-

-

-

-

In this moment, different programs are being implemented in collaboration with external agents.

In some cases, meetings between victims and inmates have been prepared. The person in charge of moderation depends on the program and specific situation of both, inmate and victim.

Generally, it is difficult to stablish a relation between participating in a programe and reoffending. Nevertheless, there are cases of victims that have given a very positive feedback.

Yes. In some prisons and with the collaboration of external agents.

Currently, restorative justice programmes are not widely used within SPS. However, at HM Young Offenders Institution Polmont, a restorative justice process can be used to resolve in-house conflict. The process looks at the facts of the situation, the consequences arising from the dispute and the future options for the individuals involved and can be used to repair the harm done after a fight, an assault or any arguments or disagreements.

In Finland we have a couple of restorative "programs". The most important - although quite new - program is "Restorative Dialogue in Serious Crimes" (Vakavien rikosten Jälkikäsittely). This means that the victim or relative or covictim of serious crime (homicide, attempted manslaughter, aggravated assault, sexual crime) can consider if he or she wants to meet the offender face to face with two facilitators in order to have answers for his or her questions or what ever his/her needs are. Offender or victim can make the initiative. We have made a careful modeling about this quite long process. Another type of program is restorative dialogue between the offender and his/her member of the family in order to minimize the consequences of the crime for the family. Third type of "program": in the restorative department of the prison where restorative values are followed we with surrogate victims visit the prisoners in this department and have discussions with the prisoners who participate e.g. violent or substance abuse -program. There are carried out also other restorative practices. We have made a draft of a program of 6-10 times. Fourth type of "program": mediation or restorative dialogue between two prisoners.

Yes all those programmes (see above) include face-to-face or shuttle -meetings between prisoners and victims or representatives of victims. Two facilitators moderate these meetings, although this varies a little depending on the type of the program. Restorative dialogue in serious crimes -program is carried out together with prison service and NGO -nowadays under Finnish institute for health and welfare- as partnership.

The restorative Finnish programs are guite new so we have not been able to investigate the effects for re-offending. However we have interviewed all the participants who have participated face-to-face -meetings and documented their experiences immediately after the meeting and about 2-3 months later. They all have been satisfied with the process and meeting the other. Relatives of the victims have told that their fear and anger and hate have decreased or disappeared. Their social relations have improved. Many have told that their PTSD -symptoms have decreased and they have been happy that they have been able to have answers to their questions from the prisoner. Prisoners have been relieved that they have been able to show their remorse and perhaps to apologize. Their anxiety and feeling of revenge (if he/she has had that kind of feeling) have decreased. This meeting has usually motivated the prisoners to focus better on their rehabilitation programs. Some prisoners have also told that this encounter has facilitated their re-integration process when they release from the prison. In restorative department of the prison when we have interviewed the inmates who have participated in rehabilitative programs they have been more motivated and eager to participate and learn when the environment is respectful, genuine, honest and confidential. The prisoners can trust that everyone in this Group want to change their behaviour and thoughts.

Using principles of restorative justice within disciplinary cases is one of our aims for the future: to use restorative discussion after the traditional punisment or if it is not so severe violation then only the restorative discussion is used. In one restorative department of one prison we have trained the staff and prisoners to use peaceful conflict solutions – and again when new group of prisoners have been accepted in the department.

In Finland we have a couple of restorative "programs". The most important - although quite new - program is "Restorative Dialogue in Serious Crimes" (Vakavien rikosten Jälkikäsittely). This means that the victim or relative or covictim of serious crime (homicide, attempted manslaughter, aggravated assault, sexual crime) can consider if he or she wants to meet the offender face to face with two facilitators in order to have answers for his or her questions or what ever his/her needs are. Offender or victim can make the initiative. We have made a careful modeling about this quite long process. Another type of program is restorative dialogue between the offender and his/her member of the family in order to minimize the consequences of the crime for the family. Third type of "program": in the restorative department of the prison where restorative values are followed we with surrogate victims visit the prisoners in this department and have discussions with the prisoners who participate e.g. violent or substance abuse -program. There are carried out also other restorative practices. We have made a draft of a program of 6-10 times. Fourth type of "program": mediation or restorative dialogue between two prisoners.

Yes all those programmes (see above) include face-to-face or shuttle -meetings between prisoners and victims or representatives of victims. Two facilitators moderate these meetings, although this varies a little depending on the type of the program. Restorative dialogue in serious crimes -program is carried out together with prison service and NGO -nowadays under Finnish institute for health and welfare- as partnership.

