Court

With the ever growing implementation of restorative justice, court systems in the Pacific have begun looking at restorative practices as part of a sentence or as mitigating factors in sentencing.

. In courtroom 7 -- The children's Koori Court at work. Findings from an Evaluation.: This article reports some of the findings of an evaluation of the Children’s Koori Court (CKC)—the first legislated effort in Australia to involve the Indigenous community in the sentencing of young Aboriginal offenders as a strategy for reducing their overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. A prominent feature of this court of summary jurisdiction is that the presiding magistrate, while remaining the sentencing authority, is assisted by Aboriginal Elders. This article focuses on the evaluation findings that were derived from observations of the CKC in action. They indicate that the operational objective of cultural responsiveness was realized. They also point to realization of the community-building goal—fostering Indigenous ownership of the administration of the law. Little slippage was found between the CKC’s design and operation, although some areas of improvement were identified. Nevertheless, the scope for the CKC by itself to significantly reduce overrepresentation is limited. (Author's abstract)
. Indigenous Sentencing Courts.: This brief focuses on Indigenous sentencing courts, which operate in all Australian states and territories except Tasmania. These courts have been established according to protocols and practices, and can be distinguished from more informal practices that occur in remote areas where judicial officers travel on circuit. The first court was established in Port Adelaide on 1 June 1999. Indigenous sentencing courts do not practise or adopt Indigenous customary laws. Rather, they use Australian criminal laws and procedures to sentence Indigenous offenders who have either pleaded guilty or been found guilty, but they allow Indigenous Elders and Respected Persons to participate in the process, thereby creating a more culturally appropriate forum for sentencing Indigenous offenders (Auty 2004). (excerpt)
. Victoria's neighbourhood justice centre.: Experience with community justice centres suggests that they can have a significant effect on the quality of local community life (Berman 1998). Indigenous communities, being particularly conscious of a community sense of justice, may find the approaches used in community justice centres particularly appropriate. In the context of a growing array of approaches to Indigenous justice (including Indigenous courts) in Australia, community justice centres would seem to have considerable potential for improving the life of Indigenous communities. This paper provides the global context for the establishment of the Victorian Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) and details its rationale, operation, and results. (excerpt)
A Survey of 10 Years of New Zealand Court Cases on Restorative Justice: This paper by Judge Stan Thorburn offers a brief account of the development of restorative justice in the Courts of New Zealand since it has been practised over the past 10 years. In particular, it examines a selection of court decisions and identifies significant principles emerging from them. Finally, it compares those to legislation, in particular the Sentencing Act 2002.
Becroft, Andrew. Restorative Justice in the Youth Court: A Square Peg in a Round Hole?: New Zealand is known as a leader in the application of restorative justice to youth offending, with over 80% of juvenile offenses being handled through police diversion. The remaining 16-20% results in formal charges in the youth court. This article provides excerpts of a paper that examines the restorative potential of the New Zealand youth court. The full paper, written by Judge Andrew Becroft, Principal Youth Court Judge, New Zealand Youth Court, is attached.
