40. Memorandum submitted by the Restorative
Justice Consortium
The Consortium was formed in 1997 for the purposes
of:
— Encouraging the development of restorative
justice within the criminal justice system and anywhere where
conflict arises;
— Providing good principles for standards
of practice;
— Sharing and exchanging information
about RJ; and
— Promoting understanding and use of
RJ by the community.
It is a registered charity and is the only independent,
umbrella, membership organisation for those involved and/or interested
in Restorative Justice.
INTRODUCTION
Anti-social behaviour takes many forms and can
occur in almost any context or environment. It is well documented
that it can cause major fear and dysfunction in local communities,
for example, where out of control youngsters have attracted considerable
media attention and the Government has introduced major changes
to combat it. Among young people it may be akin to bullying. It
may include harassment of elderly people, which is a form of bullying.
Among adults it may involve neighbours who cause a nuisance or
do not prevent their children from doing so. Although there are
many innocent victims of anti-social behaviour, it is important
to recognise that in many disputes there are faults on both sides;
the complainant may also have behaved in ways that upset the complained-about,
not least in the way that they make their complaint.
The Restorative Justice Consortium does not
have specific expertise on the causes of anti-social behaviour
but we are in a strong position to suggest ways, which may reduce
it. First of all, it is clearly best dealt with at an early stage
before attitudes have hardened. The sooner this is done, the more
chance there is of dealing with it through persuasion and restorative
justice processes (RJ), including mediation.
The basic presumption should be "try restorative
justice first". It will not always work, but when it does,
it can solve the problem far more effectively than recourse to
the courts. It is far less expensive both in terms of the direct
costs and, to use a dispute between neighbours as an example,
it can save indirect costs such as the expense and stress of eviction
and re-housing.
RESTORATIVE JUSTICE
RJ is already used by several police forces
to tackle anti-social disorder amongst young people, with considerable
success. This usually takes the form of Restorative Conferences
in which all those involved are brought together by a trained
RJ facilitator, often a police officer, in a carefully planned
meeting. People involved include the youngsters who are offending
plus their parents and teachers, the victims of the behaviour
plus their family and friends, and local community representatives
The impact of the behaviour on local people
and the local community is brought home directly and personally
to those doing it, in such a way that they are able to understand
the harm done, feel remorse for its effects and undertake to stop
it forthwith. Those who have suffered from it lose their fear
of being targeted again, and feel more constructive and less vengeful
about supporting—and holding to account—the youngsters
in the future. Community representatives feel involved and are
better able to help the community to take more responsibility
for its own problems in future.
The conference ends with an "outcome agreement",
in effect a contract about the young person's behaviour in the
future, which will be monitored closely by the police, and everyone
else involved.
There are many examples of this working well,
but more investment in training the professional participants,
particularly the police, is needed if its full potential is to
be exploited.
SCHOOLS
A basic preventive measure is the promotion
of restorative approaches in schools. This is a general term including
not only peer mediation (in which older pupils are trained to
help younger ones to resolve their differences), but anti-bullying
initiatives based on personal accountability and respect, and
open communication using such techniques as circle time, to encourage
pupils and staff to speak freely about their concerns and ways
of addressing them.
RJ in schools has already been piloted by the
Youth Justice Board, in conjunction with DfES, and the preliminary
results have been impressive, with less truancy and reduced exclusions,
linked to better behaviour in and around the school vicinity.
Final results are awaited and, as in RJ generally, there is a
need for greater investment in RJ in schools if the full benefits
are to be exploited.
COMMUNITIES
Similar methods could help prevent young people
from harassing elderly residents, bringing them together so that
they see each other as human beings with needs, not as stereotyped
"yobs" or "wrinklies". This should also take
place as soon after the event as possible. The involvement of
the formal youth justice system should be seen as the last resort.
Mediation services should be encouraged to develop the skills
of their mediators in handling community and group meetings, and
to recruit those with experience of working with young people
as well as young people themselves.
NEIGHBOURHOOD MEDIATION
It is the common experience of community mediation
services, as mentioned above, that the party who reports a dispute
has sometimes contributed to it, whether by anti-social behaviour
of their own or by the manner in which they approached the other
party. Mediators visit both sides, whereas councillors and MPs
in their surgeries often hear only from one side. In addition,
mediators are trained in active, non-judgemental listening, which
makes it easier for both sides to describe the facts from their
point of view and express their feelings. This in itself can often
defuse the tension and promote better understanding between the
parties and an appreciation of underlying personal difficulties.
Mediators are as far as possible drawn from local communities,
and receive a practical training. In most mediation services,
volunteer mediator's work in pairs as this not only assists their
evaluation of their performance, but means that at least to some
extent they can be drawn from a background comparable to that
of the parties.
Impressively, an agreement can be reached in
eight or nine cases out of ten when the parties agree to meet.
It is true that the more entrenched disputes,
especially some of those seen on sensational television programmes
about "neighbours from hell", seem unlikely to respond
to this down-to-earth approach, but many of those have only reached
their present degree of aggravation because the underlying causes
were not discussed at a much earlier stage.
