Criterios que se asumen sobre el concepto de sistema

Braithwaite (1989) points out that the concept of restorative justice has predominated criminal justice throughout human history (Neser, 2001). Bazemore and Umbreit (2001) maintain that the origin of the principles of restorative justice can be traced to traditional reactions to crime. Restorative justice is defined as “a system of criminal justice which focuses on the rehabilitation of offenders through reconciliation with victims and the community at large” (Zehr, 2014) (Zehr & Gohar, 2003: 11). It is the process whereby all the stakeholders get the opportunity to discuss the incident that caused harm and they also decide how to repair the harm (Braithwaite, 2004: 28).

Prison Fellowship International (PFI) (2001) states that the definition of restorative justice, which is increasingly used internationally, is:

a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future (Prison Fellowship International, 2001-2005).

In a later edition Restorative Justice Online, a programme of the PFI centre, restorative justice is defined as:

Restorative justice is a systematic response to wrongdoing that emphasizes healing the wounds of victims, offenders and communities caused or revealed by the criminal behaviour (Prison Fellowship International, 2001-2005).

According to Umbreit (1998), the Director of the Centre for Restorative Justice and Mediation and the National Restorative Justice Training Institute in the United States of America, restorative justice focuses on elevating the role of crime victims and the community as a victim. The offender needs to be held accountable primarily to the victim and then to the community and to make whatever possible reparation for all harm caused by the crime. Bazemore and Umbreit (2001) state, “crime is sanctioned most effectively when offenders take responsibility for their crimes and the harm caused to victims, when offenders make amends by restoring losses, and when communities and victims take active roles in the sanctioning process” (Umbreit, 1998: 5).

To this, the White paper of the Department of Correctional Services (DCS), adds that offenders need to internalise the impact that their actions have had on the victims and on society as a whole (SAGovernment, 2003). Imiera (2018:147) states that “Restorative justice as a means of bringing back offenders into society can emphasize the importance of treating the true cause of crime”. Restorative justice try to find a restoration of the balance by bringing the victims back into the system and at the same time involving the perpetrators in a way that they realise the harm they have done (Imiera, 2018). Umbreit (1998:5) states, “[restorative justice] assumes that those most affected by crime should have the opportunity to become actively involved in resolving the conflict”.

According to Prison Fellowship International (2001), restorative justice views crime comprehensively and acknowledges that the harm caused by the offender harms the victim, the community and the offender. Restorative justice does not focus on how much punishment is necessary to inflict on the offender, but rather on what can be done to repair the damage caused by the crime.

Ganapathy (2006) points out that restorative justice is constructive because it is a process whereby the community and the offender can do something for the victim, rather than the state doing something against the offender.

Finally, restorative justice principles emerged clearly in the strongly established traditions of non-western societies (Neser, 2001). In the traditional reaction to crime or disputes between individuals that were regarded as members of the group, the whole group was perceived as the victim. The group to which the offender belonged was responsible for making amends to the victim and the restoration of the relationship between the two parties. One of the most important functions of the indigenous African legal systems is “…the restoration of the disturbed social equilibrium within the community” (Neser, 2001: 2). This collectively is part of the Ubuntu concept. Kaufmann (2016) describes Ubuntu as all the qualities needed in order to ensure and maintain harmony amonst the members of a society. Kaufmann (2016) includes respect, caring, sharing, trust and unselffulness as the important ethical values in Ubuntu. Ubuntu gives priority to the community’s well being as a whole, and understates the importance of agreement or consensus. The concept Ubuntu plays a vital role in African jurisprudence (Kaufmann, 2016). If a crime is commited by an individual against another individual, the crime extends far beyond the two individuals. The people from where the offender comes from, are directly involved and the crime has implications on them as well. The punishment given will be of such nature to restore harmony.

For purposes of this study restorative justice is defined as a process followed by the school in an effort to deal with infractions of the code of conduct as part of school discipline in a manner that reconciles the “offender” with the wronged community (school community) and which repairs the harm done. It includes a change in mind- set or cognitive response to the problem of offending or antisocial behaviour which contributes to the adoption of new values and approaches to school disciplinary policy, programmes and practise, taking into account the harm done to members of the school community and addressing the imbalance created both to the victim and the community.

The following concept of significance is that of community service and the benefits it has for the offender, victim and community.