Briggs, Daniel and Auty, Kate. Koori Court Victoria – Magistrates Court (Koori Court) Act 2002.: The introduction of Koori Courts in Victoria pursuant to the Magistrates Court (Koori Court) Act 2002 has not been without its detractors and like all change, is attended by controversies. Steps which attempt to ‘move the law along’ (as if she were an old bag lady), are often seen as a threat to the legitimacy of the legal system. Before we even commenced sitting at Shepparton by the Bayunga or Koriella river, known to non-Aboriginal people as the Goulburn, our regional Koori court was the subject of criticism with members of the legal profession commenting that Aboriginal people would not be able to find their way to the court, or that they would ‘go walkabout’ on the day of the hearing (Herald Sun 6/5/2002). This early criticism was met by much positive commentary (The Age October 2002). Nevertheless criticism continued, when a senior member of the Victorian bar, citing the establishing Act incorrectly, suggested that the Koori Court ‘tipped the scales’ and provided ‘luxury’ or ‘special’ courts and some ill-defined special regime of sentencing options (Galbally, Herald Sun 13/3/2003). He also contrasted the banning of Father Christmas from child-minding centres with the Koori Court initiative. The Victorian Attorney General, Rob Hulls criticised the ‘impaired logic’ which underpinned this commentary (Herald Sun 14/3/2003). It is timely to put the controversy and distractions to one side and start seriously considering what we do in the Koori Court in Victoria. (excerpt)
Chief Justice of Samoa. Police v Pili.: The accused’s family had also performed a ifoga (traditional formal apology) and it was accepted by the family of the deceased. The accused’s family had also presented a large pig and thirty boxes of tinned fish to the family of the deceased for the deceased’s funeral ‘lauava’. A presentation of two cattle beasts and thirty boxes of tinned fish was also made by the accused’s family to the village council of Saleapaga, the village where this incident occurred. Thus the incident that occurred has been settled between the family of the accused and the family of the deceased, and between the family of the accused and the village of Saleapaga. This is all part of what is now commonly referred to as ‘restorative justice’. (excerpt)
Chief Justice of Samoa. Police v Tafiligia.: In his plea in mitigation, the accused expressed remorsefulness for what he has done. He also expressed remorsefulness to the probation service. He is very worried and concerned about the outcome of this case. The family of the accused has also performed a traditional apology (ifoga) to the father of the victim and was accepted. This was confirmed to the Court by the father of the victim. The accused’s family has also presented one cattle beast, two large pigs, thirty boxes of tinned fish as well as breakfast and lunch for the village as penalty for the offence committed by the accused. All of this was accepted by the village. Thus this matter has been settled in accordance with Samoan custom not only between the family of the accused and the family of the victim but also between the family of the accused and the village. This is all part of what is now commonly referred to as ‘restorative justice’ even though for very many years it has been the customary way Samoans penalise offences committed within a village and settle any possible enmity or friction that may arise between the family of an accused and the family of a victim. (excerpt)
Considering Restorative Interventions in Sentencing: New Zealand's Sentencing Act of 2002 incorporated restorative justice language in its sentencing provisions. Judges are now required to consider the results of a restorative process in sentencing decisions. Judge Stan A. Thorburn of the District Court in Auckland applies these provisions to a case of aggravated robbery.
Daly, Kathleen and Proietti-Scifoni, Gitana. Defendants in the Circle: Nowra Circle Court, the presence and impact of Elders, and re-Offending.: The first Indigenous sentencing court was established in 1999 in South Australia, and as of mid-year 2008, about 40 adult courts are operating around Australia. A growing literature has mapped jurisdictional variation, analysed the courts’ processes and outcomes, and attempted to estimate differences in re-offending compared to conventional courts. This Report presents the first qualitative study of how Indigenous offenders view the court process and the role of Indigenous Elders, with reference to the Nowra Circle Court in New South Wales, established in 2002. (excerpt)
Fitzgerald, Jacqueline. Does Circle Sentencing Reduce Aboriginal Offending?: This paper examines whether Aboriginal offenders who participate in circle sentencing show a reduction in the frequency of their offending, take longer to reoffend, and/or reduce the seriousness of their offending. Taken as a whole, the evidence presented suggests that circle sentencing has no effect on the frequency, timing or seriousness of offending. The results suggest that such direct involvement is not enough, by itself, to produce a reduction in reoffending. It is recommended that the combining of circle sentencing with other programs that have been shown to alter the risk factors for further offending be considered. Circle sentencing is an alternative sentencing process for adult Aboriginal offenders in New South Wales (NSW). It takes the sentencing process out of the traditional court setting and allows the involvement of the offender's community. In a circle sentence, the offender, magistrate, community elders and, sometimes, the victim and support people for the offender and/or victim sit in a circle to discuss the circumstances and impact of the offense and determine a sentence tailored to the offender. The circle sentencing process in NSW was adapted from a program that originated in Canada in the 1990s. The aim of this study was to determine whether Aboriginal offenders who participated in circle sentencing in NSW (1) showed a reduction in the frequency of their offending, (2) took longer to reoffend, and/or (3) reduced the seriousness of their offending, relative to Aboriginal defendants who proceeded through a conventional court process.(abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov).
