GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR RESTORATIVE CONFERENCING

THE NEW ZEALAND MODEL

• Criminal proceedings should be avoided unless the public interest requires otherwise.
• Criminal justice processes should not be used to provide welfare assistance.
• Families should be strengthened…by fostering their abilities to develop means of dealing with offending within the family and ensuring that an appropriate network is in place to allow for a plan to succeed.
• Children should be kept in the community if at all possible.
• The child or young person’s age must be taken into account.  Youth are still developing thus their overall needs and responsibilities are guides to decisions affecting them.
• Personal development should be promoted using the least restrictive option.
• The interests of victims must be considered.  It is very effective to have young people focus on the impact of their actions and the subsequent needs that must be addressed.  This is true accountability since it has natural and logical consequences.

 Adapted from The Little Book of Family Group Conferences by Allan MacRae and Howard Zehr

• NOTES:  The “Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act” passed by New Zealand’s Parliament in 1989 specified seven guiding principles for the Family Group Conference process in youth justice cases.  These have been applied to shape policy and to guide decisions in each case and each situation.  It appears from New Zealand’s 20-year experience that success is dependent on consistently following such principles rather than on imposing a rigid procedural model.  In Santa Barbara County, the process is referred to as “Restorative Conferencing.” It expands beyond the family group to involve various supportive community-based networks.

BALANCED AND RESTORATIVE JUSTICE [BARJ] MODEL

• Crime is injury.
• Crime hurts individual victims, communities, and juvenile offenders and creates an obligation to make things right.
• All parties should be a part of the response to the crime, including the victim if he or she wishes, the community, and the juvenile offender.
• The victim's perspective is central to deciding how to repair the harm caused by the crime.
• Accountability for the juvenile offender means accepting responsibility and acting to repair the harm done.
• The community is responsible for the well-being of all its members, including both victim and offender.
• All human beings have dignity and worth.
• Restoration -- repairing the harm and rebuilding relationships in the community -- is the primary goal of restorative juvenile justice.
• Results are measured by how much repair was done rather than by how much punishment was inflicted.
• Crime control cannot be achieved without active involvement of the community.
• The juvenile justice process is respectful of age, abilities, sexual orientation, family status, and diverse cultures and backgrounds -- whether racial, ethnic, geographic, religious, economic, or other -- and all are given equal protection and due process.

NOTE:  BARJ was one of many initiatives that arose out of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention withing the U.S. Dept. of Justice.  It was established in 1985 and, thirteen years later, was identified as an effective model by the OJJDP.  The Project began coordinating a special emphasis, states initiative of which California became a member in 2000.