2005
Author | Paulin, Judy; Kingi, Venezia; Lash, Barb; New Zealand Ministry of Justice |
---|---|
Date | 2005 |
Source/Publisher | New Zealand Ministry of Justice |
Link(s) | https://thehub.swa.govt.nz/resources/the-wanganui-community-managed-restorative-justice-programme-an-evaluation/ |
Subjects | Courts and sentencing |
This evaluation assesses the extent to which the Wanganui Community-Managed Restorative Justice Programme (NZ) met the objectives it had set for itself in its 1999 implementation plan. The evaluation was based on an offender reconviction analysis and interviews with key stakeholders, victims and offenders. It finds that the programme clearly met its first objective that the restorative justice process only proceeds when victims of offences or their agents participate, and its second objective that community members actively participate in the programme. The programme?s third objective is that victim-offender contracts are negotiated with community input and have a restorative effect. The programme met the ‘community input’ test, but findings were less positive about whether the contracts had a restorative effect, as the contract completion rate was only about 27% among the offenders interviewed for the evaluation, and only one half of participating victims were of the view that their offender had been able to make amends for what s/he had done. The evaluators assessed the programme as generally meeting its fourth objective to gain acceptance from professionals working in the criminal justice system. The programme’s last objective was to reduce re-offending by offenders; however the evaluation findings show that the one-year reconviction rate among programme participants was statistically no worse or no better than the one-year reconviction rate among similar offenders dealt with by conventional court processes. The cultural responsiveness of the programme to Maori, to Pacific peoples, and to other cultural groups is also evaluated. The evaluation finds that the Wanganui Community-Managed Restorative Justice Programme generally appeared to be operating in the spirit of the Ministry’s eight principles of best practice for restorative justice processes, and concludes by making a number of recommendations for improvements in different areas of practice. (Executive summary, edited).