Justice Doogue. Palenapa v R.: [35] It was further submitted for the appellant that restorative justice might have occurred had the Court been invited to adjourn sentencing for that process. It was also submitted that reparation was not considered at sentencing. [36] For the appellant it was submitted that a final sentence of two years imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention is the appropriate response to the appellant’s appeal. This is in particular because of the personal and family circumstances of the appellant, the fact that her husband is in custody, her willingness to pay reparation to the victims and her willingness to undertake restorative processes in order to provide for the interests of the victim. (excerpt)
Kent, Melissa. Prosecutors and the Sentencing Process in the Australian Capital Territory.: This paper highlights the three different sentencing options in the A.C.T. ranging from the traditional common law approach, the diversionary sentencing approach of the Aboriginal Circle Court (the Ngambra Court) and the new Restorative Justice legislation. The prosecution take part in both traditional sentencing and Circle Court sentencing, but have very little contribution within the Restorative Justice model. It is hoped readers will get a general idea of the sentencing options available in the A.C.T. and the important role prosecutors can have within the sentencing process. (excerpt)
Livingston, Michael and Hayes, Hennessey and Palk, George and Livingston, Michael and Stewart, Anna and Hayes, Hennessey. Youth Justice Conferencing and Indigenous Over-Representation in the Queensland Juvenile Justice System: A Micro-Simulation Case Study.: Research suggests that rather than focusing on criminal justice responses, more progress in reducing Aboriginal overrepresentation might be made if the focus was shifted to the underlying causes of Aboriginal crime: substance abuse, family violence, poor school performance, and unemployment. Further development of initiatives to address the underlying causes of offending by indigenous young people, as well as use of effective criminal justice responses, such as youth justice conferencing, likely will be more effective in reducing the overrepresentation of young indigenous people in the juvenile justice system. The results of the simulations indicate that youth justice conferencing is unlikely to contribute significantly to the targets set by the Justice Agreement. While conferencing has the potential to reduce the number of young people reoffending overall, this impact may be more apparent for non-indigenous young offenders, resulting in an increase in the disparity in the ratio of indigenous to non-indigenous young offenders. While youth justice conferencing is only one of a range of criminal justice interventions identified in the Justice Agreement as strategies for reaching the identified goals, it is the only diversionary option that has been empirically shown to reduce rates of reoffending. However, there is a deep need for more rigorous evaluations of the impact of youth justice conferencing on reoffending; simulation modeling is only as good as the estimates that are used as parameters in the models. (Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov).
Lunabek, Vincent. Public Prosecutor v Sablan.: 2. The victim girl was seriously affected. It was very painful for her to give evidence against her father doing the trial. Since there is no specific confinement scheme in Vanuatu, I consider it is essential to protect the defendant, the victim daughter, the family and the community, to adjourn the matter to consider and explore a restorative justice process based on custom, village and traditional “welfare or social support” under Section 20(3) of the Penal Code Act [CAP 135] and Section 119 of the Criminal Procedure Code Act [CAP. 136]. (excerpt)
Restorative Justice Centre's submission to Ministry of Justice on victims' rights: The Restorative Justice Centre at AUT University in New Zealand has responded to a discussion draft titled "A Focus on Victims of Crime: A Review of Victims' Rights" on how the government might better address the needs of crime victims. Following are excerpts from RJC's response: 9. The central justice needs of victims are submitted to be accountability, vindication, empowerment, information, truth-telling and future safety. Only the first and last of these are addressed (to some degree) by the current legal process, and then only when the offender is convicted. Thus in crimes that go largely unreported, such as sexual offences, there can be no feeling of accountability in the absence of alternative processes, and victims remain unsafe. 10. The remaining four central justice needs are those which Dr Howard Zehr, known to and used by MoJ as a consultant in restorative justice, has said are “especially neglected”. They are next mentioned separately. However they overlap with needs identified by other writers.
Select committee urged to avoid courtroom 'Oprahfication': from the article on Voxy.co.nz: Rethinking Crime and Punishment agrees that victims should be able to provide information to the court about the effects of offending; and the harm they have suffered. However, it does not believe that the presentation of a victim impact statement in the Court, was the best way to achieve it.