The restorative Finnish programs are guite new so we have not been able to investigate the effects for re-offending. However we have interviewed all the participants who have participated face-to-face -meetings and documented their experiences immediately after the meeting and about 2-3 months later. They all have been satisfied with the process and meeting the other. Relatives of the victims have told that their fear and anger and hate have decreased or disappeared. Their social relations have improved. Many have told that their PTSD -symptoms have decreased and they have been happy that they have been able to have answers to their questions from the prisoner. Prisoners have been relieved that they have been able to show their remorse and perhaps to apologize. Their anxiety and feeling of revenge (if he/she has had that kind of feeling) have decreased. This meeting has usually motivated the prisoners to focus better on their rehabilitation programs. Some prisoners have also told that this encounter has facilitated their re-integration process when they release from the prison. In restorative department of the prison when we have interviewed the inmates who have participated in rehabilitative programs they have been more motivated and eager to participate and learn when the environment is respectful, genuine, honest and confidential. The prisoners can trust that everyone in this Group want to change their behaviour and thoughts.

Using principles of restorative justice within disciplinary cases is one of our aims for the future: to use restorative discussion after the traditional punisment or if it is not so severe violation then only the restorative discussion is used. In one restorative department of one prison we have trained the staff and prisoners to use peaceful conflict solutions – and again when new group of prisoners have been accepted in the department.

In Lithuania restorative (mediation) programs are implemented by probation staff (mediators). In the Lithuanian Probation Service, the mediation process is usually used discussing the cases of compensation for criminal damage (at the pre-trial stage, in court or after conviction) and domestic violence, when the issues of communicating with children, their maintenance and, sometimes, property division are discussed. Mediation is not limited to these cases and can be used for any type of dispute at any stage of the criminal justice system.

The Lithuanian probation staff (mediators) organize meetings (online meetings and phone calls during the pandemic) between the victim and the offender.

The anonymous survey revealed that the majority of offenders are satisfied with their decision to participate in the mediation process. No other studies have been carried out yet.

Restorative justice measures are most commonly used for victim – offender mediation. Heads of correctional institutions are recommended to more often use restorative justice in conflict situations between inmates and staff, and the imposition of disciplinary sanctions should be the last resort, as provided for in the European prison rules. The mediation system in Lithuania was launched in 2014, 82 specialists (14 mediators and 68 probation officers) were trained within the period of the project implementation.

The Austrian Prison System is basically embossed by the idea of resocialisation: the of-fender should be reintegrated into society without committing further crimes (relapse management). This goal is not just pursued during the time in prison, but especially in times of release (release management). To support the inmates beyond the activities set by the probation service there are different national institutions. Their main goal is to help these people to help themselves (consultation and support to get into contact with other follow-up care and post-rehabilitation institutions, arrangement of accommodations and work/employment, programs for creating a daily structure, etc.).

Generally, during the time of imprisonment, the victims are not involved in these restora-tive programs. However, in some cases (e.g. if children are victims) there are possibilities to have joined meetings with the prisoner, the victim, the prison service and specific au-thorities or NGOs (e.g. youth health care, victim protection facilities). Because of the sensitivity of the concerning crimes, it is always necessary to prepare and hold these meetings in a multi-professional setting. Such meetings, however, cannot be obligatory.

Most of the inmates consider it as a big advantage and give positive feedback about re-ceiving the necessary help to help themselves; especially if they have served a long-term sentence (e.g. after an imprisonment of several years the digital development in daily life is often not easy to handle without any help). Furthermore, often inmates are unable to cope with all the bureaucracy they have to manage after being released (e.g. finding an accom-modation, a job, paying back debts, etc.). The participation in restorative programs helps (former) prisoners to (re)integrate into society and reduces re-offending.

No, it is generally not used within disciplinary proceedings, but, if necessary, the psycholo-gists (trained prison staff) hold specific professional conversations with the inmates concerned. In conflict situations between inmates, after being reported to the judge, the victim (inmate) has to have the possibility to get into contact with a victim protection facility.

There is no specific RJ based programme in Croatian prisons, but some programs have the elements of this approach. Elements of RJ are applied under the intervention programme for perpetrators of offences in traffic. Namely, group intervention programme for perpetrators of offences in traffic encompasses psychoeducational part - raising knowledge about traffic regulations, causes and consequences of traffic; and psychosocial part - regulation of psychological hazard mechanisms, risk acceptance, awareness and self-assessment of subjective factors which are risky for safe driving, the importance of cooperation and communication with other participants in traffic, the development of positive attitudes and motivations in relation to traffic safety, gaining insight into own behaviour and dealing with the consequences of traffic misconduct. Previously the core element of the programme was holding mediation groups consisted of prisoners - offenders in traffic (selected by the prison specialist staff) and representatives of families of traffic victims - members of the NGO named Association of families of traffic victims. Unfortunately, this practice doesn’t exist anymore as the mentioned NGO is inactive for last several years. Other part of the programme with elements of RJ refers to visits of representatives of prisoners - offenders in traffic to high-schools and meetings with students (aged 17-18 years) who are soon to receive their driver’s licences and this practice is still applied but on a small scale. In addition, the EU funded project “Restorative Justice at Post Sentencing level; Supporting and Protecting Victims” was conducted in the period 2013 to 2014 - for more information, please consult https://www.balkan-criminology.eu/projects/restorative-justice-croatia/)

As explained above, meetings between victims and perpetrators were held within the intervention programme for perpetrators of offences in traffic. Specialist staff from prison (social pedagogue, psychologist or social worker trained in the specific programme) pre-selects prisoners who are able to participate, prepares them for the meeting and runs/moderates the meeting. Participants from the side of victims are pre-selected and prepared by the NGO. It is worth to mention that special attention was given not to have in the meeting perpetrators and victims of the same offence (only indirect encounter was possible to avoid possible psychological harm for participants and/or inability of both staff and participants to cope with the situation).

