NCJ Number
172636
Date Published
1996
Length
12 pages
Annotation
Whether restorative justice will in the future occupy more than its currently marginal role will depend on the ability of its proponents to market it effectively to policymakers with the authority to risk innovation in the administration of justice; this paper outlines the likely concerns to which a marketing strategy of this type must be responsive, ranging from the clarification of goals and principles to the specification of processes and expected outcomes.
Abstract
The author raises specific questions that restorative justice advocates may anticipate in each of these areas. The author concludes that the chances are remote of any wholesale shift from a criminal justice system that draws much of its strength from the helplessness and dependency it encourages among victims, offenders, and the general public. Under restorative justice, the change would be to a criminal justice system that seeks to empower them through expanded roles, responsibilities, and levels of participation. Conversely, haphazard changes in the name of restorative justice -- without a consistent, information- driven policy framework -- are at risk of being co-opted to perpetuate existing philosophies and goals. Witness, for example, the popularity of community service sentencing for predominantly retributive purposes, as well as the use of victim impact statements to produce harsher sentences for offenders. McElrea has identified two ingredients that are important to the future of restorative justice: political will and financial resources; both are in short supply at the moment. Neither is likely to be forthcoming unless policymakers are systematically engaged in discussing the nature of restorative justice and how it improves upon the current retributive justice system. 16 references