Snowball, Lucy. Diversion of indigenous juvenile offenders: Conferencing and cautioning are used as diversionary alternatives in the juvenile justice system and there is evidence to suggest they reduce reoffending. As Indigenous young people are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system, an important question is whether they are as likely to be diverted as non-Indigenous young people. This study used modelled data to examine juveniles’ contact with the police and courts, and the differences in juvenile diversionary rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders in New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia in 2005. For all states, Indigenous young offenders were more likely than non-Indigenous offenders to be referred to court, non-Indigenous offenders were more likely to receive a police caution, and males and older offenders were more likely to be diverted. The number of prior contacts was similar for all states, with more contacts reducing the likelihood of diversion and with less likelihood of diversion for offenders committing offences against a person. As Indigenous young offenders are more likely to have multiple prior contacts with the system, including detention, further research is needed into the reasons for their high reoffending rates. (excerpt)
Submission of Victims' Rights: A response prepared by the Restorative Justice Centre at AUT University in New Zealand to the Ministry of Justice's discussion document, "A Focus on Victims of Crime: A Review of Victims' Rights."
Thorburn, Stan. The Arrival of Restorative Justice in the Courts: A Brief Outline of the New Zealand Experience: The paper is intended to provide a narrative about the emergence of Restorative Justice into the processes of the Courts in New Zealand.

Next 2 items » [1] 2

Sections

Court

Document Actions

Personal tools


Navigation Lecture Hall Introduction to Restorative Justice Restorative Justice around the World Africa Asia Europe Latin America Middle East North America and the Caribbean Pacific Indigenous Juvenile Justice Court Evaluation School Articles from RJ Online All Documents Educational Opportunities Restorative Justice Theory Making Amends Restorative Justice Course Syllabi Book Reviews Video Reviews Real People, Real Stories Practice Manuals Evaluation Research Evaluation Tools Role Plays Using Restorative Practices	Info Court With the ever growing implementation of restorative justice, court systems in the Pacific have begun looking at restorative practices as part of a sentence or as mitigating factors in sentencing. . In courtroom 7 -- The children's Koori Court at work. Findings from an Evaluation. This article reports some of the findings of an evaluation of the Children’s Koori Court (CKC)—the first legislated effort in Australia to involve the Indigenous community in the sentencing of young Aboriginal offenders as a strategy for reducing their overrepresentation in the juvenile justice system. A prominent feature of this court of summary jurisdiction is that the presiding magistrate, while remaining the sentencing authority, is assisted by Aboriginal Elders. This article focuses on the evaluation findings that were derived from observations of the CKC in action. They indicate that the operational objective of cultural responsiveness was realized. They also point to realization of the community-building goal—fostering Indigenous ownership of the administration of the law. Little slippage was found between the CKC’s design and operation, although some areas of improvement were identified. Nevertheless, the scope for the CKC by itself to significantly reduce overrepresentation is limited. (Author's abstract) . Indigenous Sentencing Courts. This brief focuses on Indigenous sentencing courts, which operate in all Australian states and territories except Tasmania. These courts have been established according to protocols and practices, and can be distinguished from more informal practices that occur in remote areas where judicial officers travel on circuit. The first court was established in Port Adelaide on 1 June 1999. Indigenous sentencing courts do not practise or adopt Indigenous customary laws. Rather, they use Australian criminal laws and procedures to sentence Indigenous offenders who have either pleaded guilty or been found guilty, but they allow Indigenous Elders and Respected Persons to participate in the process, thereby creating a more culturally appropriate forum for sentencing Indigenous offenders (Auty 2004). (excerpt) . Victoria's neighbourhood justice centre. Experience with community justice centres suggests that they can have a significant effect on the quality of local community life (Berman 1998). Indigenous communities, being particularly conscious of a community sense of justice, may find the approaches used in community justice centres particularly appropriate. In the context of a growing array of approaches to Indigenous justice (including Indigenous courts) in Australia, community justice centres would seem to have considerable potential for improving the life of Indigenous communities. This paper