-by Justice Janine P. Geske (ret.)
(please note: Justice Geske has a second article directly following this one.)
printable version here

(view her blog on victim/ offender mediation conference in Turkey here.)

Tanya Nelson, Secretary for the board of the Wisconsin Restorative Justice Coalition (WRJC), asked me to write a short piece on my thoughts about what we, as restorative justice practitioners, should be working on to enhance the utilization of restorative practices.  After spending this semester in Belgium teaching and working side-by-side with scholars looking at restorative justice in a more global way, I have a few suggestions.

Organizations such as the WRJC should consider partnering with other groups (both victims’ and offenders’ organizations as well as governmental and nonprofit agencies and universities) to gather data on current restorative justice projects, selecting a research and analysis model, and then advocating for legislative enactments that recognize and support justice processes as part of the solution in addressing the harm caused by crime.

Great care has to be taken by those of us in the field, not to lose the independence and value driven processes that exist, just to have them become diluted to the point that the fundamental principles of restorative justice are lost. Those of us who do this work fully understand that there are many challenges in effectively integrating restorative justice approaches into our current justice system. We must remain mindful that by institutionalizing restorative justice, there is always the risk that it would lose its victim-centered nature.  Bringing together all the stakeholders in the justice system to begin a dialogue and planning strategy on how best to create and implement useful restorative justice projects is a good starting point.  All the various disciplines need to be involved.

Although there are  some excellent research projects that have been conducted by a number of American scholars including Professors Mark Umbreit, Marilyn Armour and Gordon Bazemore, I believe that we really do continue to lack the substantial empirical data that is needed to convince politicians and other decision-makers of the transformational benefits of restorative justice.  We all know, anecdotally, of many projects that had great successful outcomes and then were shut down because of lack of funds.  Much of the historical data from that work is lost forever.  I want to encourage organizations such as the WRJC and others to work with academic researchers so that , at the minimum, ongoing restorative justice projects can utilize evaluation forms, questionnaires, interviews, etc. that can be used to gather information that can later be analyzed.  It is through the substantial research done at Leuven and other academic and professional institutions that restorative justice has gained the creditability and stature it has in public policy and legislative debates in many European countries.  We ought to be doing likewise in our professional organization.

Justice Janine P. Geske (ret.)
Visiting Professor in Restorative Justice
Institute of Criminology (Law School)
Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium
Distinguished Professor of Law
Director of the Restorative Justice Initiative at
Marquette University Law School

See previous article   

- by Justice Janine P. Geske (ret.)

printable version here

I have the privilege of serving as a visiting professor at the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium this semester.  The university was founded in 1425, making it the oldest existing Catholic university in the world.  There are 40,000 students here, about 6000 of them from other countries.  Within the law school, the Criminology Institute focuses on restorative justice, penology and victimology, both academically and through research projects.  It offers a very significant PhD program and conducts incredible research for institutions and governments, including the European Union.  The headquarters for the European Union for Restorative Justice (http://www.euforumrj.org/) is also located here.  The European Forum also conducts research, serves as an advocacy role for legislative changes and provides continuing education in restorative justice.

Most Americans who work in the restorative justice field can learn a great deal about the development of restorative justice in Belgium, as well as other European countries.  The Belgian federal government funds much of this work in a variety of criminal justice settings.  Since 1994, federal regulations have governed what is called “penal mediation”, which is facilitated through prosecutors’ offices.  Those mediations occur in the midst of the criminal court proceedings and can impact how the prosecutor decides to proceed.  A liaison magistrate in the prosecutor’s office selects them.  In order for an offender to qualify for mediation he or she must be over 18 years of age and has to accept responsibility of the crime, the maximum sentence for the offense does not exceed 2 years; the offender is willing to pay costs, and is willing to cooperate in the mediation.  Any statements made by the offender in mediation would not generally be admissible if the matter goes to court.  Although there are critics of the penal mediation system because it is not managed through an independent nonprofit organization (as are the other types of criminal mediation/dialogue), it is significant that it is built into Belgium’s criminal procedure law.

