It is important to understand that restorative justice may not be beneficial from a victim’s perspective as it is a complexed issue. Not every individual that has been victimised is the same, there are various types of victims and offenders. They differ from race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, levels of education, sexual orientation, maturity along with others. These different factors between individual victim(s) and individual offender(s) are rendered problematic concerning the interaction between the individuals, which is what adds to the complexity of the issue. It is critical to understand that restorative justice programs are not all correct or convenient in particular situations for some victims and offenders. This is why victims and the offender’s needs must to be carefully assessed and to undergo analysis by professions. Enabling individuals to familiarise themselves with the process and objectives.
An additional argument as to how there is no transparent reason for how effective the restorative justice processes is for victim mending is the complications in defining what a prosperous result is for a victim. According to (Better Outcomes through Victim-Offender Conferencing, 2017) within a recent report, “, it was found that offenders and victims entered the restorative justice process with a variety of expectations and needs, which suggested that there can be no one measure of perceived ‘success’, as far as participants are concerned.” This analysis covered various aspects involving the depths of how a victim’s questions were answered, how their needs were meet, whether the offender was able to take responsibility, if there was a sense of closure and more. But overall both the victim and their offenders’ views on this were mostly positive. For instance, it is said that over half of the victims that do face to face conferencing with their offender was able to get a sense of closure on the other hand others had said it had given them closure to a certain extent which all depends on the victim and the circumstance of the crime. However, this evaluation highlighted that 85% of victims who took part in the restorative justice process said they were “satisfied” with the experience. There are victims that initially could be satisfied with the conference between them and their offender but later on could reflect and change their opinions and their views on how they felt. It is possible for victims to have high expectations of the process in the beginning and if these needs are not met, they can never possibly be satisfied with the outcome. This proves that there is no set outcome when understanding how prosperous the restorative justice process can be for a victim of crime.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
The restorative justice process may not be effective to victims due to the level of violence done to them. Victims who are physically injured report that the crime had a longer impact on their lives compared to different types victims (Shapland, Willmore & Duff, 1985). It is important to understand that it is about the crime and how heinous the act is rather than the victim as different crimes and offences effects victims differently. Violence in every form is a matter of concern. There are types of violence that is done that disrupts the community’s ability to work well and live among one another as a society. Violence essentially takes away our humanity and value as human beings which is a course of great concern.
In some cases, there are particular offences that restrict the restorative justice process from moving forward, the crime which has affected the victim could be so extreme that the victim may not want to sit and seek rectification with the offender. Examples of these types of crimes are sex offences, domestic violence, and more. Another main example is hate crime, this is when a crime where the offender’s prejudice against any identifiable group of individuals is a factor when determining who is victimised. “In the United Kingdom, the 2000 British Crime Survey estimated that there were 280.000 racially motivated incidents in England and Wales.” (Gönczöl, 2010). It has been argued that restorative justice isn’t the most effective alternative for serious offences such as hate crimes, this is because some programs such as victim-offender mediation would expose victims to further trauma and stress. The serenity of offenders is also questioned because it would be difficult to come to terms with an offender who has had negative attitudes towards other individuals consistently would agree to an honest meeting. Racist offenders may be difficult to rehabilitate, overall it causes victims to be exposed to more possible offences if in contact with the offenders.
Stuck on your essay?