provides the global context for the establishment of the Victorian Neighbourhood Justice Centre (NJC) and details its rationale, operation, and results. (excerpt) A Survey of 10 Years of New Zealand Court Cases on Restorative Justice This paper by Judge Stan Thorburn offers a brief account of the development of restorative justice in the Courts of New Zealand since it has been practised over the past 10 years. In particular, it examines a selection of court decisions and identifies significant principles emerging from them. Finally, it compares those to legislation, in particular the Sentencing Act 2002. Becroft, Andrew. Restorative Justice in the Youth Court: A Square Peg in a Round Hole? New Zealand is known as a leader in the application of restorative justice to youth offending, with over 80% of juvenile offenses being handled through police diversion. The remaining 16-20% results in formal charges in the youth court. This article provides excerpts of a paper that examines the restorative potential of the New Zealand youth court. The full paper, written by Judge Andrew Becroft, Principal Youth Court Judge, New Zealand Youth Court, is attached. Briggs, Daniel and Auty, Kate. Koori Court Victoria – Magistrates Court (Koori Court) Act 2002. The introduction of Koori Courts in Victoria pursuant to the Magistrates Court (Koori Court) Act 2002 has not been without its detractors and like all change, is attended by controversies. Steps which attempt to ‘move the law along’ (as if she were an old bag lady), are often seen as a threat to the legitimacy of the legal system. Before we even commenced sitting at Shepparton by the Bayunga or Koriella river, known to non-Aboriginal people as the Goulburn, our regional Koori court was the subject of criticism with members of the legal profession commenting that Aboriginal people would not be able to find their way to the court, or that they would ‘go walkabout’ on the day of the hearing (Herald Sun 6/5/2002). This early criticism was met by much positive commentary (The Age October 2002). Nevertheless criticism continued, when a senior member of the Victorian bar, citing the establishing Act incorrectly, suggested that the Koori Court ‘tipped the scales’ and provided ‘luxury’ or ‘special’ courts and some ill-defined special regime of sentencing options (Galbally, Herald Sun 13/3/2003). He also contrasted the banning of Father Christmas from child-minding centres with the Koori Court initiative. The Victorian Attorney General, Rob Hulls criticised the ‘impaired logic’ which underpinned this commentary (Herald Sun 14/3/2003). It is timely to put the controversy and distractions to one side and start seriously considering what we do in the Koori Court in Victoria. (excerpt) Chief Justice of Samoa. Police v Pili. The accused’s family had also performed a ifoga (traditional formal apology) and it was accepted by the family of the deceased. The accused’s family had also presented a large pig and thirty boxes of tinned fish to the family of the deceased for the deceased’s funeral ‘lauava’. A presentation of two cattle beasts and thirty boxes of tinned fish was also made by the accused’s family to the village council of Saleapaga, the village where this incident occurred. Thus the incident that occurred has been settled between the family of the accused and the family of the deceased, and between the family of the accused and the village of Saleapaga. This is all part of what is now commonly referred to as ‘restorative justice’. (excerpt) Chief Justice of Samoa. Police v Tafiligia. In his plea in mitigation, the accused expressed remorsefulness for what he has done. He also expressed remorsefulness to the probation service. He is very worried and concerned about the outcome of this case. The family of the accused has also performed a traditional apology (ifoga) to the father of the victim and was accepted. This was confirmed to the Court by the father of the victim. The accused’s family has also presented one cattle beast, two large pigs, thirty boxes of tinned fish as well as breakfast and lunch for the village as penalty for the offence committed by the accused. All of this was accepted by the village. Thus this matter has been settled in accordance with Samoan custom not only between the family of the accused and the family of the victim but also between the family of the accused and the village. This is all part of what is now commonly referred to as ‘restorative justice’ even though for very many years it has been the customary way Samoans penalise offences committed within a village and settle any possible enmity or friction that may arise between the family of an accused and the family of a victim. (excerpt) Considering Restorative Interventions in Sentencing New Zealand's Sentencing Act of 2002 incorporated restorative justice language in its sentencing provisions. Judges are now required to consider the results of a restorative process in sentencing decisions. Judge Stan A. Thorburn of the District Court in Auckland applies these provisions to a case of aggravated robbery. Daly, Kathleen and Proietti-Scifoni, Gitana. Defendants in