Participants from the side of perpetrators and victims were very satisfied with the meetings. The feedback from prisoners indicated increased understanding and empathy for the victims, increased perception of own accountability for one’s actions and behaviours and sense of emotional relief arising from words of understanding, and sometimes even forgiveness from the victims’ side. The feedback from victims’ side indicated mostly emotional relief arising from understanding offenders as human beings who also suffer psychological and emotional damage as a consequence of their actions (which impact also their families) and who are often in search for forgiveness. No research was conducted on the effects of this method in terms of reoffending.

Principles of restorative justice are not applied in prisoners’ disciplinary proceedings.

Unfortunately we do not deliver any restorative program in our prison system yet. There is not yet a developed model of Restorative Justice in Slovenia as such. However there are some similar modes such as settlement and mediation in criminal matters operating. All are under the court jurisdiction. Settlements in criminal proceedings are possible in cases punishable either by fine or by three years of prison (five years in case of minors) and can be implemented on discretion of attorney general. Diversion proposed by the public prosecutor can be enforced before the criminal proceeding or even during the trial process. Some sort of ‘spirit of restorative justice’ could be found in community service as a mode of serving prison sentence, restitution of damage as part of the sentence and also the extenuating circumstances in determining sentence if an offender restitutes for the damage done. Conditional sentence as defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure could be seen as partly restorative, because imposed conditions are associated with performing either restitution of damage, contribution to the wronged party or for charity or community service. In case of minors the court could impose a commitment to settle with the wronged party.

See answer to the first question.

See answer to the first question.

See answer to the first question.

Restorative justice in France is implemented through 7 types of programmes that differ from one another, particularly in the actors they mobilise, namely : • Inmate/victim meetings in the custodial sector; • Convicted offenders/victims meetings in the non-custodial sector; • Restorative mediation or mediation between perpetrators and victims; • Restorative Conferences or Family Group Conferences; • Circles of support and responsibility; • Circles of support and resources; • Sycamore Tree (experimented in 2019 in a prison)

With the exception of the Circles of Support and responsibility and the Circles of Support and Resources, which only concern perpetrators coming out of detention and which are grouped together in the category of support groups, the programmes include meetings between prisoners and victims. However, a distinction should be made between meetings that bring together perpetrators and victims of the same case (restorative mediation) and indirect meetings between perpetrators and victims, which aim to bring together perpetrators and victims who are not involved in the same case but only in the same type of offence. These meetings are facilitated by a specially trained independent third party (or third parties). This may be a pair of co-facilitators consisting of a professional from a victim support association or a socio-judicial service, an integration and probation officer or a youth protection worker. These meetings also involve community members who have been trained in restorative justice. These people show the interest of society in the process undertaken. Their role is essentially one of listening and support.

Freeing speech and the fact of being able to express oneself freely, without taboos, are two elements of satisfaction that perpetrators and victims systematically evoke, often associating a feeling of well-being. The National Survey of Victims and Perpetrators participating in Restorative Justice conducted by the French Institute for Restorative Justice in 2019 collected testimonies from both victims and perpetrators. It highlights three major elements: -Restorative justice liberates through dialogue, which offers both the possibility of telling stories and of meeting each other; - Restorative justice is part of broader processes of reparation and desistance; - The crucial importance of the secure framework of restorative justice. By telling their stories, the victims experience a feeling of regaining power, while the perpetrators allow themselves to speak through the dynamics of authentic, taboo-free exchange that the restorative justice framework allows. Victims who seek to understand the "why" and "how" of their actions get answers from the perpetrators themselves. The perpetrators express a sense of satisfaction. They were able to "help" the victims to "heal". They feel useful in this way. They also speak of relief and well-being while allowing themselves to envision a future and life projects. The desistance process is fuelled by the desire of victims to make perpetrators understand the extent of the repercussions of their actions by raising awareness. In turn, meeting victims and hearing their stories undoubtedly makes the perpetrators feel more responsible for their actions, but also for their consequences, of which they were often unaware. Finally, for the participants, the supervision of the system is reassuring and allows them to cope with the emotional charge of the meetings. It encourages listening to each person and creates an atmosphere of respect

No, we do not use restorative justice processes within disciplinary proceedings. However, the French National Correctional Administration Academy is currently developing a new training course entitled "mediation in a professional context", which will enable prison officers to be trained in relational mediation within prisons. This mediation can be carried out before or after a disciplinary procedure.