According to Zehr (2015), Restorative Justice is a criminal justice practice and is a problem solving approach that is based on the following three concepts:
In the event that a crime takes place, the main point of concern is the relationship and the people to whom the harm has been done.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Liabilities and obligations are created when harm is done.
The steps after a crime has been committed involve the community, the victims as well as the perpetrators in a bid to rectify the situation.
Notably, restorative justice movement is advancing into different facets from the criminal justice system. In retrospect, new terms have been established. The use of principles, practices and values of Restorative Justice by practitioners is referred to as restorative practices. A wide range of Restorative Justice programs are known to take place in different fields such as faith groups, organizations, educational institutions, communities, families, workplaces as well in the justice system. In the justice system, restorative practices can take place in correctional, juvenile or in policing of the system.
The following values are featured in Restorative Justice programs:
Encounter : In this situation, a chance is created for offenders, their families and the communities who wish to meet to discuss the crime and the effects it has had on them
Amends : In this situation, the offenders are expected to take steps to remedy the situation that they have created
Reintegration : In this situation, victims and perpetrators are helped to achieve wholeness and be responsible members of the society
Inclusion : In this situation, the different groups that were involved in a criminal situation are included to resolve.
According to Zehr (2015), in order to achieve Restorative Justice, the following models are used:
Family Group Conferencing commonly referred to as FGC
Restorative Cautioning by the police
Conferences held before and after sentencing as well as before the release of an offender, if they were imprisoned
Mediation between the victim and the perpetrator
Classroom conferencing, engaging in restorative dialogue as well as formal conferences.
Family Group Decision Making.
Literature Review
Strain Theory
In order to determine the effectiveness of Restorative Justice, it is important to discuss the following criminological theories; Strain theory and social control theory.
According to the claims of Agnew (2015), strain theory claims that deviant behavior is as an inevitable result of the society not providing sufficient ways for people to achieve culturally valued goals. For instance, in the society, cultural value is placed on the rich and the wealthy. However, the same society is unable to make sure that its entire people achieve that position. As a result, the population unable to meet these standards may turn to crime to achieve this status.
In the studies of Downes, Rock & McLaughlin (2015), Robert K Merton an American sociologist is responsible for coming up with the strain theory. The foundation of strain theory is in the functionalist perspective on defiance. Additionally, it is related to Emile Durkheim theory of anomie. According to Merton’s strain theory, the two aspects that encompass a society is social structure as well as culture. The concept of culture is where the identities, goals, beliefs and structure are emanated from. Identities, goals, beliefs and structures are derived from the social structure of society that is already in existence. The sole purpose is to allow for people to achieve their life goals as well as ambitions. Notably, the ambitions that are made popular in a people’s culture is not consistent with resources in the social structure. It is in this situation that a strain occurs where Merton claims that deviant behavior is likely to follow. Using inductive reasoning, Merton was able to develop this theory deriving data from crime statistics which he studied by class.
According to Merton, individuals who came from a lower social class were prone to committing crimes that involve stealing and thievery. In accordance with the strain theory as explained by Merton, in a situation where individuals are unable to achieve the “legitimate goal” of thriving economically through ways that the society term as “legitimate means” which is hard work, they may involve themselves in illegitimate means of achieving that particular goal. The cultural value placed by society on the success of a person economically is huge and some individuals who might be unable to attain it might try to do so even through illegitimate means. According to Merton, it is for this reason that people from a low social and economic class would move to thievery.
Ways of responding to strain
In view of Agnew (2015), deviant response to strain was one among five other responses according to Merton as noted in the society. Merton referred to the deviant response as “innovation”. According to him, it is using illegitimate or unconventional ways to achieve the cultural valued goal of economic success. Besides deviance, the following are other responses:
Conformity: This response is applicable to individuals who accept and choose to follow the legitimate means of attaining the culturally valued goals.
Ritualism: This response defines individuals who choose to attain the culturally valued goals through legitimate means. They do so by attaining small attainable goals.
Retreatism: This response describes individuals who reject and retreat from the society because they are not in acceptance of the culturally valued goals and the legitimate means of achieving them. These individuals choose to avoid the situation of participating.
Rebellion: This response is applicable to individuals who disassociate themselves from the culturally valued goals and legitimate means of achieving them and choose to replace them other goals and ways of attaining them.
