International Journal on Criminology Volume 1, Number 1, Fall 2013 | Page 22

Restorative Justice
When legal proceedings are initiated, which obviously occurs in the case of serious
crime (except when there are serious grounds for not doing so, such as the death of the
offender or mental incapacitation), the rights of individuals must be consistent with the
fundamental principles guaranteed by human rights and criminal procedure. Equality of
arms is essential if the work of justice is to lead to a manifestation of truth, the
punishment of the offender, the reparation of the victim, and the reestablishment of social
peace. Today, these goals are rarely achieved at once. The reductionist strategy
developed more or less consciously by our criminal justice system may nevertheless be
significantly rectified by introducing measures of restorative justice in a genuinely
complementary manner.
3. Implementation of restorative justice processes
Processes of restorative justice are diverse in origin and nature, but all have in
common the desire to promote an encounter between offender and victim, and sometimes
even their relatives. They are designed to play a part in all stages of the criminal
procedure, usually "face to face": as an alternative to prosecution (in the case of lesser
offenses that would benefit from being decriminalized), during the investigation and the
trial, and post-sentencing, or even at the end of the sentence. The most serious offenses
should not be excluded a priori; quite the opposite, provided that the conditions outlined
above in the definition are met.
Victim–offender mediation 22 gives the interested parties the opportunity for a
voluntary meeting to discuss the characteristics, consequences, and repercussions of the
criminal conflict which opposes them. This restorative justice measure, also known as the
Kitchener experiment, first emerged in Ontario, Canada in the early 1970s. Victim
Offender Reconciliation Programs (VORP) soon became widespread in the United States,
and then throughout Europe under the name Victim Offender mediation (VOM). Criminal
mediation (reserved for adults) and criminal restitution involving minors are directly
derived from these programs (see 4 January 1993, art. 41-1 of the Criminal Code and 12-
1 Ord. 1945).
Family group conferences 23 , inspired by the customs of the “Whanau” (extended
family) of New Zealand’s native Maori, whose extended family ties are very strong, are
intended to deal with offenses committed by minors. Reintroduced in the 1980s, in 1989
they were incorporated into New Zealand's criminal legislation to be proposed
systematically before initiation of any criminal proceedings against minors. Today,
Family Group Conferences (FGCs) are implemented in Australia, the United States,
Canada, the United Kingdom, and Belgium. Restorative conferences generally pursue the
same objectives as victim/offender mediation, but see the offender, the victim, and the
mediator/facilitator joined by a diverse group of participants. Any person or institution
with an interest in the conflict being resolved and/or who may provide some form of
support to the main stakeholders is welcome to be involved. The conference provides an
opportunity to consider the means of support that the family or social environment is able
to give the interested parties to help them recover their place in the community.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
22 M.S. Umbreit et al., The Handbook of Victim Offender Mediation: An Essential Guide to
Practice and Research (Jossey-Bass Inc., 2001).
23 A. MacRae, H. Zehr, The Little Book of Family Group Conferences. New Zealand Style: A
Hopeful Approach when Youth Cause Harm (Good Books Pub., 2004); B. Sayous, Les
conférences du groupe familial, in La Justice restaurative. Une utopie qui marche?, eds R. Cario
and P. Mbanzoulou, L’Harmattan, Coll. Controverses, 2011, 33-48.
21