Police-referred restorative justice for juveniles in Australia

This preliminary paper provides an overview of the legislative and policy context of restorative justice measures for juveniles in each Australian state and territory, highlighting the diverse characteristics of current restorative practices. Further, it provides an indication of the numbers and characteristics of juveniles who are referred by police to restorative justice measures and the offence types for which they are most commonly referred. A number of key points about the application of restorative justice measures to juveniles in Australia’s jurisdictions are highlighted, including that juveniles were referred to conferences primarily for property crimes and that Indigenous juveniles comprised higher proportions of those sent to court than to conferencing. This paper argues that more detailed data on the offending histories, offence types and offence seriousness of juveniles referred by police to restorative justice processes would enable a more finely-grained analysis of restorative justice for juveniles in Australia.

Unlikely friends? Oprah Winfrey and restorative justice

In recent years, restorative justice has surfaced as a new criminal justice practice in diverse parts of the world. Often, it appears that these practices have emerged in complete isolation from one another. This prompts us to question what it is that has allowed restorative justice to become an acceptable way of dealing with criminal justice issues, or in Foucault's terms, the ‘conditions of emergence’ of restorative justice. This article explores one of numerous potential ‘conditions of emergence’ of restorative justice — the discourses of the ‘therapeutic’, ‘recovery’, ‘self-help’ and ‘New Age’ movements. It aims to investigate the ways in which the taken-for-granted nature of these discourses have, in part, permitted restorative practices to become an approved way of ‘doing justice’.

Taking victims seriously? : the role of victims' rights movements in the emergence of restorative justice

It is widely accepted in the literature on restorative justice that restorative practices emerged at least partly as a result of the recent shift towards recognising the rights of victims of crime, and increasing the involvement of victims in the criminal justice system. This article seeks to destabilise this claim. Although it accepts that there is a relationship between the emergence of a strong victims' rights movement and the emergence of restorative justice, it argues that this relationship is more nuanced, complex and contingent than advocates of restorative justice allow.

What’s Oprah Winfrey got to do with it? The rise and rise of restorative justice

In recent years, restorative justice has become an immensely popular criminal justice option in contemporary western societies. Restorative practices have emerged in diverse parts of the world often in total isolation from one another – that is, they have emerged without knowledge of other, similar practices. This quandary prompts us to question how it is that restorative processes have come about, and what it is that has allowed restorative justice to become such a widely acceptable way of thinking about crime and criminal justice. The research project from which this pa-per stems takes this as its central problem, and aims to explore the many dis-courses which inform the field of restorative justice, or more specifically, the “conditions of emergence” of this field. This paper focuses on one of these discourses – the discourse of the therapeutic/recovery/self-help movement, famously championed by talk-show host Oprah Winfrey. It aims to investigate the ways in which the taken-for-granted nature of this discourse has permitted restorative justice to be-come an approved way of “doing justice”.

Against Rehabilitation; For Reparitive Justice

The difficulties of re-imagining the possible relationships between crime and justice in capitalist societies, and imagining the possible meanings of democracy in societies characterised by gross inequalities of knowledge, and exclusion of the majority from political decisions are well known. One such difficulty stems from the impossible necessity of maintaining stances of both constant reform and constant critique (see Carlen, 2012). Confronted with economic and cultural inequalities which routinely deny ideals of justice and democracy, there can be a temptation to suppress (or bracket-off) troubling knowledge of criminal justice's and democracy's maligned underbellies and instead talk 'as if' criminal justice's ideal play of governance is always and already realised in its rhetoric. In some senses, this 'as if' talk is aspirational and it is difficult to see how it could be otherwise if more just conceptions of criminal justice and more democratic forms of democracy are to be conceived. However, when, as often happens, aspirational criminal justice concepts become routinised and acted upon as if they can be realised without fundamental social change, they become penal imaginaries, part of a taken-for-granted ideological baggage which, because it is taken-for-granted, obstructs critique (see Carlen, 2008). One such penal imaginary is the concept of rehabilitation, a concept which has a long history of justifying almost every kind of non-lethal response to lawbreaking and which is currently being reborn yet again in theories of criminal desistance and anti-prison campaigns as well as in the more invidious rehabilitation industry with its sales of programmes for cognitive reform.

Beyond the ‘three dogmas of juvenile justice’ : a response to Weatherburn, McGrath and Bartels

In 'Three Dogmas of Juvenile Justice', Weatherburn, McGrath and Bartels identify three 'assumptions' or 'dogmas' about youth justice, on which they claim 'juvenile justice policy in Australia currently rests'.

Review essay : Crime, risk and money : "The Currency of Justice : Fines and Damages in Consumer Societies" and "Crime and Risk", both by Pat O'Malley

Sharing some closely related themes and a common theoretical orientation based on the governmentality analytic, these are nevertheless two very different contributions to criminological knowledge and theory. The first, The Currency of Justice: Fines and Damages in Consumer Societies (COJ), is a sustained and highly original analysis of that most pervasive yet overlooked feature of modern legal orders; their reliance on monetary sanctions. Crime and Risk (CAR), on the other hand, is a short synoptic overview of the many dimensions and trajectories of risk in contemporary debate and practice, both the practices of crime and the governance of crime. It is one of the first in a new series by Sage, 'Compact Criminology', in which authors survey in little more than a hundred pages some current field of debate. With this small gem, Pat O'Malley has set the bar very high for those who follow. For all its brevity, CAR traverses a massive expanse of research, debates and issues, while also opening up new and challenging questions around the politics of risk and the relationship between criminal risk-taking and the governance of risk and crime. The two books draw together various threads of O'Malley's rich body of work on these issues, and once again demonstrate that he is one of the foremost international scholars of risk inside and outside criminology.

