Ms Catherine Ashe:

My colleague, Ms Claire Casey, and I represent the Restorative Practice Strategic Forum. The forum promotes and supports the use of a wide range of restorative approaches spanning all sectors of the community. It is grateful to the committee for the opportunity to comment on the heads of the Bill and it restricts its comments to specific aspects of heads 8 and 9, referring to victims’ interests and restorative justice.

The forum makes comments in respect of five key aspects of the provisions in heads 8 and 9. It welcomes the inclusion in the heads of the Bill of provisions relating to restorative justice. It recognises that the stated intention is to provide for a limited and specific restorative justice approach in District Court criminal proceedings for minor offences. It also recognises that the focus of the Bill is on community sanctions, not restorative justice.

The forum would respectfully suggest that consideration be given to broadening the scope of the restorative justice provisions to include so-called “victimless” crimes or offences where a corporate victim is involved or cases where the victim does not wish to receive reparation or engage otherwise with the offender. In such cases, reparation could be paid to the court reparation fund for possible dispensing to other victims or for the benefit of communities affected by crime.

Of critical importance in the view of the forum is that it is not necessary or desirable that a willing, remorseful and otherwise suitable offender should be denied an opportunity to benefit from a discharge or binding over order by making reparation. We welcome the inclusion of non-financial forms of reparation in the definition of reparation and the possibility to adjourn proceedings to ensure sufficient time to make reparation. We also welcome the possibility of offenders benefiting from discharge and binding-over orders, notwithstanding that they do not have the means to make reparation. It is also our view that the payment of reparation should take place in a restorative context. This would include other restorative actions by the offender, including potentially a restorative dialogue with the victim, and supports for offenders to avoid further offending. We welcome the statutory underpinning of reparation, although we see court-based reparation as a very limited form of restorative justice and recognise that reparation is already a possibility, and a reality in the majority of cases, under other restorative justice options, such as community-offender reparation panels and victim-offender mediation.