and to develop an understanding of the meaning participants attribute to their participation experience. In order to do that, this study examined victims' and offenders’ perspectives of the experiences of the OCS program operating in Zagreb and Osijek using qualitative methodology. Data was collected using semi-structured interviews with 14 crime victims and 17 offenders. Data was analysed using inductive thematic analysis by Braun and Clarke (2006, 2012, 2013).
Findings highlight that victims had positive experiences with OCS which is evident from isolated themes named: OCS brings many benefits for victims, Experience of positive atmosphere, Positive perception of mediator as process “guardian”, Positive perception of the offender, Process leads to the relief for the victims. However, findings also indicated negative cases, which are discussed and reflect disrespect of OCS standards and principles by mediators.
Meanings that victim attach to the experience with OCS is described in two overarching themes called: Satisfaction with the process and OCS outcomes and OCS is sufficient for victims but not for the offenders.
12
Offenders, as well as victims, have positive experience with OCS. Although their motivation for participation is primary pragmatic accompanied by emotions of fear, discomfort, upon completion of the process they recognize many benefits for themselves and more modest for the victims. OCS is perceived as measure which is better for them than for the crime victims. Victims are perceived better than expected and often oriented toward helping the offenders. The perception of the mediator is positive. Many offenders experience transformation of emotions during the process. This means that the process leads to changes of emotions in most cases (from „negative“- fear, discomfort, embarrassment to a feelings of relief and happiness).
But in spite of the above, disrespect of the principles and standards of OCS conduct by mediator, leads to problems during the joint victim and offender meeting and bring less restorative outcomes than those which in accordance with theories one might expect.
Meanings that offenders attach to the experience with OCS is described in two overarching themes called OCS is oriented toward offenders and OCS is better than court for the offenders.
This study brings forth the detailed stories from an insider’s perspective on restorative justice, helping us to take a closer look at the “black box” of OCS.
zvansudska nagodba za mlade u sukobu sa zakonom potpuna je novost u odnosu na dosadašnje intervencije u Hrvatskoj i jedini je program restorativne pravde u kaznenom pravu u nas. Riječ je o jedinoj intervenciji koja je usmjerena na žrtve i podrazumijeva susret žrtve i počinitelja. Kroz međusobni dijalog i uz posredstvo profesionalnog posrednika sudionici pokušavaju naći za obje strane zadovoljavajuće rješenje s ciljem nadoknade štete počinjene kaznenim djelom. Unatoč činjenici da u svijetu postoji velik broj istraživanja restorativne pravde koja svjedoče o dobitcima od takvih programa za sudionike, hrvatski model izvansudske nagodbe do sada je provjeravan u odnosu na neke aspekte njegove učinkovitosti dok iskustvo i doživljaj izvansudske nagodbe od strane sudionika (žrtava i počinitelja) nisu empirijski provjeravani. Nedvojbeno je da unutar istog modela restorativne pravde ipak postoje određene specifičnosti u provedbi pa i to zahtijeva provjere pojedinih, specifičnih modela i usporedbu s drugima. Zato ovo istraživanje doprinosi i provjeri do sad stečenih znanja o restorativnoj pravdi. Ovo istraživanje doprinijelo je odgovoru što izvansudsku nagodbu čini uspješnom iz perspektive sudionika te kako ju sudionici doživljavaju i tumače. S ciljem istraživanja i opisa doživljaja i iskustva s izvansudskom nagodbom kroz perspektivu korisnika (oštećenika i osumnjičenika) te ispitavanja i opisa značenja koje korisnici pripisuju iskustvu sudjelovanja u izvansudskoj nagodbi, provedeno je istraživanje primjenom kvalitativne metodologije s 14 žrtava i 17 počinitelja koji su sklopili sporazum na kraju izvansudske nagodbe u Zagrebu i Osijeku. Podaci su obrađeni induktivnom tematskom analizom. Generalni zaključci su kako slijedi: Iskustvo žrtava s nagodbom je pozitivno na što utječe doživljaj izvansudske nagodbe kroz brojne dobitke za žrtvu, doživljaj pozitivne atmosfere i pozitivan doživljaj posrednika kao čuvara procesa, pozitivan doživljaj počinitelja i procesa koji dovodi do olakšanja. Ipak, u perspektivi žrtava uočeni su odstupajući slučajevi. Naime, radi se o greškama i nepravilnostima u proceduri izvansudske nagodbe. To znači da je s velikom sigurnošću moguće identificirati indikatore negativne perspektive žrtava u slučaju uspješne nagodbe. Značenje koje žrtve pridaju iskustvu sudjelovanja u izvansudskoj nagodbi moguće je opisati kroz nadtemu Zadovoljstvo