National National Commission on Commission on

Restorative Restorative JusticeJusticePresentation to ACJRD on Presentation to ACJRD on

Commission ReportCommission Report

April 2010April 2010

Terms of ReferenceTerms of Reference

To consider the application of the To consider the application of the concept of restorative justice with concept of restorative justice with regard to persons brought before regard to persons brought before the courts on criminal charges andthe courts on criminal charges and

To make recommendations as to its To make recommendations as to its wider application in this jurisdiction wider application in this jurisdiction ( including in the context of ( including in the context of community courts )community courts )

Terms of Reference Terms of Reference detailsdetails

Review:Review: existing Irish models of RJexisting Irish models of RJ contemporary RJ developments abroadcontemporary RJ developments abroad research based evidence and evaluation of research based evidence and evaluation of

different RJ models vs other court disposals different RJ models vs other court disposals re: re:

- impact on Victims and Offenders- impact on Victims and Offenders

- as an alternative to imprisonment- as an alternative to imprisonment

- cost and public interest and- cost and public interest and

- range of offences for which suitable- range of offences for which suitable

More Details of TermsMore Details of Terms Seek views of relevant bodies, interests etcSeek views of relevant bodies, interests etc Consider recommendations of Joint Consider recommendations of Joint

Oireachtas Report on RJOireachtas Report on RJ Consider whether RJ models should be Consider whether RJ models should be

developed on national scale and if so:developed on national scale and if so:- which models appropriate/ cost effective?- which models appropriate/ cost effective?- is legislation needed?- is legislation needed?- what are roles of courts, probation service - what are roles of courts, probation service etc?etc?

- estimate case throughput, cost and - estimate case throughput, cost and diversion from custodial sentencesdiversion from custodial sentences

Understanding termsUnderstanding terms

concept of restorative justice?concept of restorative justice? before the courts on criminal before the courts on criminal

charges?charges? wider application?wider application? community courts context? community courts context?

Review Irish RJ ModelsReview Irish RJ Models

RJ – RJ – YouthYouth JusticeJustice - Children Act, - Children Act, 20012001

Garda Juvenile Diversion Programme 2007:Garda Juvenile Diversion Programme 2007:

RJ events 378, formal cautions 4,500 RJ events 378, formal cautions 4,500

Court referred Probation Service Court referred Probation Service Conference:Conference:

40 cases p.a.40 cases p.a. 66% cases completed66% cases completed

Irish RJ – Adult JusticeIrish RJ – Adult Justice

Two Pilots plus national caution schemeTwo Pilots plus national caution scheme Nenagh Community Reparation PanelNenagh Community Reparation Panel

up to 20 cases p.a.up to 20 cases p.a. 85% completed85% completed

Restorative Justice Services TallaghtRestorative Justice Services Tallaghtreparation panel up to 100 cases p.a.reparation panel up to 100 cases p.a. 90% completed90% completed

victim offender mediation up to 12 cases p.a. 45% victim offender mediation up to 12 cases p.a. 45% completedcompleted

Garda Adult Cautioning SchemeGarda Adult Cautioning Schemediversionarydiversionary 6,000 cautions in 20086,000 cautions in 2008

Contemporary Contemporary Developments AbroadDevelopments Abroad

Common Law Systems Common Law Systems

Northern Ireland - Youth ConferencingNorthern Ireland - Youth Conferencing UK – Adult conferencing and mediation UK – Adult conferencing and mediation

pilotspilots New Zealand – Youth/FGC,New Zealand – Youth/FGC, Adult/pilotsAdult/pilots Australia NSW – Youth diversion, Australia NSW – Youth diversion,

Adult/pilotsAdult/pilots North America – mostly VOM, (+Prison North America – mostly VOM, (+Prison

VOM)VOM)

Contemporary Contemporary Developments AbroadDevelopments Abroad

Civil Law Systems Civil Law Systems Austria – VOMAustria – VOM probation diversionprobation diversion Belgium – VOMBelgium – VOM prison schemeprison scheme Finland – VOMFinland – VOM

pre-sentence/mitigationpre-sentence/mitigation Norway – VOMNorway – VOM mediation diversionmediation diversion France – VOMFrance – VOM pre-sentence optionpre-sentence option Germany – VOMGermany – VOM option at all stagesoption at all stages

Research Based EvidenceResearch Based Evidence Evaluations of RJ schemes:Evaluations of RJ schemes:

participationparticipationsatisfactionsatisfactionsuccessful successful

outcomeoutcome Meta analysis studiesMeta analysis studies Shapland, Sherman, Strang, Umbreit, Shapland, Sherman, Strang, Umbreit,

Campbell,Campbell,O’Dwyer, O’Mahony, Pelikan, Trenczek, O’Dwyer, O’Mahony, Pelikan, Trenczek,

Bonta etc.Bonta etc.

