EFRJ Conference, Belfast, June 2014

Transcription

1 25 years CRC, Leiden, November 2014 EFRJ Conference, Belfast, June Restorative (youth) justice 2. International standards 3. Try it out model 4. RJ & the law 5. RJ developments NL 6. Conclusion & discussion dr. Annemieke Wolthuis

2 Intro juvenile justice

3 to liberate the oppressed and the oppressor both

4 RJ: Central notions No clear definition umbrella Formal RJ : reaction crim. behaviour Central notions: - restoration of harm - responsibility - participation - human interaction - doing justice towards victim, offender and society

5

6 Practice Foresee Research Group, Eur Forum for RJ (with the financial support of the EU's Criminal Justice Programme) made for the occasion of the International Week of RJ a 16 min video in which some excellent THINKers and ACTors (e.g. Joanna Shapland, Ivo Aertsen, Shadd Maruna, John Braithwaite, Ted Wachtel and many others!), who are some of the engines of our work in the field, share their thoughts and vision about the future of RJ: 3XUP0

7 RJ for youth: forms & history Most common: mediation & FGC History: indigenous peoples - Maori New-Zealand, Inuit Canada, ubuntu S-Africa, until middle ages also here Recently (since nineties): rise of alt. sanctions, development of children s rights, alt. dispute settlement & emancipation of victims In many countries RJ initiatives started with youth CRC: fair trial ánd special child oriented approach

8 Human rights & RJ Human rights/children s rights: agreements on how we universally want to deal with each other to defend, protect & enable children to grow up safely & participate Restorative justice: how we want to deal with harm done/ the afthermath of a crime human interaction HR provides standards how to fulfill RJ

9 Int standards Juv Justice 1985 Beijing Rules 1989 CRC Art. 40 and art. 37 (see also art. 39) General principles (arts. 2, 3, 6 and 12) 1990 Havana Rules 1990 Riyadh Guidelines UN Committee s General Comment No. 10 (2007) Regional developments CoE, EU

10 Juvenile Justice CRC: fair trial & child oriented approach Pedagogical objective best interests of child ; education & reintegration MACR at 12 ( international minimum level ) Role of parents Child friendly proceedings participation Diversion Child specific sentences Detention as last resort (and for the shortest appropriate period of time) focus on restoration & reintegration

11 CRC point of view General Comment 10 states:... The protection of the best interests of the child means, for instance that the traditional objectives of criminal justice (repression/retribution) must give way to rehabilitation and rj objectives in dealing with child offenders. This can be done in concert with attention to public safety.

12 Child victims protection CRC, article 39 ECOSOC Resolution 2005 Guidelines on justice in matters concerning child victims & witnesses of crime right to reparation among the main principles (under 7 f) EU Victim Directive 2012

13 Int standards RJ 1999 Council of Eur Rec No. R (99) 19 on mediation in penal matters 2002 UN Basic Principles 2001 EU Council Framework Decision on victims in criminal proceedings & 2012 Victim Directive other guidelines UN CoE EU since 1996 > RJ as a priority in reaction on crime

14 Try it out (probeer het model) Prevention first! Rights of the child as a leading factor O: oh learning aspects central Best interests of the child first E: eh..to specify their own development and responsibility Emotions deserve a place, as well as victims Re-integration as a goal H: harm reduction & restoration where possible E: end locking up, use only as a measure of last resort T: to check human rights

15 4. RJ developments Heart JJ system New-Zealand: FGC since th option in the law Maori tradition, national system, politice, justice, lawyers know it Also in Europe: Belgium, Northern Ireland, Austria, Hungary,... all Eur countries have RJ projects int. movement active Eur Forum for RJ:

16 Results/effects Int meta studies show: high satisfaction rates victims offenders & professionals feeling of justice increases less recidivism a new beginning

17 Rights-based RJ necessary to review RJ in the light of children s rights risks of abuse, power, discrimination or excess punishment art 40 & general principles CRC other rules & legal practice frame work, guidelines concrete balance of interests in each case

18 Legal safeguards Legal safeguards criminal justice fair process, legal assistance, proportionality, presumption of innocence,... RJ principles voluntariness confidentiality neutrality Restorative process is different: should other principles prevail?

19 RJ developments for youth Heart JJ system New-Zealand: FGC since th option in the law Maori tradition, national system, all partners in the chain know it Also in Europe: Northern Ireland, Austria, Belgium, Hungary just to mention a few NL also start there all Eur countries have RJ projects int. movement, active EFRJ:

20 Netherlands Nineties: VOM experiments, conferencing, pilots with youth After experimental stage main focus victim offender conversations Victim in Focus > 1000 per year New pilots court level, police level & probation RJ in juvenile detention centres RJ in youth protection more attention for victims, initiatives in neighbourhoods and by citizens themselves active organisations: RJNL, Eigen Kracht, org for mediators, schools new article in criminal procedure law on victims

21 Possible models RJ model Integrated model: integrate RJ and criminal justice Work towards a youth justice system which is as restorative as possible It should be pragmatic and easy to implement

22 RJ in JJ: from prevention until detention & afterwards 1. preventive phase 2. arrest & investigation stage police 3. stage public prosecutor 4. during a court session 5. while being in detention 6. after a penal case

23 Conclusions Int standards: states cannot avoid RJ Obligation under EU law (Victim Directive) Strong moral support by CoE and UN Especially juveniles RJ = a children s right

24 Discussion What about: legal presentation, proportionality, presumption of innocence What about: Risks of net widening, power differences What about: The need for developing standards on RJ in the different juvenile justice systems: should they be open or quite strict?

25