Declan Roche – författare

In reviving the idea of an informal approach to conflict resolution, the Restorative Justice movement attempts to break out of the predominantly punitive thinking which shapes modern criminal justice. Its proponents claim that its guiding ideals - personalism, participation, reparation, and reintegration - deliver a fairer, more effective, and more humane justice than does the court system. However, a simplistic tendency both to extol the virtues of restorative justice and to denigrate all conventional formal approaches risks blinding enthusiasts to the dangers inherent in unchecked participant power, as well as to the protection which state institutions and professionals can provide to individuals and communities. The procedural safeguard of institutional accountability helps reduce these dangers. Examining the experiences of 25 programmes in six countries, Accountability in Restorative Justice uncovers a number of neglected, overlapping, and incomplete types of accountability, including the informal type built into deliberations between victims and offenders and their supporters. This deliberative accountability can provide a rigorous check for regulating decision-making, holding state agencies accountable, and monitoring the completion of agreements reached between participants. This book also considers the role played by formal types of accountability, such as external review. It suggests a new approach, in which judges become more involved in monitoring the quality of deliberation in restorative justice conferences than with enforcing traditional sentencing principles.

In reviving the idea of an informal approach to conflict resolution, the Restorative Justice movement attempts to break out of the freedom punitive thinking which shapes modern criminal justice. Its proponents claim that its guiding ideals - personalism, participation, and reintegration - deliver a fairer, more effective, and more humane justice than does the court system. However, a simplistic tendency both to extol the virtues of restorative justice and to denigrate all formal approaches risks blinding enthusiasts to the dangers inherent in unchecked participant power , as well as to the protection which State institutions and professionals can provide to individuals and communities.The procedural safeguard of institutional accountability helps reduce these dangers. Examining the experiences of 25 programmes in six countries, Accountability in Restorative Justice uncovers a number of neglected, overlapping, and incomplete types of accountability, including the informal type built into deliberations between victims and offenders and their supporters. This deliberative accountability can provide a rigorous check for regulating decision-making, holding state agencies accountable, and monitoring the completion of agreements reached between participants.This book also considers the role played by formal types of accountability, such as external review. It suggests a new approach, in which judges become more involved in monitoring the quality of deliberation in restorative justice conferences than with enforcing traditional sentencing principles.

The legitimacy and performance of the traditional criminal justice system is the subject of intense scrutiny as the world economic crisis continues to put pressure on governments to cut the costs of the criminal justice system. This volume brings together the leading work on restorative justice to achieve two objectives: to construct a comprehensive and up-to-date conceptual framework for restorative justice suitable even for newcomers; and to challenge the barriers of restorative justice in the hope of taking its theory and practice a step further. The selected articles start by answering some fundamental questions about restorative justice regarding its historical and philosophical origins, and challenge the concept by bringing into the debate the human rights and equality discourses. Also included is material based on empirical testing of restorative justice claims especially those impacting on reoffending rates, victim satisfaction and reintegration. The volume concludes with a critique of restorative justice as well as with analytical thinking that aims to push its barriers. It is hoped that the investigations offered by this volume not only offer hope for a better system for abolitionists and reformists, but also new and convincing evidence to persuade the sceptics in the debate over restorative justice.