CCSJ continues the serialisation of our March 19 response, on behalf of the Archdiocese, to the Ministry of Justice’s (MOJ) Discussion Paper on Restorative Justice in T&T. This is Part 2.
We need a multi-faceted approach to address crime and violence in T&T as the causes are many and varied. Our response must include a focus on repentance, reparation, restoration, reconciliation, rehabilitation, empowerment, and re-integration with a sense of responsibility. These are some of the watchwords of a Restorative Justice (RJ) approach.
Over the years, as stated in Section C of the MOJ Discussion Paper, there have been a number of reports in T&T that have recommended that an RJ approach to the criminal justice system be embraced. The 2002 Task Force Report on Prison Reform and Transformation (1 of 5 reports listed in Section C) summarised three general principles of RJ as follows:
- Doing justice demands that we work to repair the damage inflicted by the offence and so far as possible restore the victims, offenders and communities.
- Those directly involved and affected by the crime should have the opportunity to participate fully in the restorative justice conference if they so desire.
- The State’s role is to preserve a just social order while the community’s role is to maintain a just peace.
It is necessary cheap viagra for women for the person to have satisfying intercourse. This is purchase of levitra https://www.supplementprofessors.com/viagra-5792.html called as emotional erectile dysfunction. viagra order canada I explain it in my eBook and articles. viagra on line order The effect of the drug lasts for about 36 hours after its consumption which must be done after about 1 hour prior to any sexual activity.
Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI urged us in his encyclical, “Charity in Truth”, to promote integral human development, that is, the development of each person and of every dimension of a person. If we are to do this and to build a civilisation of love, we must move away from our current retributive model which is obviously not working.
RJ is not a ‘soft’ option. Inter alia, as the MOJ Discussion Paper states, it addresses the experiences and needs of the victim, offender and the community. It encourages offenders to understand the real human consequences of their actions. It places the responsibility for the crime squarely in the hands of those who commit the offence.
Since, as Howard Zehr (2001) said, the values/underlying assumptions that underpin an RJ system are somewhat different from those that drive the current retributive system, CCSJ urges the Minister of Justice to consider the need to embrace a holistic approach to RJ and not seek to implement it piecemeal. Such an approach is essential if we are to reduce crime and promote social justice.
There are different forms of RJ, e.g. victim-offender mediation to facilitate healing, family group/community conferencing, restorative circles, sentencing circles, community based sentencing, and community restorative boards.
RJ must be linked to attempts to address the risk factors that contribute to crime, e.g. poverty, urban decay and social exclusion, family disintegration, lack of quality education and employment, poor housing, the proliferation of guns and drugs in T&T, white collar crimes. These all contribute to crime and unless our strategies address them, we will be spinning top in mud as the saying goes.
While schools cannot compensate totally for the role and function of parents, schools can and must make a difference, e.g. in seeking to strengthen family life, and beefing up violence prevention/conflict management programmes in schools. The current spate of violence among students – both within and outside of some schools – must be addressed as part of a wider programme on RJ.
The relevant authorities should increase the number of guidance officers, social workers, and counsellors in secondary schools; address structural and institutional injustices; create conditions that will allow each person to realise his/her potential; complete the restructuring and reformation of our prison system; and address the deficiencies in the administration of justice in T&T – such as lengthy delays in trials, poor witness protection system, etc.
The state of places like the Remand Yard remains a scandal. The lack of adequate youth correctional facilities for ALL youth who are sent to such facilities in T&T, unacceptable infrastructure, lack of adequate rehabilitation programmes within and outside prison are just some of the areas that must be addressed if RJ is to succeed.
T&T’s Inspector of Prisons Daniel Khan, Attorney-at-Law, says in his 500-page 2012 report that T&T’s recidivism rate is about 74 per cent. The motto of our Prison Service is: “To hold and treat”, yet, so many leave without receiving any real treatment.