Blurred lines : reconsidering the concept of ‘diversion’ in youth justice systems in Australia

This article revisits ‘diversion’ in the context of youth justice in Australia. Although ‘diversion’ is omnipresent in youth justice, it is rarely subject to critical examination. This article raises four interrelated questions: what young people are to be ‘diverted’ from and to; whether young people are to be ‘diverted’ from the criminal justice system or from offending; whether young people are to be ‘diverted’ from criminal justice processes or outcomes; and whether ‘diversion’ should be considered distinct from crime prevention and early intervention. The article concludes that the confusion about youth ‘diversion’ may foster individualised interventions in young people’s lives.

The promise of justice reinvestment

Abstract: This article examines the notion and practice of Justice Reinvestment (‘JR’), an emerging approach addressing the high social and economic costs of soaring incarceration rates. JR invests in public safety by reallocating dollars from corrections budgets to finance education, housing, healthcare, and jobs in high-crime communities. Key distinguishing features of JR (including justice and asset mapping, budgetary devolution and localism, and the desirability of bipartisanship) are briefly outlined, followed by discussion of its recent emergence and application in the United States, and to a lesser extent in the United Kingdom. The prospects for the adoption of JR approaches in Australia are then considered, with particular reference to the high imprisonment rates of Indigenous people. If JR is to be promoted in the Australian context it is important that it be subject to critical scrutiny and therefore some of the key problems are briefly outlined, before a conclusion which emphasizes the potential benefits of JR.

Criminal Laws : Materials and Commentary on Criminal Law and Process in NSW [Fifth Edition]

"The success of Criminal Laws lies both in its distinctive features and in its appeal to a range of readerships. As one review put it, it is simultaneously a "textbook, casebook, handbook and reference work". As such it is ideal for criminal law and criminal justice courses as a teaching text, combining as it does primary sources with extensive critical commentary and a contextual perspective. It is likewise indispensable to practitioners for its detailed coverage of substantive law and its extensive references and inter-disciplinary approach make it a first point of call for researchers from all disciplines. This fifth edition strengthens these distinctive features. All chapters have been systematically updated to incorporate the plethora of legislative, case law, statistical and research material which has emerged since the previous edition. The critical, thematic, contextual and interdisciplinary perspectives have been continued."--Publisher's website. Table of Contents: 1. Some themes -- 2. Criminalisation -- 3. The criminal process -- 4. Components of criminal offences -- 5. Homicide: murder and involuntary manslaughter -- 6. Defences -- 7. Assault and sexual assault -- 8. Public order offences -- 9. Drugs offences -- 10. Dishonest acquisition -- 11. Extending criminal liability: complicity, conspiracy and association -- 12. Sentencing and penality.

Prison rates, social democracy, neoliberalism and justice reinvestment

This chapter will begin with a brief summary of some recent research in the field of comparative penology. This work will be examined to explore the benefits, difficulties and limits of attempting to link criminal justice issues to types of advanced democratic polities, with particular emphasis on political economies. This stream of comparative penology examines data such as imprisonment rates and levels of punitiveness in different countries, before drawing conclusions based on the patterns which seem to emerge. Foremost among these is that the high imprisoning countries tend to be the advanced western liberal democracies which have gone furthest in adopting neoliberal economic and social policies, as against the lower imprisonment rates of social democracies, which variably have attempted to temper free-market economic policies in various ways. Such work brings both social democracy and neoliberalism into focus as issues for, or subjects of, criminology. Not in the sense of new ‘brands’ of criminology but rather as an examination of the connections between the political projects of social democracy and neoliberalism, and issues of crime and criminal justice. In the new comparative penology, social democracy and neoliberalism are cast in opposition, simultaneously raising the questions of to what extent and how adequately both social democracy and neoliberalism have been constituted as subjects in criminology and whether dichotomy is the only available trope of analysis?

Indigenous Youth Justice Programs Evaluation

Diversion from the youth justice system is a critical goal for addressing the overrepresentation of Indigenous young people in the criminal justice system. In this report, four programs that were already being implemented by states and territories and identified by them under the National Indigenous Law & Justice Framework as promising practice in diversion are examined. The programs were evaluated, as part of a broader initiative, to determine whether and on what basis they represent good practice (ie are supported by evidence). State and territory governments nominated the programs for evaluation.

Unspeakably present: The (un)acknowledgment of diverse sexuality and gender human rights in Australian youth justice systems

A number of international human rights frameworks protect the rights of young people in contact with the criminal justice system in states parties, including Australia. These frameworks inform youth justice policy in Australia’s jurisdictions. While the frameworks protect young people’s right to non-discrimination on the grounds of ‘race’, religion and political opinion, the rights of young people to non-discrimination on the grounds of sexuality and gender diversity are not explicitly protected. This is problematic given that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ) young people appear over-represented in youth justice systems. This article argues that the exclusion of this group from human rights frameworks has an important flow-on effect: the marginalisation of the right of LGBTIQ young people to non-discrimination in policy and discourse that is informed by international human rights frameworks. After outlining the relevant frameworks, this article examines the evidence about LGBTIQ young people’s interactions with youth justice agencies, particularly police. The evidence indicates that the human rights of LGBTIQ young people are frequently breached in these interactions. We conclude by arguing that it is timely to consider how best to protect the human rights of LBGTIQ young people and keep their rights on the agenda.