Conferencing Serious Juvenile Delinquents in Belgium
From November 2000 to October 2003, youth courts in Belgium piloted the use of the New Zealand model of Family Group Conferencing.
|
Inge Vanfraechem and Lode Walgrave [1] provide a research update on the project. _____________________________________________________________ In November 2000, a pilot-project on family group conferencing with serious juvenile delinquents was set up in Belgium. In this article, we present some results as well as the current state of affairs. The project For several reasons, the conferencing project in Belgium is based upon the New Zealand model. Facilitators of five existing mediation services implemented the process after they were trained by a New Zealand facilitator. During the pilot project, 53 conferences took place for 58 youngsters during about two and one half years. Almost all were observed and about half of the participants were interviewed. The Flemish government (Ministry of Welfare) funded the evaluation of the project. Goals The main goal of the pilot project was to determine whether conferencing was feasible in the Belgian context. Conferencing aims primarily to involve the young offender, the victim and their networks in a communication process leading towards restoration. As in the New Zealand model, a police officer is present to symbolically represent society and to point out the seriousness of the crime. The project is conceived in the broader framework of restorative justice. Results The procedure A referral procedure was worked out in order for conferencing to be embedded in the judicial procedure. The juvenile is referred by the youth judge to a private mediation service. Participants voluntarily take part in the process. Lawyers can be present in order to ensure procedural safeguards are observed. The outcome of the conference is called a ‘declaration of intention’ and is sent back to the judge, who has to endorse it before the execution can start. So far, all declarations of intention have been endorsed by the referring judges, though they have mentioned two times that they found it difficult [2]. The type of crime Since victim-offender mediation is available for young offenders throughout Belgium, we opted to reserve conferencing for the more serious crimes. New Zealand practice has shown it is applicable in those cases. Because it represents a significant time investment of all parties, we decided it should not be used for small cases. Most importantly, it is a serious event for both victim and offender to take part in a conference. We have dealt with theft with aggravating circumstances, assaults, armed robbery and carjacking. It appears that the more serious the case, the more benefit the parties can get out of it. Victims are able to tell their story and offenders are able to make amends for what has happened. Satisfaction and support Interviews show that both victim and offender are satisfied with the preparation by the facilitator. Victims do say it is very difficult to imagine what the meeting will be like. They are present in about half of the conferences. In an additional tenth of the conferences, a representative (usually a relative or partner) of the victim is present. Table 1. Satisfaction with the preparation
|
Table 2. Satisfaction with the outcome of the conference.
|
Juveniles |
Parents |
Victims present |
Victims not present |
|
|
Conferencing should be offered, on a voluntary basis, to all offenders/victims. |
75.7% |
- |
61.5% |
91.7% |
|
If you had to do it all over again, you would choose to participate in a conference. |
86.8% |
88.6% |
92.3% |
58.3% |
|
The damage is repaired. |
- |
- |
48.1% |
50% |
Participants are satisfied with the process as well as with the outcome. They consider the process to be procedurally just (Tyler, 1988). If they would have to do the process over again, most would opt for a conference. Even victims who chose not to be present, consider it very important to be offered the opportunity to take part, and more than half would take part. Only half of the victims think the damage is repaired by the conference, but in interviews they pointed out that the process was still ongoing, and they were expecting the effective implementation.
Victims typically bring one support person along or come by themselves. They feel sufficiently supported by other victims present, as well as by the police officer. Young offenders bring four to five supporters: their parents, lawyer, other relatives, teachers, sports coaches, etc. Victims expressed appreciation for the presence of the police. Those who were victims of violent crimes particularly said that it contributed to the initial feelings of safety.
Closed institutions
Since we are dealing with more serious offences, we evaluated what the relationship would be between conferencing and placements in closed institutions (Vanfraechem and Walgrave, 2004). According to interviews with the judges and the staffs of the closed facilities, a conference can be an alternative for a placement. When a youngster participates in a conference, a placement may be avoided. Moreover, a conference may be a reason for the young offender to leave the institution early. The conference then helps in the transition between detention and home. An addtional justification for conferencing in closed institutions is that the victims’ needs for information and closure can be met.
The way forward
The research results identified particular aspects of practical implementation to serve as guidelines for further policies. The Minister of Justice has now formulated a proposed law to reform the existing youth protection law in order to implement and perpetuate restorative practices. The future will show whether legislative initiatives can enhance and broaden the applicability of conferencing, while at the same time safeguarding its principles.
_____________________________________________________
Bibliography
Tyler, T.R., ‘What is Procedural Justice?: Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures’, Law & Society Review, Vol. 22, nr.1, 1988, 103-135.
Vanfraechem, I., ‘Implementing Family Group Conferences in a Legalistic System. The example of Belgium’, in Walgrave, L. (ed), Repositioning Restorative Justice. Restorative Justice, Criminal Justice and Social Context, Willan Publishing, 2003, 313-327.
Vanfraechem, I., ‘Evaluating conferencing for serious juvenile delinquency’, in Elliott, E. and Gordon, R., Restorative Justice: emerging issues in practice and evaluation, Devon, Willan Publishing, to be published in 2005.
Vanfraechem, I. en Walgrave, L., ‘Restorative conferencing in Belgium. A
way to decrease confinement of youth offenders?’, Corrections Today,
December 2004, 72-75.
_____________________________________________
[1] Researcher and Professor Emeritus at the Research Group on Juvenile
Criminology (K.U.Leuven). For a more detailed account, cf. Vanfraechem
(2003, 2005)
[2] The restoration towards the victim is always addressed in the outcome,
but the restoration towards society/community remains vague. Youth judges
expect this aspect to be incorporated in the agreement.
March 2005