the Circle: Nowra Circle Court, the presence and impact of Elders, and re-Offending. The first Indigenous sentencing court was established in 1999 in South Australia, and as of mid-year 2008, about 40 adult courts are operating around Australia. A growing literature has mapped jurisdictional variation, analysed the courts’ processes and outcomes, and attempted to estimate differences in re-offending compared to conventional courts. This Report presents the first qualitative study of how Indigenous offenders view the court process and the role of Indigenous Elders, with reference to the Nowra Circle Court in New South Wales, established in 2002. (excerpt) Fitzgerald, Jacqueline. Does Circle Sentencing Reduce Aboriginal Offending? This paper examines whether Aboriginal offenders who participate in circle sentencing show a reduction in the frequency of their offending, take longer to reoffend, and/or reduce the seriousness of their offending. Taken as a whole, the evidence presented suggests that circle sentencing has no effect on the frequency, timing or seriousness of offending. The results suggest that such direct involvement is not enough, by itself, to produce a reduction in reoffending. It is recommended that the combining of circle sentencing with other programs that have been shown to alter the risk factors for further offending be considered. Circle sentencing is an alternative sentencing process for adult Aboriginal offenders in New South Wales (NSW). It takes the sentencing process out of the traditional court setting and allows the involvement of the offender's community. In a circle sentence, the offender, magistrate, community elders and, sometimes, the victim and support people for the offender and/or victim sit in a circle to discuss the circumstances and impact of the offense and determine a sentence tailored to the offender. The circle sentencing process in NSW was adapted from a program that originated in Canada in the 1990s. The aim of this study was to determine whether Aboriginal offenders who participated in circle sentencing in NSW (1) showed a reduction in the frequency of their offending, (2) took longer to reoffend, and/or (3) reduced the seriousness of their offending, relative to Aboriginal defendants who proceeded through a conventional court process.(abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov). Justice Doogue. Palenapa v R. [35] It was further submitted for the appellant that restorative justice might have occurred had the Court been invited to adjourn sentencing for that process. It was also submitted that reparation was not considered at sentencing. [36] For the appellant it was submitted that a final sentence of two years imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention is the appropriate response to the appellant’s appeal. This is in particular because of the personal and family circumstances of the appellant, the fact that her husband is in custody, her willingness to pay reparation to the victims and her willingness to undertake restorative processes in order to provide for the interests of the victim. (excerpt) Kent, Melissa. Prosecutors and the Sentencing Process in the Australian Capital Territory. This paper highlights the three different sentencing options in the A.C.T. ranging from the traditional common law approach, the diversionary sentencing approach of the Aboriginal Circle Court (the Ngambra Court) and the new Restorative Justice legislation. The prosecution take part in both traditional sentencing and Circle Court sentencing, but have very little contribution within the Restorative Justice model. It is hoped readers will get a general idea of the sentencing options available in the A.C.T. and the important role prosecutors can have within the sentencing process. (excerpt) Livingston, Michael and Hayes, Hennessey and Palk, George and Livingston, Michael and Stewart, Anna and Hayes, Hennessey. Youth Justice Conferencing and Indigenous Over-Representation in the Queensland Juvenile Justice System: A Micro-Simulation Case Study. Research suggests that rather than focusing on criminal justice responses, more progress in reducing Aboriginal overrepresentation might be made if the focus was shifted to the underlying causes of Aboriginal crime: substance abuse, family violence, poor school performance, and unemployment. Further development of initiatives to address the underlying causes of offending by indigenous young people, as well as use of effective criminal justice responses, such as youth justice conferencing, likely will be more effective in reducing the overrepresentation of young indigenous people in the juvenile justice system. The results of the simulations indicate that youth justice conferencing is unlikely to contribute significantly to the targets set by the Justice Agreement. While conferencing has the potential to reduce the number of young people reoffending overall, this impact may be more apparent for non-indigenous young offenders, resulting in an increase in the disparity in the ratio of indigenous to non-indigenous young offenders. While youth justice conferencing is only one of a range of criminal justice interventions identified in the Justice Agreement as strategies for reaching the identified goals, it is the only diversionary option that has been empirically shown to reduce rates of reoffending. However, there is a deep need for more rigorous evaluations of the impact of youth justice conferencing on reoffending; simulation modeling is only as good as the estimates that are used as parameters in the models. (Abstract courtesy of the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, www.ncjrs.gov). Lunabek, Vincent. Public Prosecutor v Sablan. 