Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Ten Years On, the ‘Three Circle’ Model of Restorative & Transformative Justice: A Tool to Combat Victimization and Recidivism

  • Published:
Asian Journal of Criminology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper had its genesis 10 years ago in the authors’ development of a communitarian ‘three circle’ model of restorative and transformative justice for a pilot restorative justice study used with serious and repeat adult offenders appearing in the Magistrates’ Courts in Western Australia. The model was designed in part to place their crimes within a context, something that rarely occurs within the mainstream adversarial criminal justice system in Australia. The model was primarily designed to provide victims of crime with the best outcome and offenders with the opportunity to provide apology and restitution, as well as take responsibility for their actions. The three circles, each including two facilitators, are: Circle 1: consists of the perpetrator who has pleaded guilty to a specified criminal act together with his/her family and/or friends; Circle 2: consists of the victim(s) of the crime together with their family and/or friends. Circle 3: consists of a combination of the first two circles, tasked to seek, if possible, a mutually agreeable resolution that culminates in a report to present to the Magistrate in court to use in mitigation of sentencing. Importantly, although the 30-month study had socially and economically significant results, 10 years after its completion there is still no restorative justice program in the adult courts in Western Australia. Because of this, the authors also set out to question the state government’s motivation in largely ignoring this successful process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics (2002) 4517.0, Prisoners in Australia, June 2002. www.abs.gov.au>ABSHOME>statistics>ByReleaseDate

  • Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012) 4517.0, Prisoners in Australia, October 6th 2012 http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/5CDADB0B6AC7958DCA257A150018FD40?opendocument

  • Australian Institute of Criminology. (2007). Australian crime facts and figures, 2006. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beven, J., Hall, G., Froyland, I., Steels, B., & Goulding, D. (2005). ‘Restoration or Renovation? Evaluating restorative justice outcomes’, in Psychiatry. Psychology and the Law, 12(1), 194–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonta, J., Jesseman, R., Rugge, T., & Cormier, R. (2006). Restorative justice and recidivism: Promises made, promises kept? In D. Sullivan & L. Tifft (Eds.), Handbook of restorative justice: A global perspective. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, shame and reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, R., (2002) HEUNI Papers, United Nations Programme Network Institutes Technical Assistance Workshop, Rapporteur’s Report No 17, April 17th 2002, Vienna.

  • Coyle, A. (2001). ‘The myth of prison work’, in The Restorative Prison Project. London: International Centre for Prison Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff, A., & Garland, D. (Eds.). (1994). A reader on punishment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrall, S. (1995). Why do people stop offending. Scottish Journal of Criminal Justice Studies, 1, 51–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulding, D., & Steels, B., (2006) Developing, implementing & researching a communitarian model of Restorative & Transformative Justice for adult offenders in magistrates’ courts’. In: King, M., & Auty, K., (Eds) Special series, eLaw Journal, Vol 1, 2006. http://elaw.murdoch.edu.au

  • King, M., & Ford, S., (2006) Exploring the concept of wellbeing in therapeutic jurisprudence: The example of the geraldton alternative sentencing regime. In: King, M., & Auty, K., (Eds) Special series, eLaw Journal, Vol 1, 2006. http://elaw.murdoch.edu.au

  • Latimer, J., Dowden, C., & Muise, D. (2001). The effectiveness of restorative justice practices: A meta-analysis. Canada: Ottawa Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maruna, S., & Immarigeon, R. (2004). After crime and punishment: Pathways to offender reintegration. London: Willan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, A. (2002). Critiquing the critics: a brief response to critics of restorative justice. British Journal of Criminology, 40, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G., & Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: a theory of juvenile delinquency. American Sociological Review, 22, 664–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. (1990). Why people obey the law. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, T. (2006). Restorative justice and procedural justice: Dealing with rule breaking. Journal of Social Issues, 62(2), 307–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dot Goulding.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Goulding, D., Steels, B. Ten Years On, the ‘Three Circle’ Model of Restorative & Transformative Justice: A Tool to Combat Victimization and Recidivism. Asian Criminology 8, 321–333 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-013-9162-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11417-013-9162-6

Keywords

Navigation