Social Control Theory
Unlike other criminological theories that seek to explain why people commit an offence, social control attempts to justify why individuals obey the rules. Social control theory attempts to explain why a behavior would conform to the norm behavior of the society. According to Black (2014), a few others control theories place an emphasis on the process of childhood development where there is development of internal constraints. However unlike these other control theories, social control theories concentrates on external environment and the manners in which they stay effective. Insufficient constraints result to crime and deviance.
When it comes to social control theory, the basis of human nature is considered. This results to free will being conceived. In accordance, the perpetrators have the freedom to choose and should as well meet their responsibilities. In this light therefore, the concept of social control theory is considered to be in line with the classical school of criminology than with perceptions that are deemed determinist or positivist.
According to Black (2014), in social control theory the belief in social norms is shared among all the people in that particular society. It is purported that even the offenders share in the belief that the social norms should not be violated. According to this theory, deviance and crime are behaviors that society is yet to reduce. In order to explain social control theory, it is important to mention conformity. Conformity is the situation where individuals in the society are domesticated to obey rules. Social control theory explains on ways which the lack of intimate relationships with other conventional individuals can alienate individuals from socially based constraints creating room for delinquency.
Origins of the Theory
In view of Cornish & Clarke (2014,) the initial traces of social control theory can be identified in the theories of those from classical school of criminology and the enlightenment speakers. Thomas Hobbes was a philosopher from England. In the seventeenth century he wrote about the in-born tendency for a person to be self-indulgent and evil. To mitigate these tendencies, external force is required as well as the government’s role. Considerably, this theory is said to be related to Emile Durkheim. He was a prolific writer from France that most consider the founder of structural functionalism and sociology. Additionally, Durkheim explained about a breakdown of culturally accepted norms. This condition is referred to as anomie. He also talked about deviance and crime as aspects mandatory in every society. In his view, crime plays the role of identifying the boundaries of behavior in a given society. These behaviors are collectively agreed upon by a community and are strengthened by negative reaction by the community on the same.
“ The more weakened the groups to which [the individual] belongs, the less he depends on them, the more he consequently depends only on himself and recognizes no other rules of conduct…” (Black, 2014). Individuals in a particular community will socialize themselves in order to avoid alienation associated with such behavior. This process is referred to as social order. Social order allows for boundaries and social change. Durkheim views social control in the following manner:
Discussion
Effectiveness of restorative justice in regards to social control theory
As previously stated, social control theory explains on ways which the lack of intimate relationships with other conventional individuals can alienate individuals from socially based constraints creating room for delinquency. Restorative justice views an offender’s wrongdoing as perpetration against an individual or community and not the state. For the most part, crime is a violation against human relationships; and it is for this reason that the social control theory applies in relations to restorative justice practices (Agnew, 2011) . This practice requires that the offender takes responsibility for their offence and to socialize appropriately with the victim and the community as stipulated by the justice system. The aim of the socialization is to build the offender’s self control in social settings so as to prevent future criminal acts that arise as a result of antisocial behaviors. Restorative justice is fairly contemporary and debates as to whether it should be considered as an alternative justice practice to other more common practices. While is being integrated into the system, the practice need not replace other practices entirely, but can be used hand in hand in the implementation of other criminal justice practices.
The social control theory is of the opinion that; the relationships that people have with other, their levels of commitments, beliefs and values, play a major role in deterring them from breaking the law. Restorative justice works hand in hand with this theory in the sense that, through the practice, individual community members (both offenders and non-offenders) view themselves as community stakeholders and thus they willingly refrain from engaging in deviant and criminal acts. As mentioned in the literature review, it is important to mention the previously used term, conformity, while discussing the social control theory. Just like conformity, restorative justice is used to domesticate the offender to obey societal rules. This is done in place of alienating offenders from having intimate relationships with other individuals and instead the offender is given the chance to take responsibility in their victim’s presence and those of some crucial and affected members of the community as well. I believe that this practice is, and can be, especially effective in regards to juveniles.
Seeing as social control theory is mostly about the relationships that an individual has with other individuals and their community, restorative justice is a practice that goes hand in hand with this theory since it seeks to make things right. It seeks to mend relationships that have been severed by the acts of the offender. It also seeks to take care of the needs of what can be termed to be the main cause of the offense (Williams & McShane, 2010) . Restorative justice also goes hand in hand with rehabilitation in this regards. It can be particularly helpful for restorative justice to be carried out when an offender has completed a sentence and is about to be integrated back into society. Once the safety of ;the immediate victim/s, community and the offender, are made certain, then this practice transitions into an opportunity for the offender to be taught on ways of being an appropriate and acceptable member of the community.