Since 2001, Belgium has offered victim-offender mediation after offenders have been incarcerated.  These dialogues are very similar to the ones that the Marquette Restorative Justice initiative and the University of Wisconsin Law School projects provide in crimes of severe violence.  One of the fundamental differences is that here the offender can initiate the process.  The professional mediators, who work for nonprofit criminal mediation agencies, will contact a victim to determine whether he or she has any interest in meeting with an offender who has made a request.  Otherwise the processes are very similar to the ones we utilize.

In 2005, the federal law provided that every person who has “a direct interest” can request mediation at any stage of the criminal procedure. Art. 553, sex. 2 of the Belgian Code of Criminal Procedure.  Like most places, any mediation that occurs needs to be voluntarily agreed to by all parties.  These mediations, although funded by the government, are overseen and facilitated by two private, nonprofit organizations (Suggnome and Mediante) and supervised by a federal Commission on Mediation.  There are no specific regulations on how and when the mediation should occur.  It does define mediation as follows:

“Mediation is a process that allows people involved in a conflict, if they agree voluntarily, to actively participate and in full confidentiality in resolving the difficulties that arise from a criminal offense, with the help of a neutral third person and based upon a certain methodology.  The goal of the mediation is to facilitate communication and to help parties to, by themselves come to an agreement concerning conciliation and restoration.”

The law does allow participation by other affected persons, such as partners or friends of the offender or victim who have been impacted by the offense.  This mediation is intended to occur parallel to, but separately from the criminal process itself.  There may or may not be information shared with the prosecutor or justice system after a mediation depending on what the parties agree to.

Finally, in 2006 the Belgian Youth Protection Act recognized and encouraged mediation and sentencing circles in juvenile cases.  In 2009, over 4000 juveniles were referred for mediation, 37% of them went through mediation (often indirect dialogue through the mediator) and most of them ended in agreements.

Of course, despite much legislative recognition, many in the system have not “bought into” the restorative approach of addressing the harm caused by crime.  As in the United States, many in the criminal justice system remain skeptical using restorative practices after a crime.

There are two other types of mediation occurring in different parts of the country.  One is called “mediation for redress” and the other “Police mediation.”  The mediation for redress program occurs at sentencing and focus on minor property and violent offenses with clear financial or material damages.  Police mediation occurs in the police stations, before referral to the prosecutor’s office.  The University of Leuven has provided incredible research support analyzing the implementation and outcomes of these various processes in Belgium as well as in the greater European community. When restorative justice processes are done well, the outcomes are almost always favorable.

Just a few of the university’s recent research projects included:

• Meeting the Challenges of Introducing Victim-Offender Mediation in Central and Eastern Europe.

• Developing Standards for Assistance to Victims of Terrorism.

• Mass Victimization and Restorative Justice. In Search for the Possibilities to Apply Restorative Justice Principles in an Integrated Approach…Case Studies in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia.

• Mediation and Community Oriented Measures in Cases of Hate Crime and Discrimination.

• Victims and Restorative Justice: An Empirical Study of the Needs, Experiences and Position of Victims within Restorative Justice Practices.

• The Development of a Theoretical frame for “Restorative Justice” From an Ethical and Social Perspective

To spend a semester as part of a highly respected academic community studying the global impact of restorative justice programs in a myriad of settings has been sheer joy for me.  I look forward to returning to Marquette Law School next semester with a newly ignited excitement of our work with the Restorative Justice Initiative and the possibilities for things to come.

Justice Janine P. Geske (ret.)
Visiting Professor in Restorative Justice
Institute of Criminology (Law School)
Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium
Distinguished Professor of Law
Director of the Restorative Justice Initiative at
Marquette University Law School

See previous article   

November is National Restorative Justice Month

-by Jay Kiefer, Youth Services of Southern Wisconsin jay.kiefer@youthsos.org.

MADISON, WI – Restorative justice is an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of victims, offenders, as well as the involved community, instead of satisfying abstract legal principles or punishing the offender. Victims take an active role in the process, while offenders are encouraged to take responsibility for their actions, to repair the harm they’ve done—by apologizing, returning stolen money, or community service.

The essence of restorative justice lies in the principle that crime harms people, communities, and relationships. Consequently, if crime is about harm, then the justice process should emphasize repairing the harm (Bazemore, Seymour, and Rubin, 2000). Restorative justice focuses on three (3) key questions:

What is the nature of the harm resulting from the crime?
What needs to be done to repair the harm?
Who is responsible for the repair?