procesom i ishodima izvansudske nagodbe koja govori o doživljaju izvansudske nagodbe kao dobitku na mnogim područjima i razinama, ili izvansudskoj nagdobi kao ukupnom dobitku za žrtve. Drugo značenje koje oštećenici pripisuju iskustvu sudjelovanja i doživljaju izvansudske nagodbe definirano je u drugoj nadtemi Izvansudska nagodba je dovoljna za žrtve, ali ne i za počinitelje. Ova nadtema govori 9 o tome da da je ova mjera dovoljna za žrtve, što znači da su one zadovoljne onime što su doživjele i postigle kroz proces izvansudske nagodbe, ali donosi i perspektivu koja šalje poruku da žrtve izvansudsku nagodbu ne doživljavaju dovoljnom za počinitelje, posebno ne u smislu prevencije recidivizma. Ključna spoznaja iz perspektive počinitelja je, kao i kod žrtvava, pozitivan doživljaj i iskustvo s izvansudskom nagodbom po uspješno okončanom završetku. Iako u proces najčešće kreću usmjereni na vlastitu dobrobit i sa snažnim emocijama straha, nelagode, po njegovom okončanju prepoznaju brojne dobitke za sebe te nešto skromnije za žrtvu (iako spominju cijeli dijapazon dobitaka za oštećenika, o tome govore sažeto i šturo). Stoga izvansudsku nagodbu doživljavaju kao mjeru koja je povoljnija za njih nego za žrtve. Oštećenike doživljavaju pozitivnije od očekivanog i često usmjerene na pomoć njima. Doživljaj posrednika i atmosfere istovjetan je doživljaju žrtava. Dakle, on je bolji od očekivanog i izrazito pozitivan u većini doživljaja sudionika. Posebno značajan je uvid da velik dio počinitelja doživljajava transformaciju ili preobrazbu, mogli bismo reći - metamorfozu tijekom procesa. To znači da proces dovodi do promjene emocija kod većine osumnjičenika (od negativnih, straha, neugode, nelagode do osjećaja olakšanja i sreće). No unatoč navedenom, kao i kod oštećenika, propusti u poštivanju standarda provedbe procesa dovode do problema tijekom zajedničkog susreta žrtve i počinitelja, ali i, mogli bismo reći, manje restorativnih ishoda od onih koje bi se, sukladno teorijskim postavkama restorativne pravde, mogli očekivati (riječ je o odstupajućim slučajevima). U kontekstu značenja koje osumnjičenici pridaju sudjelovanju u procesu, važna je nadtema Izvansudska nagodba je orijentirana na počinitelje. Počinitelji prepoznaju izvansudsku nagodbu kao mjeru koja njima donosi puno dobitaka i zadovoljstvo, dok su, ipak, manje orijentirani na dobitke za žrtve. No, također, manje govore o dobicima za sebe u smjeru promjene ponašanja, prevencije recidivizma i slično, pa se možda u tom kontekstu može govoriti da se perspektiva počinitelja donekle podudara s perspektivom žrtava da nagodba nije dovoljna za počinitelje, iako oni sami smatraju da je za njih dovoljna. Druga nadtema Izvansudska nagodba je bolja nego sud za počinitelje također govori o njihovom razumijevanju mjere. Pozitivan doživljaj izvansudske nagodbe temeljen je na tome da je nagodba bolja za njih nego sud. Za takav je doživljaj zaslužno više elemenata: pozitivan doživljaj posrednika, žrtve, ali i proces.
Desde hace algunos años se plantea la necesidad de incorporar dentro del sistema procesal penal
mecanismos propios de la Justicia Restaurativa. Sin embargo aún persiste la discusión acerca
de cómo debe ser el alcance de sus respuestas, particularmente lo relativo a la responsabilidad
del autor y la reparación a la víctima. Este trabajo pretende establecer los presupuestos mínimos
para que pueda estimarse efectiva la responsabilidad de quien haya cometido el hecho delictivo.
En este sentido, surgen preguntas acerca de la necesidad de exigir el reconocimiento del hecho y
compromisos de evitación, estableciéndose un paralelo con la pena, sobre todo desde la perspectiva
de sus dimensiones comunicativas y aflictivas. Asimismo, se examina la reparación a la
víctima, entendiendo que para la solución del conflicto penal se debe, necesariamente, considerar
su restauración. En este orden, se analiza la naturaleza de los encuentros restaurativos y cómo
estos deben entenderse.
Die Rückfallquote spielt eine zentrale Rolle in der
Forschung zu Restorative Justice (RJ). Ein Grund dafür ist der zunehmende Einsatz von RJ innerhalb
der Strafjustiz. Für Regierungen und Gesellschaften ist es wichtig, ihre Reaktionen auf Kriminalität
so auszurichten, dass Rückfälligkeit reduziert und
somit die öffentliche Sicherheit verbessert wird.
Zwar ist eine Rückfälligkeitsminderung nicht das
vornehmliche Ziel von Restorative Justice – es geht
vorwiegend um andere positive (psychologische)
Wirkungen auf Beschuldigte und Geschädigte –,
es wurde jedoch von verschiedenen Wissenschaftler*innen bereits festgestellt, dass Täter*innen,1
die an RJ-Programmen teilgenommen haben, seltener rückfällig werden als solche, die von der Strafjustiz verurteilt wurden.
(German summary of Jonas-van Dijk et al. (2019), Crime & Delinquency)
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.