Let me begin by saying how pleased I am to be in Vienna and to be part of this panel discussing what I believe is a very important approach to the efforts to create healthy communities and foster individual well-being as well as a means to secure justice in a more satisfying way. The main purpose of our gathering together is to share ideas, questions and possible solutions to the challenges we are facing in dealing with crime and order problems in our communities. Over the last number of years there has been an expansion in the use of restorative approaches to meet these challenges and we are noticing that these programs are emerging both outside and inside the criminal justice system. In my remarks I will talk about the use of restorative approaches in Canada at three specific points in the criminal justice system: pre-charge, pre-sentence and post-sentence. A key point that I want to make is to establish the need to get and keep the community involved in these approaches. A danger, as I see it, is that these approaches will be colonized to meet the needs of the penal apparatus and become just another program to manage resource allocation problems. This can be avoided by keeping the grassroots orientation of restorative justice front and center. It is also a means to keep the values and beliefs that underlie restorative justice vital and connected to the program efforts.

Let me begin by a brief description of the philosophy of restorative justice. Then a quick overview of selected program approaches in use in Canada at various levels of the penal system and finally, close with a word about possible hazards and a caution regarding the danger of loss of community involvement as restorative approaches become mainstream and incorporated into the penal apparatus.

1.      Restorative Justice: A brief description.

Restorative justice is a way of thinking about harm and conflict and a way of acting on that thinking. It challenges us as a community to examine how we respond to and resolve conflict and the results of harmful behavior. Restorative justice comes in various forms depending on the circumstances of the event and seeks to intervene at appropriate points in the process, for example either at the pre-charge or pre-sentence stage and seeks to find a resolution that doesn't invoke the full force of the criminal justice system.

There are basic principles that underlie and inform restorative justice approaches. Briefly these elements include a focus on holding the offending party accountable, providing means to repair the harm done, providing opportunities for the reintegration of the individual into the community, involving the victim and working towards the victim's healing.

Restorative justice is a way of settling disputes. The victims, their families and friends, and the broader community are viewed as the recipients of the harm caused by the offender's behavior. Restorative approaches attempt to repair the harm done by direct contact between victim and offender rather than a resolution conducted by the state.

The process of reparation involves bringing the offender; victim and representatives of the community together to problem solve and look for outcomes that are satisfying to all parties. It is the intent that this process of mediation would negotiate a settlement and initiate a process of understanding that would culminate in forgiveness and healing for the offended and the offender.

Restorative justice practices that most people are familiar with are victim-offender reconciliation meetings and more recently the development of conferencing and sentencing circles. Key to all these approaches is the involvement of the victim and the community. Thus we see the participation of victims and community participating in the administration of justice and also the management of offenders in the community. To summarize my remarks to this point, most restorative programs adhere to three basic principles:

• Crime is a violation of a relationship among victims, offenders and the community.
• Responses to crime should encourage the active involvement of victim, offender and community.
• A consensus approach to justice is the most effective response to crime.

Let me turn now to a brief overview of some examples of restorative approaches in Canada.

2.      Restorative approaches at three critical points in the response to offending behavior.

The first critical point is at the pre-charge stage, that is when a harm has been noticed and an offender apprehended and the victim identified. A number of police services in Canada are using the conferencing model of restorative justice to manage youthful offenders who have committed property offences or behavior incidents in schools. The Edmonton Police Service creation of a Community Conferencing Association is one example of the use of this model. The CCA has focused on training facilitators, creating relationships with schools and conducting conferences. Community conferencing provides an alternative response to harmful behavior. Using the concept of the circle, participants in the conference share their experiences about what happened during the incident and discuss what can or should happen in the future. The process requires that offenders accept responsibility for their involvement in the incident. Participation of offenders and victims is voluntary. There are usually three stages in the process.

First, participants discuss how they have been affected by the incident and through the work of the facilitator come to an understanding of the impact of the incident and the harm caused. The offender is given an opportunity to respond.

Secondly, participants seek to determine how the harm should be mitigated or repaired. This is an opportunity to talk about the responsibility of the offender to make things right as well as an opportunity for the rest of the community who have been affected might assist in the offenders reintegration. If there is an agreement, a written statement is developed with clear arrangements for follow-up that will ensure compliance.

The final stage is the beginning of the reintegration process. It is a time for socializing that allows for additional gestures of apologies and support. The process helps bring closure for victims and gives offenders a chance to be accountable for their actions.

The CCA may receive referrals from various sources including the community, police and the courts. The organizers of this approach hope to be able to deal with minor offences such as bullying or harassment in schools that traditionally have received little attention from the justice system. CCA hopes to resolve underlying problems while they are still relatively minor and before they escalate to more serious incidents. This approach seeks to have offenders recognize how their actions affect others and how with the assistance of the community they can behave more appropriately and positively.

Another type of program initiative uses restorative principles to provide an opportunity for offenders to be diverted from the court proceedings. This usually occurs after a charge has been laid.

A local agency, Operation Springboard in Toronto, Canada is using restorative principles in the design and delivery of a diversion program connected to one of the courts in that city. This effort is intended to assist the Court in responsibly increasing the number of non-violent offenders approved for diversion and to prevent their further involvement in criminal activity.

As an alternative to proceeding with criminal charges through formal court proceedings the program provides a community-based option for adult, non-violent offenders, usually first time offenders. If the offender chooses to participate in the program by admitting responsibility, they are expected to satisfy specific requirements prior to the charge being withdrawn.

