The Guardian
Select committee says legal system in England and Wales should work towards ensuring right of restorative justice
Prisoners taking part in a scheme to promote restorative justice. Photograph: Richard Saker for the Observer
Victims of crime in England and Wales should be given the right to restorative justice – where they can confront the criminal who harmed them – once the criminal justice system develops sufficient capacity, a parliamentary committee is to recommend.
But the report by the justice select committee warns that availability of the service is presently subject to a postcode lottery and cautions that it may not be appropriate for certain offences – such as sexual assaults, domestic violence and hate crimes.
Expanding the role of restorative justice should feature in the government’s delayed victims’ law and involve public consultation on the means of enforcing entitlement, the cross-party report proposes. It suggests a “commencement order” should be brought into effect by a minister “only once he or she has demonstrated to parliament that the system has sufficient capacity” to provide restorative justice services to all victims.
“While capacity issues mean that it is still too soon to introduce a legislative right to restorative justice for victims, we urge the government to work towards this goal,” Bob Neill, the Conservative chair of the committee, said. “We heard extensive evidence of the tangible benefits to victims and the role of restorative justice in reducing reoffending, so it clearly benefits wider society as well.”
Neill added: “The priority must be to ensure that victims of crime are properly informed. The Ministry of Justice should focus its resources on ensuring restorative justice is well understood by bodies within the criminal justice system who can then convey this information to victims. A rigorous system should be introduced to improve compliance with the police’s requirement to inform victims – perhaps something as straightforward as a box at the end of the victim impact statement form.”
Restorative justice usually involves bringing together a victim and the offender in a face-to-face meeting or via video-conferencing. In some cases, trained facilitators pass messages back and forth between them and there is no direct contact. The aim is to make offenders understand the impact of their actions and to help victims repair the emotional damage they have endured. Both victim and perpetrator must be willing participants.
Restorative justice is chiefly funded through local police and crime commissioners. In 2013, the coalition government made £29m available over three years but the restorative justice element was not ringfenced. The justice select committee does not support ringfencing finance in future because “it is difficult to predict with certainty how much should be allocated to it”.
Public awareness of restorative justice remains relatively low, at 28%. The same poll, however, found that 80% of people questioned thought that victims should have the right to meet their offender.
Although restorative justice should, in principle, be available in all cases, the report says, there should be more training for facilitators who are working with sex, domestic violence and hate crimes.
The committee notes that “the then home secretary, Rt Hon Theresa May MP, recently criticised the use of restorative justice by police in cases of domestic violence, saying that it does not follow ‘common sense’ to ‘sit vulnerable victims’ in the same room as the perpetrator”.
It should never be used in what is known as level one restorative justice, the MPs say, where police officers attend a domestic violence incident and attempt to arrange a discussion between the victim and assailant.
“It is a matter of great concern to us that level one restorative justice is being used by police forces in cases of domestic abuse,” the report notes. “This risks bringing restorative justice into disrepute. It is crucial that frontline police officers are fully informed of the risks for vulnerable victims in such cases.”
Responding to the report, Jon Collins, chief executive of the Restorative Justice Council, said: “Restorative justice helps victims recover from crime and move on and it should be available to every victim of crime. Embedding a right to restorative justice in legislation would help to achieve this. Urgent steps must also be taken by police and crime commissioners to make sure that restorative justice services are in place in every area in order to make this entitlement a reality.
“While some types of crime, and particularly domestic abuse, require robust risk management, wherever possible victims themselves should be able to decide whether restorative justice can help them to move on. Restorative justice works – it cuts crime while helping victims to move on.”
In a separate statement Polly Neate, chief executive of Women’s Aid, and Collins said: “Women’s Aid and the Restorative Justice Council are clear that restorative justice can, in certain circumstances, be useful in domestic abuse cases – but only if the survivor’s safety remains paramount.
“The survivor must feel in control of the process, and it must have no impact on the perpetrator’s criminal sanctions. Restorative justice being used must never be taken as an opportunity to minimise the perpetrator’s crimes or be used as an alternative to a more serious criminal justice sanction.
“Specialist training on domestic abuse – and especially coercive control – must be undertaken by all restorative justice practitioners. Women’s Aid and the Restorative Justice Council can deliver this training. It is essential that this is done, in order for restorative justice to be used safely and effectively in domestic abuse cases.”
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “We welcome the committee’s report and will consider the recommendations carefully. It is vital that victims see swift and certain justice delivered to offenders. Under the Victims’ Code, which was introduced last year, all victims can now receive information on how they can take part in restorative justice.
“In addition we have protected the victims’ budget and given police and crime commissioners greater flexibility over the services offered to victims in their areas.”
A victim’s experience
Emma Riggs, 33, who has waived her right to anonymity, was repeatedly raped by a former partner. She wanted to meet him after he was released from prison so that he would understand the harm he had inflicted.
Their meeting took place in his probation office where two other people sat in on the confrontation. It lasted two hours. Steve (not his real name) had been controlling during their relationship.
“He had stalked me [after we broke up],” Riggs explained. “The sexual assault, I felt, took a lot of the power I had away from me. I needed to meet him face to face to get that power back.
“I felt in control throughout the restorative justice process. It was a chance for me to put my side of the story which he had never heard.
“There was a facilitator, who was also my victim’s services officer. She prompted me if there were questions I had forgotten to ask. Another woman sat at the back of the room, out of line of sight, making sure everything was safe.
“We had a lot to talk about. I explained to him the effect he had had on me, my family and friends. He admitted that it was a ‘million times worse’ than he had ever thought. He said he had prepared something to say but realised he wouldn’t because he understood the impact [the rapes] had had on me.
“He did apologise. I needed to have that meeting, for me. I didn’t realise the burden I was carrying until it was lifted, until I said out loud how much it had hurt. I felt 10ft tall. I felt a lot lighter in every aspect.
“I could always talk to other people about it but they had not been there. He was the person I needed to tell what he had done. It helped me. Sexual crimes are so much about the control of the perpetrator. That meeting allowed me to redress the power balance.”