MEDIATION IN
ACTION
Local methods vary. We would like to draw to
the Committee's attention a particularly effective scheme, currently
in use in Hampshire and being considered for use in Lambeth and
possibly elsewhere.
New Forest, Southampton and South-West Hampshire
Mediation has a contract with Southampton City Council housing
service that provides for all cases of alleged anti-social behaviour
reported by tenants to be immediately (not as a last resort) referred
to the Service. It employs paid independent assessors, trained
in active listening and conflict resolution skills, which visit
the households concerned within five working days of the initial
complaint. An assessment of the appropriate outcome is completed
within 15 working days. In many cases, receiving a visit, being
listened to and told what options are available, is enough to
resolve matters. In other cases the assessors write a report to
the Council recommending appropriate action, taking account of
the parties' own views. When this involves mediation, the Service
arranges it. Assessors and mediators help both parties to look
for realistic ways forward rather than a win/lose outcome. The
results are striking. The Service handles some 500-600 cases a
year. Of all fully assessed cases, 94% were closed with no further
action from the Housing Office after their initial referral. The
time of Housing Officers is saved, the satisfaction of tenants
increased, who appreciate the independence of the Service and
the role of volunteer mediators enhanced and simplified. The City
Council housing service has ensured the stability of the scheme
by awarding a five-year contract to the Service.
ANTI-SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR ORDERS
(ASBO)
We would argue strongly that, far from encouraging
local authorities to make more and more ASBOs, the Government
should encourage them to use RJ and mediation as their first line
of intervention, working alongside the police and not-for-profit
organisations. The use of an ASBO should be regarded as the last
resort, not the first. Local authorities should also be encouraged
to assist a local not-for-profit organisation to establish a mediation
centre if one does not already exist. Mediation centres should
be independent voluntary organisations, overseen by an appropriate
umbrella body. Many such organisations are members of the Restorative
Justice Consortium.
By the same token, if an ASBO or Acceptable
Behaviour Contract is breached, immediate breaching of the offender
is likely to be counterproductive, especially if it leads to custody
with its well-known high reconviction rate. The offender should
first be asked to explain the reason for the breach and then be
given the opportunity to make a new commitment to keep it, knowing
the consequences if they do not. At the same time their personal
circumstances should be explored, including whether local statutory
or voluntary agencies had given whatever support was needed by
the individual or family. This could include the parenting support
and youth and community services mentioned in the terms of reference.
Those responsible for setting targets should
remember the desired objective. To achieve more convictions, or
ASBOs, is not desirable in itself; the aim is to reduce the unwanted
behaviour, and if this is better done by other means, such as
ABCs, injunctions, or indeed environmental measures, the agency
concerned should not be penalized for failing to reach an arbitrary
target.
Mediation and RJ usually leads to an agreement,
and this could take the form of an acceptable behaviour contract
(ABC). We think that in present-day society the language of contract
(as in "social contract") is more appropriate than the
language of giving "orders". The contract should be
two-way. The person should undertake to refrain from unacceptable
behaviour, but the community (for example in the form of a local
authority agency or a voluntary organisation) could agree to access
services for them to accommodation, rehabilitation, and their
other pressing needs.
Under the general heading of "mediation"
or a "restorative approach" we recommend the use of
methods such as people's panels. Instead of the standard public
meeting, at which the most vociferous ask questions and speakers
from the platform try to parry them, the meeting is divided into
small groups, each with representatives of the various local interests,
agencies and voluntary organisations, with a facilitator who asks
them to observe basic ground rules. They are then invited to voice
their concerns, and suggest ways of meeting them. At a follow-up
meeting, those responsible for the relevant field are invited
to report on progress.
FUNDING
The letter asks about the role of the private
sector and the impact of government initiatives. We cannot comment
on the former, but we would stress that the not-for-profit sector
has considerable experience and great potential for more work
of this kind, provided it is not hampered by the constant search
for short-term, narrowly-focused funding initiatives and bureaucratic
procedures for assessing performance.
CONCLUSION
We believe that RJ and mediation are fine examples
of what the Home Secretary has advocated: active citizenship and
"an alternative that relates to people's lives—in a
non-authoritarian way" (Edith Kahn Memorial Lecture, Guardian
11 June 2003).
It would help if public figures would encourage
people to take the step of agreeing to RJ and mediation, emphasising
"smart" measures like these which actually work well
at low cost, rather than repeating the over-worn mantra of "being
tough", even though many so-called "tough" interventions
do not bring in the results needed.
They will be supported in this by the growing
number of people who have experienced successful RJ and mediation.
Building on the experiences of the examples above, we believe
that over time, if consistently applied, these approaches should
lead to a cultural change in the way anti-social behaviour is
seen and dealt with. What we want is confident, responsible communities
which take more responsibility for solving their own problems,
rather than systems which unnecessarily escalate them into the
courts with the delays, bureaucracy and ineffectiveness which
often ensues.
14 September 2004
| 
