roy

Week 3: Accountability to the Community PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHMENT:  Place Your Order Here!

Relevant stakeholders become more easily identifiable as persons immediately involved or connected with a criminal offence. This does not require all such persons to partici- pate, but rather that opportunities exist for persons beyond the victim and offender to take part. Similarly, there must be opportunities for members of the general public to take part.

The Punitive Restoration Alternative This section presents and defends a particular approach to achieving restorative justice in a novel way: the idea of punitive restoration.31 Punitive restoration offers a distinctive view about restorative justice. It is a single practice taking the form of a confer- ence setting, where the victim, the offender, their support networks,

Punitive Restoration and Restorative Justice 127 offender with the wider community. This goal is built on a view that there is a wrong to be made right and an injustice between affected persons requiring closure. If this is the case, then it is unclear why restorative justice requires a criminal offence where there may be

The Problems with Restorative Approaches Restorative justice approaches suffer from several problems. This section identifies the more significant problems, and the first—the fact of the diversity of restorative practices —has already been stated above. Punitive Restoration and Restorative Justice 125 Perhaps commonality of most restora- tive approaches lies in what they are not: they are

Punitive Restoration and Restorative Justice 123 enabling both understanding and healing.6 Perhaps the best-known working definition of restorative justice approaches is offered by T. F. Marshall: “Restorative justice is a process whereby all parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence

The Diversity of Restorative Justice The term restorative justice refers to a range of approaches and not any single practice.1 It is more an orien- tation than a practice favoring the informal over the formal, aiming at providing victims and offenders alike with a voice. Furthermore, “there is no agreement on the actual nature of

SPECIAL TOPIC ARTICLE Punitive Restoration and Restorative Justice THOM BROOKS∗ Criminaljusticepolicyfacesthetwinchallengesofimprovingourcrimereductioneffortswhile increasing public confidence. These challenges are exacerbated by the fact that at least some measures popular with the public are counterproductive to greater crime reduction. How to achieve greater crime reduction without sacrificing public confidence? While restorative justice approaches offer a promising alternative to

Further Insights:Punitive Damages Punitive damages serve as a civil parallel to criminal deterrence. The idea is that behavior that causes civil liability, and is “reprehensible” in nature can incur damage awards. The punitive award is both a punishment for the behavior, and deterrence (both specific and general) against future action. In 1989, the United States

Criminal Justice System Another factor to consider when trying understanding why specific deterrence does not seem to be effective is the role that interaction with the criminal justice system itself might play. After experiencing arrest, prosecution, conviction and incarceration, the offender’s opportunities in the field of white collar work might well be quite restricted. Without