Restorative justice - Scheme a deterrent for youth

WITH the country’s prisons jammed with criminals, the proposal for a restorative justice programme as an alternative to putting people behind bars is sure to attract broad political and public support.

Obviously, with an election looming, it is opportune for politicians to resume the battle against criminality. There can be no doubt that measure aimed at combating Ireland’s upsurge of violent crime will figure high on the agenda of every right thinking person.

This lends considerable weight to yesterday’s report from the cross-party Oireachtas Justice Committee calling for the introduction of restorative justice on lines which have worked abroad.

Essentially, the concept is that instead of being incarcerated behind bars, the perpetrators of less serious crimes would undergo alternative remedies. Targeted mainly at first time offenders, the scheme would require them, for instance, to make to amends to victims of crime or attend therapy courses aimed at getting offenders to examine their own behaviour.

Legislation for such a scheme would be modelled on a system currently being tested among young people in the district courts of Tallaght in Dublin and Nenagh in north Tipperary. Both are overseen and funded by the Probation and Welfare Service.

This new proposal follows last week’s introduction of ASBOS — anti-social behaviour orders — aimed at bringing nuisance offenders into line. Given their controversial nature, it is essential to use ASBOS with extreme caution and for the process to be monitored by an independent body.

According to Fine Gael justice spokesman Jim O’Keeffe, principle author of the Oireachtas committee report, there is a “particular role” for restorative justice programmes in Ireland. Significantly, various schemes based on this approach are already operating under the childcare legislation for young offenders and have been credited with positive results.

A considerable level of success has been achieved by the Nenagh experiment aimed at lowering re-offending levels among those taking part in the programme.

Arguably, a similar system for adults could reduce the rate of recidivism among prison inmates who, having acquired nefarious new skills in jail, invariably revert to their old ways when discharged.

Mr O’Keeffe makes the point that the idea of extending an adult oriented programme on a State-wide basis would only work if it gets full co-operation from the courts service and also receives the backing of judges.

This could be a potentially sensitive subject since tensions have arisen between the judiciary and politicians following Justice Minister McDowell’s outspoken criticism of the perceived leniency of sentencing for serious drug offences.

His remarks drew a volley from Mr Justice Judge Adrian Hardiman, reminding the Government of the separation of powers, a fundamental principal of the Constitution designed to protect the courts against political interference.

What is patently clear is that traditional approaches to criminal justice generally have a limited impact on either reducing crime rates, rehabilitating offenders, or redressing the harm to victims.

Thus the report argues strongly that restorative justice should be a standard part of the Irish criminal justice system. The concept of restorative justice is not aimed at the vicious thugs who terrorise communities and are killing one another in savage drug wars. But it holds out a real prospect of reducing criminality by deterring young people from becoming enmeshed in crime and ending up behind prison bars.