Rónán Mullen (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I congratulate Senator Conway and Senator Burke for proposing and seconding this motion and other speakers whose contributions I found very interesting. I have long been a believer in the importance of advancing restorative justice processes in our prison system and as an alternative to prison. I urge all present to give consideration to restorative justice as a serious and effective alternative to imprisonment in many cases. Currently the justice system is failing to deliver. It continues to lock up the poor and the vulnerable but it does not prevent crime or deter offenders. It does not address the root causes of crime and it does not manage to rehabilitate offenders very much either. Evidence of this can be found in the high rate of recidivism. The truth is that nobody benefits from crime, neither victims nor the community and under the current justice system the offender does not benefit especially if he or she continues to re-offend.

We have been talking about this for a long time but so much more needs to be done. Back in 2004 the annual report of the prison chaplains contained the combined reflections and experiences of those chaplains. They questioned the current system where people are imprisoned and a method of rehabilitation is attempted. However, it is questioned whether this can have a positive effect when people are removed from their family and society, when all responsibility is removed from them, such as the responsibility to earn a living, to care for their families and to become contributing members of society. I am not denying, of course, that there are situations where the custodial dimension is essential. However, we need to be realistic about what occurs under the current system where prisoners are confined to their cells for more than 17 hours a day with nothing to occupy them only television and computer games. As many who enter prison are not even able to read, that luxury is denied them. How can this be called rehabilitation when perhaps only four or five hours a day are devoted to education and work experience and only two hours a day devoted to recreation? The practical needs such as food and shelter are provided for but other basic human needs are denied to them. For example, young people of 16 and 17 are removed and isolated from their families and mothers and fathers are removed from their children. This will surely have a negative effect on future generations. Wives and children become social welfare recipients while at the same time husbands and fathers walk prison yards or lie in beds. The chaplains' report queried how productive from an economic point of view is the minimal training available in workshops when the same walls are constructed, painted over, knocked down and then the whole process repeated constantly. Prisoners often become institutionalised and marginalised. They lack social skills and they certainly do not develop the normal skills for everyday living.

Society needs to question whether imprisonment reforms, deters or discourages offenders. The high rates of recidivism must mean that the answer is clear; imprisonment does not reform or deter and it does not discourage crime. When offenders are sent to prison they are cut off from the consequences of their crimes and their responsibility to victims, families and society at large.

Restorative justice tries to set up a situation where offenders are confronted, among other things, with the consequences of their actions and the effects of their actions on others. It would involve, in my view, a brand new approach to the treatment of sex offenders. This is a very difficult and sensitive area but many such offences are perpetrated within the family so, therefore, where possible, the solution and healing might best, in some cases, be found within a family setting. Community-based programmes can offer an alternative to prison. The particular needs of some young sex offenders might best be met within community while undergoing treatment. Certainly, locking them away in an all-male prison, where minimal if any help is available to them, cannot sensibly be seen as a solution. Older men, especially those who have not offended in years, could benefit more from treatment in some cases than from imprisonment. Of course I am not saying that there must not be a prosecutorial and sometimes a custodial dimension. That will, of course, always depend on the seriousness of the crime and the other surrounding circumstances. However, it is about society thinking smarter instead of working harder. Society can become a safer place, for example, when sex offenders receive proper treatment. Child protection is enhanced and there is less disruption to the lives of many families. There is an important balance to be struck.

The process of restorative justice can also better serve the needs of those suffering from addiction. Prison becomes a fertile ground for drugs of all kinds as a consequence of the lack of any meaningful employment. Drug use arises when existence becomes sheer boredom and a lack of meaningful contact with family and friends makes the situation worse. The underlying problems that originally led to drug use are rarely dealt with. The absence of counsellors, apart from those who provide the service on a voluntary basis, means that for the most part, prison is a complete waste of time and of taxpayers' money. Addictions such as alcohol call for treatment first.

I will conclude by making a few brief points. Examples of where restorative justice has been put into use successfully can be found in Germany, New Zealand and Japan. Atlantic Philanthropies has done good work in Northern Ireland in promoting initiatives across the community which are designed to support reconciliation, to address the problems of the past and to assist communities in moving away from violence.

I believe that if a system of restorative justice, building on the initiatives referred to by other speakers, were to be seriously embraced, it would reduce recidivism and as a result, there would be a decrease in the total prison population. I am certain that everyone in society would support it.

I refer to an article published in the Irish Probation Journal in 2011 by Shane McCarthy. A limited survey among defence solicitors, designed to measure their knowledge and understanding of the principles of restorative justice, found that in many cases there were limitations and gaps in the understanding even among legal personnel about the potential of restorative justice. Much work remains to be done. It is a major challenge because of long-established practice and embedded systems that have to be questioned all over again. We need to raise the profile of restorative justice among the key people in criminal justice. We need an education strategy to inform people and to assure them that it works, that there can be benefits. The implementation of the key recommendations of the national commission should be prioritised and expanded as part of mainstream practice.

There is a need for ongoing evaluation of its efficacy and effectiveness as an alternative sanction. The implementation of any alternative sanction should be monitored. This is not just some idealistic left-wing fantasy, rather it is something that has been seen to work and can work for us as a society. I again express my thanks and congratulations to my colleagues.