Research Based Evidence - Research Based Evidence - VictimsVictims

NIYC 2006NIYC 2006 69% participation 69% participation81% offer forgiveness81% offer forgiveness

UK 2004 - 2008 very positive re experience, UK 2004 - 2008 very positive re experience, felt offenders had addressed harm donefelt offenders had addressed harm done

NZ 2005 87% victims felt better after FGCNZ 2005 87% victims felt better after FGC NSW 1999NSW 1999 80% participate, 89% agreed plan80% participate, 89% agreed plan Austria 2002 RJ experience reduced harm feltAustria 2002 RJ experience reduced harm felt Norway 2005Norway 2005 high satisfaction with process high satisfaction with process

Research Based Evidence - Research Based Evidence - OffendersOffenders

Northern Ireland Youth Conferences 2006Northern Ireland Youth Conferences 2006 92% felt RJ helped them realise harm 92% felt RJ helped them realise harm

donedone 97% accepted responsibilty for 97% accepted responsibilty for

offenceoffence 71% nervous at start of conference71% nervous at start of conference 98% able to engage fully in discussion98% able to engage fully in discussion 98% believed they were listened to98% believed they were listened to 93% felt conference plan fair93% felt conference plan fair

Research Based Evidence Research Based Evidence - issues- issues

Victim concerns:Victim concerns:- RJ soft option?- RJ soft option?- revictimisation?- revictimisation?- participation?- participation?

Offender issues:Offender issues:- protection of rights- protection of rights- voluntary participation – informed - voluntary participation – informed consentconsent- time during process to reflect- time during process to reflect

Research Based Evidence – Research Based Evidence – RecidivismRecidivism

NIYC 2008NIYC 2008 38% reconvicted 1 yr post RJ 38% reconvicted 1 yr post RJ

73% reconvicted 1 yr post 73% reconvicted 1 yr post prisonprison

47% reconvicted 1 yr post 47% reconvicted 1 yr post otherother

UK 2008UK 2008 statistically significant fewer re-offendstatistically significant fewer re-offend Meta study 2007Meta study 2007 36 studies re-offending lower post RJ36 studies re-offending lower post RJ Meta study 2008 39 studies re-offending lower post RJMeta study 2008 39 studies re-offending lower post RJ Nenagh 1999 – 2007Nenagh 1999 – 2007 26% re-offended post RJ26% re-offended post RJ Tallaght 2005 – 2006Tallaght 2005 – 2006 14% re-offended post RJ14% re-offended post RJ

O’Donnell et al 2008O’Donnell et al 2008 39% prisoners re-imprisoned 39% prisoners re-imprisoned 2yrs post release2yrs post release

Research Based Evidence – Research Based Evidence – Alternative to PrisonAlternative to Prison

No suitable research evidenceNo suitable research evidence More research focus on re-offending More research focus on re-offending

recordsrecords RJ not dependent on being a prison RJ not dependent on being a prison

alternative alternative RJ considerable value to victim and RJ considerable value to victim and

offenderoffender Research warranted on use as a prison Research warranted on use as a prison

alternativealternative Significant growth in use of imprisonment Significant growth in use of imprisonment

Research Based Evidence Research Based Evidence - Costs- Costs

Estimated Estimated Cost per Cost per casecase

ReferredReferred BegunBegun CompleteCompletedd

UK 2008UK 2008

RJ PilotsRJ Pilots££248248 - - ££1,4581,458

££887 - 887 - £2,333£2,333

££3,261- 3,261- £4,666£4,666

NIYCS NIYCS 20082008

ConferencConferenceses

£1,000 - £1,000 - £1,500£1,500

Nenagh Nenagh 20072007

€€3,500 - 3,500 - €6,400€6,400

Tallaght Tallaght 20072007

€€3,2503,250

Research Based Conference Research Based Conference - Costs- Costs

2007 Costs of Other Sanctions in Ireland2007 Costs of Other Sanctions in Ireland

Prison Space Prison Space €97,700€97,700

Probation OrderProbation Order €8,200 €8,200

Probation SupervisionProbation Supervision €5,535 €5,535

Community Service OrderCommunity Service Order €2,025 €2,025

Researched Based Evidence Researched Based Evidence - Costs- Costs

Potential Savings from use of RJ:Potential Savings from use of RJ:

court process costs – court time and legal court process costs – court time and legal costscosts

reduced custodial costs – prison space reduced custodial costs – prison space needsneeds

reduced re-offending costs – victim ( health, reduced re-offending costs – victim ( health, absence ) garda, court, legal, and sanctions absence ) garda, court, legal, and sanctions

reduced victim costs – reparation, health reduced victim costs – reparation, health and work-absence etc.and work-absence etc.

Sherman and Strang ( 2007 ) Restorative Sherman and Strang ( 2007 ) Restorative Justice: The EvidenceJustice: The Evidence

Research Based Evidence – Public Research Based Evidence – Public InterestInterest

Public Interest Public Interest State (Stanbridge) v Mahon State (Stanbridge) v Mahon 19791979

11stst consideration in determining a consideration in determining a sentencesentence

is served not just by punishing offender oris served not just by punishing offender or

providing a deterrent to future offending providing a deterrent to future offending but also by but also by offering an offering an inducement/opportunity to reform.inducement/opportunity to reform.

