An international perspective of restorative justice practices and research outcomes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Restorative justice is not a new concept as it was the dominant criminal justice model in ancient Greek, Roman and Arab civilisations as well as indigenous communities in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Western countries re-discovered restorative justice in the mid 1970s and by the end of the 1990s most Western countries had legalised restorative justice programmes. South African legislation also makes provision for restorative justice processes. Restorative justice is a victim-centered response to crime that provides opportunities for those most directly affected by crime — the victim, the offender, their families, and representatives of the community — to be directly involved in responding to the harm caused by the crime. It can be applied at the formal and informal level. At the formal level the criminal justice system can apply it during the pre-trial process, the pre-sentencing process, or in pre-release programmes. At the informal level it can be applied to solve a variety of community conflicts, neighbourhood conflicts, family conflicts and interstate conflicts. Most restorative justice cases are referred by magistrates, prosecutors and probation officers. Common referrals are vandalism, theft of property, car theft, burglary, shop theft, attempted homicide, assault and domestic violence and it is appropriate for males, females and young offenders. A large number of research findings across countries indicate that restorative justice is very effective and that most victims and offenders were satisfied with the outcomes of the process. Most participants indicated that they had been fairly treated and that they would again participate in a restorative justice process. The criminal justice system is criticised for being a European worldview of a retributive justice philosophy that is largely offender focussed and guided by codified laws and rules of procedure while ignoring the needs of the victim. Restorative justice is, however, also criticised for adopting the legal framework and definitions of crime and that it can put victims’ rights at risk. It is also questioned whether restorative justice empowers victims as the process rather seems to entrench them as victims. It is furthermore argued that restorative justice can widen the net of social control if it is mostly used for minor offences.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,018 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».