This program focuses on holding offenders accountable for their behavior and provides them opportunities to make amends for the harm done to the victim and the community. The staff of the agency receives referrals of appropriate offenders from the prosecutor and is responsible for explaining the diversion implications and the offender's rights to seek legal counsel. If the offender agrees, meaningful and accountable conditions are determined and closely monitored. The staff reports to the court prior to the remand date on the offender's progress. If the progress is satisfactory and the agreement completed the charge is withdrawn otherwise the case proceeds to trial.

Agreed upon conditions for diversion may require the completion of community service, donation to a charitable organization, restitution to the victim, and or an apology to the victim. Referrals to specific services for identified needs of the offender that contributed to the offence such as substance abuse, unemployment or lack of literacy skills are made available.

This diversion program attempts to hold the offender responsible and to provide a meaningful experience for victims where applicable.

Another critical point in the offender's situation is the sentencing after a conviction has been registered. Another local agency in Winnipeg, Canada developed the Restorative Resolutions project that seeks to involve the offender, the victim and the community in repairing the harm that the offender has caused. Offenders are eligible to participate in the program if they:

• Plead guilty
• Face a prison sentence
• Are motivated to take responsibility for the harm done.

This project considers both property offences and crimes of a personal nature. Excluded from the project are offenders who have committed domestic assaults, sexual assaults, drug trafficking or gang related incidents. When the offender is accepted in the project a community based plan is developed to assist him or her to deal with the behavior that has brought him or her into conflict with the law. This sentencing plan proposes a specific course of action for the offender to follow. When the plan is finished the defense lawyer introduces it to the court at the sentencing stage. If the court accepts the plan the Restorative Resolutions project is responsible for supervising the offender in the community. An unacceptable plan leads to a sentence of imprisonment.

A key element of this plan is the involvement of the victim. Victims are contacted and given an opportunity to participate in the development of the sentencing plan through a face-to-face meeting with the offender and/or through a victim impact statement. This project is seeking to use a restorative approach to the provision of pre-sentence information to the court. The effort to bring victims into the sentencing process and to have the offender plan how he will repay or make right the wrong done is an attempt to hold the offender accountable and to meet the needs of the victim.

The last example I want to discuss is the work being done by the Mennonite Central Committee and the Toronto Community Chaplaincy of the Correctional Services of Canada.  The circle of support and accountability has been established to work with sex offenders being released from Federal prisons at warrant expiry. The circle involves community volunteers who form a support group (circle) for high profile or potentially high profile sex offenders who are re-entering the community after completion of their sentence. Offenders are selected on the basis of the following guidelines:

• A sex offender serving sentence in a Federal prison
• Will likely be detained at sentence expiry, possibly through the use of civil commitment procedures
• Are potentially high profile upon release
• May need extra assistance in reestablishing in the community and have limited or no-existent support in the community
• Are prepared to have the victim's perspective included as part of their reintegration plan
• Accept the limits of accountability imposed by the support circle
• Commit to learning to live a pro-social lifestyle and join the circle voluntarily.

The circle assists the offender to return to the community by providing intensive, caring, practical support. The circle offers help in mediating between police, media, the larger community and the offender. The relationship between the released offender and the circle includes a commitment to act responsibly and to follow a relapse prevention plan agreed upon by the members of the circle. The circle lasts as long as the risks to the community and the offender are assessed as medium to high risk of re-offending.

The general techniques and processes used in conferencing and sentencing circles are employed. This approach involves a faith community in an exercise of what the innovators call "radical Christian hospitality" by which they mean acknowledging the expression of the healing power of God by living as a risking, reconciling community in the world. This is a promising approach in working with the new "lepers" of modern society and there are early indications that the circles of support are providing the assistance needed and is lowering the risk to the community of re-offending by this selected group of offenders.

3.      Community and victim involvement

In this quick overview of some restorative approaches to correctional intervention I wish to draw attention to two specific points. First is the high involvement of non-governmental agencies in the delivery of these programs. Either the voluntary sector or faith-communities are carrying out the majority of the restorative justice initiatives in Canada. This connection to the local community is the strength of these approaches. These groups are better situated to mobilize community support than are the traditional criminal justice agencies.

The second point I would like to make is to draw attention to the fact all of the programs discussed stress the involvement of victims. A program that purports to be restorative and does not take victims seriously or give then a voice is flawed and doomed to fail as a restorative activity.

In the concluding section of by presentation I want to raise some issues that are emerging as restorative justice becomes more widely accepted.

4.      Issues emerging for a restorative approach

The first issue that I see is the need for more definition of the scope and extent of restorative justice. For me restorative justice must become more that just another option or alternative to the traditional criminal justice system. If we are to avoid colonization by the traditional system to meet their resource and population management needs we will have to involve ourselves in a fuller definition that covers more than minor offences or diversionary programs. As one of my examples demonstrates we are capable to working with restorative principles with higher risk offenders. In United States work is being done on restorative efforts with violent offenders and with the victims of homicide.

The second issue facing restorative efforts relates to the need to keep a grassroots, community base to the approaches As the principles and programs move deeper into the penal system I fear that it will be a gloss on the retributive nature of most penal systems and not an alternative paradigm for dealing with law-breaking and harmful behavior in a community context.

Finally, as our societies become more diverse we will have to reach out and explore the concepts of restorative justice in other cultures and faith communities. We have all ready learned a great deal in Canada from our dialogues with our First Nations people and their approach to harmful behavior. We owe them a deep gratitude for helping us understand the concepts embodied in circles. The same can be said of the Maori of New Zealand who have done so much to assist our understanding of conferencing. The peacemaker concepts of the American Native are also an influence on the development of restorative justice. But we need to continue this dialogue and reach beyond to other faiths and cultures if we are to fuller realize the promise of restorative justice. We owe it to our communities and to our children and grandchildren to try so that the level of crime in our communities goes down with out sacrificing justice. Thank you.