As such, restorative justice places more emphasis on the victim and holds the wrong-doer responsible for repairing the harm they have caused.

The restorative justice approach is viewed as more holistic than some of the juvenile justice practices used in the past which tended to be more punitive, less effective, less educational, and less likely to be honored.

Youth Services of Southern Wisconsin is a non-profit organization formed on July 1, 2003 through the merger of Briarpatch and Community Adolescent Programs.  The agency provides services for more than 3,000 runaway, homeless, and at-risk youth annually.

See previous article   

-by Anne Strauch, Regional Program Leader:  Brown, Outagamie, Winnebago, and FDL counties

I’m very new to my position, but I have already heard our participants ask our Circles volunteers more than once, “What’s in this for you?” The general response is “Because it makes me feel good to know I can make a difference in someone’s life…..Your’s, if you’ll let me!”

Circles volunteers are a tough breed! They work with a difficult population and do not get a lot of kudos along the way.  Their passion and dedication compels stories such as the following:

“Lily”, age 31, had been incarcerated numerous times since age 15.  Neither work nor motherhood was able to deter her from drug use and its related problems. Initially, Lily found setting goals for herself difficult, but after several Circle meetings she began to verbalize her strengths and aspirations.  Before Circles, she never saw any good in what she had to offer. Volunteers gently helped her to understand that she is not a “throw away” person. She has something to offer to others and to her community. Volunteers encouraged her to complete her education.  With some assistance from Circles of Support in the purchase of her work kit for cosmetology school, Lily completed the required courses and recently graduated. She is 13 months drug free and has her own chair in a salon! And guess who will be offering some free haircuts to our new participants?

“Alex”, age 59, has been incarcerated for the majority of his life. He not only became a part of a Circle but also received one-on-one mentoring from our determined volunteers. He was tired of the in and out, but didn’t know how to live outside. Pro-social behavior was lacking along with a a positive environment. He never had anyone say “Hey, I’m here for you ”, then prove it.  Ten months later, Alex’s eyes welled up while telling his story. “They really cared…..cared about ME. No one has ever cared about me- even when I was a tiny tot. No one.”  Alex is now building a healthy relationship with the mother of his children and his family. He has recently become engaged for the first time ever! He has never stayed out of trouble for this long. He has a brand new perspective on life and community. He volunteers for the community and has started a band with senior adults, playing in parks and at events.  He still attends Circles and helps and encourages new participants.

I suspect one day, Lily & Alex will also be asked: “Why are you doing this for me?”

You’ve got to love it when you see it come full CIRCLE!

See previous article   

-by Mayda Crites

I clearly remember the sense of fear that gripped me the first time I stood in the small holding area.  The iron gates closed behind me with a thud. After what seemed like an eternity, the iron gates in front of me finally opened.

I was at Green Bay Correctional Facility, a maximum security prison – a fortified place that houses men convicted of committing heinous crimes.  Dangerous men.  Men not to be trusted.  Certainly not the kind of place I ever thought I’d be or the type of individuals I ever envisioned interacting with.  I was here to tell them about the murder of my son Bryon and how it has affected my life.

And so we sat in a circle-forty men who were sentenced to a maximum security prison, a former State Supreme Court Justice acting as our moderator, a group of law students, visiting dignitaries and three survivors of violent crime.  Conspicuous by their absence were prison guards.

When it was my turn, I told them about Bryon, who he was and what he had done.  I glowed with a mother’s pride as I described how Bryon had matured into a remarkable young man and cried when I described how he was murdered by a man so drunk he thought his truck hit a bird when what he actually struck was Bryon on a bicycle.

The next day was my turn to listen as the men, one by one, responded to what they heard.  Some gave me art work they had created in their cells the previous evening. Others sang songs they had written. Several related stories of the murder of family members. A few talked about their crimes, divulging information too dangerous to talk about in the general prison population. Some chose to sit silently.

What happened in that room was magical.  I had gone as a teacher, as part of a team to help the men understand the consequences of their actions. My life circumstances were the lesson.

But as I listened I realized I was not the only survivor. We met as perpetrators and survivor.  We parted as individuals supporting each other in our journeys through life.

See previous article