Dominated by ritualistic confines of penance and convoluted legalese, criticisms of the traditional retributive criminal justice system has led to the increase in the popularity of restorative justice (RJ). Consedine defines restorative justice as a “constructive mechanism” designed to foster reconciliation for victims and offenders through mediation (Consedine, 1995: 9). Walgrave notes that due to the complex interpretations of reconciliation and forgiveness it is imperative that an “espresso- definition” of RJ is promoted to ensure its effectiveness (Walgrave, 2008:18). The purpose of restorative justice is to uphold victim rights, inform offenders of wrongdoing and to reduce the “visceral” impact of crime on communities (Morrison, 2012). The NSW Drug Court Act 1998 No 150, Section 3 Objects is a contemporary example of a restorative based scheme involving “compulsory …show more content…
Crime victim Dolman fervently noted that the offence “didn’t happen to the fucking queen” a passionate feeling of disillusionment that restorative processes seek to redress (Dolman 2001: 144 cited by Richards 2009: 303). RJ schemes primarily provide opportunities for social restoration as evident in a 1993 NZ case where the families of two young car crash victims welcomed their accused with mercy rather than bitterness. (Braithwaite, 1999:2) (Consedine, 1995: 9). Whilst emotional catharsis for victims following serious crimes is the goal of RJ it is subjugated by current Australian restorative schemes that almost solely address “shallow end” or minor crimes that have little victim impact (Richards 2009) (Garland 2001: 169 cited by Richards 2009: 304). Jacqueline Joudo Larsen’s report for the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) shows that current conferencing for NSW offenders omits “sexual assault…and offences causing death” – arguably cases that would best benefit from mediation (AIC