Effectiveness of restorative justice in regards to strain theory
Viewing the justice system through the lens of the strain theory explains the need for restorative justice. The fact that an individual can be pushed to criminal activity as a result of negative pressure from the society is not a slight matter. As restorative justice is partly concerned with the causes of the offense, it is linked to the strain theory; a sub category of the social structure theory. Sometimes individuals walk around feeling like failures as a result of self perceived unachieved goals as per the standards that an individual believes have been set by the society (Shirley, 2011). For instance; if an individual strongly believes that the society demands that one gets a white-collar job right after graduating, this individual might end up extremely frustrated of years after graduating, they cannot land this white collar job. Such an individual may resort to illegal means of acquiring illegitimate wealth.
According to Timms (2014), strain theory, social structure and culture are the basis of a society. Culture is all about identities, goals, beliefs and structure. These find their roots in a society’s socials structure. Restorative justice borrows a page from this theory. When an individual commits a crime as a result of anger and frustrations brought about by the negative pressure of strain, then their cultural influences should be considered when justice is meted out. Restorative justice seeks to not only reconnect the offender with the victim and community but also teach the offender how to find their footing again if they prove to be teachable after the initial stage of restoration. This enables the offender to understand that the ambitions that have been popularized by that person’s culture may not be consistent with the resources available in that particular social structure. This also reduces the chances of individuals suffering from strain as a result of this natural imbalance.
Restorative justice is suitable in dealing with crimes that are perceived to emanate from the strain theory (Newburn, 2013). This is because, regardless of the punishment decided upon, the offender should have the opportunity to try again with new knowledge, but only if their aim is to make amends and they are remorseful. The practice should therefore be used to respond to the offense from the onset; this should happen by ensuring that the offender is voluntarily cooperative and there is no coercion. The strain theory is keen to portray that the offender would not have committed the offence if they were not under duress. These offenders are thus considerable ‘teachable’ since they can also be perceived to be over achievers who are highly disturbed by the thought of failure and would go to extreme lengths to avoid failure in the eyes of the society. An issue of low self esteem also comes into play.
Conclusion
Restorative justice is not oblivious to the fact that crime exists and that it is wrong. It is very much aware of this fact and that crime should not take place. Restorative justice is also observant of the fact that in the event that crime takes place, there are some dangers involved. The dangerous consequence is the fact that the immediate victim/s, community and even the offender come out of the situation feeling more destroyed, ashamed, alienated, unsafe and unwanted by their society (Newburn, 2013). But the repercussions do not just involve dangers but come with opportunities as well. This means that, through restorative justice, injustices are identified by all concerned parties, grace and restitution are restored and going forward, things are much clearer and the stakeholders are safer, empowered, cooperative and mutually respectful.
This practice is also aware of the fact that it is not all offenders who will cooperate for the efficiency of the practice. It is therefore necessary for decision making to be done by separate authorities on behalf of the uncooperative offender; bearing in mind that the authorities should make decisions that are deemed to be; respectful for the victim, community and offender, restorative and reasonable. Based on the social control and strain theories as discussed, restorative justice is effective when used appropriately and can be used together with other practices to ensure that criminal justice is uplifted.
References
Agnew, R. (2011). Toward a unified criminology. New York, N.Y.: New York University Press.
Agnew, R. (2015). Strain theories. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Black, D. (Ed.). (2014). Toward a general theory of social control: Fundamentals (Vol. 1). Academic Press.
Cornish, D. B., & Clarke, R. V. (Eds.). (2014). The reasoning criminal: Rational choice perspectives on offending. Transaction Publishers.
Downes, D., Rock, P., & McLaughlin, E. (2016). Understanding deviance: a guide to the sociology of crime and rule-breaking. Oxford University Press.
Newburn, T. (2013). Criminology. London: Routledge.
Shirley, K. (2011). Living with violence .
Timms, N. (2014). A Sociological Approach to Social Problems (RLE Social Theory) . Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.
Williams, F., & McShane, M. (2010). Criminological theory. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Zehr, H. (2015). The little book of restorative justice: revised and updated. Skyhorse Publishing, Inc.