RJ also in public interest where it is more RJ also in public interest where it is more effective and efficient than other sanctionseffective and efficient than other sanctions

Research Based Evidence – Research Based Evidence – Suitability of OffencesSuitability of Offences

Diversionary and Court based RJ excludes:Diversionary and Court based RJ excludes:- The most serious crimes ( murder rape The most serious crimes ( murder rape

etc. )etc. ) NSW excludes serious violent offencesNSW excludes serious violent offences NZ excludes offences involving 2yrs prisonNZ excludes offences involving 2yrs prison Austria excludes offences involving 5yrs Austria excludes offences involving 5yrs

prison + prison +

Seek ViewsSeek Views

Submissions invitedSubmissions invited Meetings and visits Meetings and visits Conferences, seminars etc.Conferences, seminars etc. Regional WorkshopsRegional Workshops Advisory ForaAdvisory Fora

Recommendations of JOC Recommendations of JOC Report on RJReport on RJ

Commission / JOC recommendations Commission / JOC recommendations consistentconsistent

Wider use of and funding for RJWider use of and funding for RJ More support for existing Youth and Adult More support for existing Youth and Adult

RJRJ Legislate for Adult RJLegislate for Adult RJ Cross sectoral group to oversee strategy Cross sectoral group to oversee strategy

and expansionand expansion Raise judicial awareness of RJRaise judicial awareness of RJ RJ services should link with victim interestsRJ services should link with victim interests

Which RJ Models?Which RJ Models? Cost effectivenessCost effectiveness - Noted costs per case abroad €625 to £1,500 - Noted costs per case abroad €625 to £1,500

- Noted pilot costs here €3,250 to €6,400 - Noted pilot costs here €3,250 to €6,400 per caseper case

- Noted high costs here of other sanctions- Noted high costs here of other sanctions - Noted under use of pilot capacity- Noted under use of pilot capacity - Noted participant satisfaction and - Noted participant satisfaction and

benefit levelsbenefit levels - Noted lower re-offending following RJ- Noted lower re-offending following RJ

AppropriateAppropriate - Noted consistency with Common Law - Noted consistency with Common Law

processesprocesses - Noted potential as alternative to prison- Noted potential as alternative to prison

Need for Statutory Basis Need for Statutory Basis for RJfor RJ

Review pilot experience without legislationReview pilot experience without legislation Review RJ application under Children Act, Review RJ application under Children Act,

20012001 Review RJ application abroadReview RJ application abroad Needs met by legislationNeeds met by legislation

- Provides certainty and legitimacy- Provides certainty and legitimacy

- Provides legal incentive - Provides legal incentive

- Provides protection of legal rights- Provides protection of legal rights

- Offers guidance and structure- Offers guidance and structure

- Provides for standards, resources and - Provides for standards, resources and oversightoversight

Roles of Courts Criminal Justice Roles of Courts Criminal Justice Agencies etc.Agencies etc.

CourtsCourts referral and approvalreferral and approval ProbationProbation ServiceService provision of RJ provision of RJ

servicesservices GardaGarda support / participate as support / participate as

appropriateappropriate CommunityCommunity participate and follow up participate and follow up

supportsupport National Committee - National Committee - advisory to Ministeradvisory to Minister

- - review standardsreview standards - oversee co-ordinated strategy- oversee co-ordinated strategy - - propose wider application stepspropose wider application steps

Estimate offender throughput Estimate offender throughput and costsand costs

Throughput targetThroughput target-- 5,000 – 10,000 court referrals (5,000 – 10,000 court referrals (75%ORP75%ORP

25%VOM/RC25%VOM/RC))- 3,600 – 7,200 RJ outcomes (3,600 – 7,200 RJ outcomes (80%ORP80%ORP 50%VOM/RC50%VOM/RC)) CostsCosts- Additional 6 pilots recommendedAdditional 6 pilots recommended

to help optimise capacityto help optimise capacity

to broaden experience in delivery and standardsto broaden experience in delivery and standards

to enhance costing of national provisionto enhance costing of national provision

Scale of Diversion from Custodial Scale of Diversion from Custodial Sentences Sentences

ProjectedProjected ScenarioScenario (draws on 2007 data) (draws on 2007 data)5,800 committals sentenced to <3yrs5,800 committals sentenced to <3yrs- assume 5% to 10% referred to RJ = 290 – assume 5% to 10% referred to RJ = 290 –

580580- assume 72.5% referrals succeed = 210 – assume 72.5% referrals succeed = 210 –

420420- assume sentence duration per 2007 patternsassume sentence duration per 2007 patterns- 210 – 420 committals equivalent to 42 – 85 210 – 420 committals equivalent to 42 – 85

prison spaces p.a.prison spaces p.a.- associated savings potential = €4.1m to associated savings potential = €4.1m to

€8.3m€8.3m

National Commission on National Commission on Restorative JusticeRestorative Justice

Presentation to ACJRDPresentation to ACJRD

AprilApril 20102010