Skip to start of content

Home → Topics → Restorative justice → Comparison of models

Restorative justice

Comparison of models

Comparison of models

Who participates?
Restorative conferencing modelInvolved participants
Victim-offender mediation
  • Mediator
  • Victim
  • Offender
  • Other relevant individuals
Reparative boards
  • Co-ordinator
  • Community representative board
  • Offender and support person
  • Victim (limited attendance)
Family group conferencing
  • Co-ordinator
  • Victim and support persons
  • Offender and support persons
  • Police or other social support persons
Circle sentencing
  • Judge and other legal professionals (prosecution and defence)
  • Victim
  • Offender
  • Support services
  • Local community invited
  • Justice group and representatives
Role of the victim
Restorative conferencing modelVictim's role
Victim-offender mediation
  • Expresses feelings about crime and impact
  • Substantive input into means of reparation and offender's obligation
  • Has right of refusal to undertaking the mediation
Reparative boards
  • Victim's attendance at session is rarely encountered, however is being encouraged
  • Input into reparation plans sought on discretionary basis
Family group conferencing
  • Expresses feelings about crime and impact
  • Selective input into means of reparation
Circle sentencing
  • Has involvement in the circle decision-making process
  • Determines the eligibility of the offender for the scheme
  • May participate in a healing conference
Processes and protocols
Restorative conferencing modelProcesses and practices
Victim-offender mediation
  • Victim initiates the proceedings with guidance and encouragement by the mediator
  • Offender is then encouraged to speak
Reparative boards
  • Offender is questioned and makes statements regarding the offence
  • The board privately deliberates the appropriate sanctions and reparation for the crime
Family group conferencing
  • Family members begin in private discussions about the process of the decision-making, and the agreed process is then initiated
Circle sentencing
  • At commencement of session, the judge may make comment
  • Prosecution and defence outline the facts of the case
  • Other participants are able to speak when the "talking piece" (feather or stick) is passed to them
  • Consensual decision-making process
Outcomes sought
Restorative conferencing modelOutcomes sought
Victim-offender mediation
  • Victim satisfaction through having the opportunity to outline the impact of the crime and through expression of their needs and feelings
  • The offender gains an understanding of the harm caused and has empathy towards the victim
  • All parties are satisfied with the generated reparative plan
Reparative boards
  • The involvement of citizens in the decision-making process regarding criminal sanctioning
  • Determine and agree upon a reparative plan for the offender
  • Address means of avoiding recidivism
Family group conferencing
  • Clarify the facts of the case
  • Outline the inappropriateness of the behaviour whilst supporting the offender and encouraging their reintegration
  • Focus on the 'wrongness' of the behaviour rather than the offender and their characteristics
Circle sentencing
  • Community capacity building in regard to dispute resolution and crime prevention
  • Outline a reparative and rehabilitative plan for the offende
  • Address the needs and concerns of the victim as well as those related to issues of public safety
  • Provide support services for both the victim and the offender
Source: A comparison of four restorative conferencing models / Gordon Bazemore and Mark Umbreit, 2001 Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Juvenile justice bulletin, February 2001

Success rates of diversionary schemes