The Court-Referred Pilot Project allowed judges in four district courts to refer qualified adult offenders to restorative conferences. The requirements were that the offenders plead guilty and that the charges be serious. Only propoerty crimes with a maximum sentence of at least two years, and other offences with maximum sentences between two and seven years, were subject to referral. The evaluation of the pilot project ran from 4 February 2002 to 4 February 2003.

The goals of the pilot project were to:

• Increase resolution of the effects of crime for victims who participated in the restorative justice conferences,
• Increase victim satisfaction with the criminal justice system, and
• Reduce re-offending rates for offenders participating in the conferences

When a case was referred to conferencing, a facilitator met with the victim and offender separately to determine whether or not the partices were willing and able to participate in the process. Participation was voluntary for both the victim and offender. Of the 577 cases referred to conferencing during the evaluation period, only 36% actually went to a conference. The primary reason for this was refusal by victims to meet their offenders.

Data for the survey was gathered through:

• Survey forms sent to participants and facilitators
• Interviews with victims and offenders going through conferences at the end of the conference, at the time of sentencing, and 12 months after the conference
• Case studies prepared of 18 conferences
• Observations of 90 conferences
• Questionnaires sent to key informants
• Interviews with 90 offenders and 90 victims going through the court process in three of the four pilot districts, but not the restorative justice process.

In terms of increasing the resolution of the effects of crime for victims, initial responses of victims were very positive. In interviews following the conference, 92% of victims expressed satisfaction with the conference experience with three-quarters stating that felt better as a result. In follow-up interviews 12 months after the conference, 90% of victims could recall the conference with 67% recalling positive features first.

In reference to increased victim satisfaction with the criminal justice system, one-third of victims said they felt better about the criminal justice system as a result of their conference experience. Most said that they would recommend others to participate in a conference. In the initial interviews, almost two-thirds of victims said they were satisfied with the process. However, in the 12 month follow-up interviews, the level of satisfaction had declined. This was related to a desire for more reparation, a sentence of imprisonment, or other sanctions. This finding was similar to victims who went through the court process and not conferencing.

The one year re-conviction rate for pilot participants was 32%. This was a slight decrease from the reconviction rates of 10 matched comparison groups (36%). A study examining two-year reconviction rates is currently underway.

The evaluation showed positive results for the court-referred pilot project with the majority of key informants expressing the opinion that the pilot should be expanded. However, the study also revealed room for improvement. Two recommendations were:

• increased monitoring of conference agreements by programme staff to ensure that obligations are met
• clarify with victims the difference between the conference agreements and sentences to avoid confusion.

New Zealand Court-Referred Restorative Justice Pilot: Evaluation. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Justice.

Evaluation of the Court-Referred Restorative Justice Pilot: Technical Report. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Justice.

Evaluation of the Court-Referred Restorative Justice Pilot: Case Studies. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Justice.


Lynette Parker
September 2005