2. The victim girl was seriously affected. It was very painful for her to give evidence against her father doing the trial. Since there is no specific confinement scheme in Vanuatu, I consider it is essential to protect the defendant, the victim daughter, the family and the community, to adjourn the matter to consider and explore a restorative justice process based on custom, village and traditional “welfare or social support” under Section 20(3) of the Penal Code Act [CAP 135] and Section 119 of the Criminal Procedure Code Act [CAP. 136]. (excerpt) Restorative Justice Centre's submission to Ministry of Justice on victims' rights The Restorative Justice Centre at AUT University in New Zealand has responded to a discussion draft titled "A Focus on Victims of Crime: A Review of Victims' Rights" on how the government might better address the needs of crime victims. Following are excerpts from RJC's response: 9. The central justice needs of victims are submitted to be accountability, vindication, empowerment, information, truth-telling and future safety. Only the first and last of these are addressed (to some degree) by the current legal process, and then only when the offender is convicted. Thus in crimes that go largely unreported, such as sexual offences, there can be no feeling of accountability in the absence of alternative processes, and victims remain unsafe. 10. The remaining four central justice needs are those which Dr Howard Zehr, known to and used by MoJ as a consultant in restorative justice, has said are “especially neglected”. They are next mentioned separately. However they overlap with needs identified by other writers. Select committee urged to avoid courtroom 'Oprahfication' from the article on Voxy.co.nz: Rethinking Crime and Punishment agrees that victims should be able to provide information to the court about the effects of offending; and the harm they have suffered. However, it does not believe that the presentation of a victim impact statement in the Court, was the best way to achieve it. Snowball, Lucy. Diversion of indigenous juvenile offenders Conferencing and cautioning are used as diversionary alternatives in the juvenile justice system and there is evidence to suggest they reduce reoffending. As Indigenous young people are overrepresented in the juvenile justice system, an important question is whether they are as likely to be diverted as non-Indigenous young people. This study used modelled data to examine juveniles’ contact with the police and courts, and the differences in juvenile diversionary rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders in New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia in 2005. For all states, Indigenous young offenders were more likely than non-Indigenous offenders to be referred to court, non-Indigenous offenders were more likely to receive a police caution, and males and older offenders were more likely to be diverted. The number of prior contacts was similar for all states, with more contacts reducing the likelihood of diversion and with less likelihood of diversion for offenders committing offences against a person. As Indigenous young offenders are more likely to have multiple prior contacts with the system, including detention, further research is needed into the reasons for their high reoffending rates. (excerpt) Submission of Victims' Rights A response prepared by the Restorative Justice Centre at AUT University in New Zealand to the Ministry of Justice's discussion document, "A Focus on Victims of Crime: A Review of Victims' Rights." Thorburn, Stan. The Arrival of Restorative Justice in the Courts: A Brief Outline of the New Zealand Experience The paper is intended to provide a narrative about the emergence of Restorative Justice into the processes of the Courts in New Zealand. Next 2 items » [1] 2 Document Actions Send this Print this	Africa Asia Europe Latin America Middle East North America and Caribbean Pacific Search 10530 publications on restorative justice Recent RJOB Comments conference May 07, 2012 conference May 07, 2012 Agreement to participate May 04, 2012 More… Slide Show: What is Restorative Justice Click to view a slideshow discussing the definition of restorative justice. May 25, 2012 Project Myriam celebrates 10 years May 24, 2012 InnerChange Freedom Initiative Celebrating 15 years Apr 25, 2012 Sycamore Tree Programme from Prison Fellowship England and Wales Apr 13, 2012 PF Swaziland volunteer brings victims and offenders together Apr 13, 2012 PF Nicaragua providing legal services for prisoners