Out of Court Resolutions: A new framework
In this blog, we speak to our Consultant, Trevor Watson, about the new Out of Court Resolution framework.
There are only 22 days left to respond to the Ministry of Justice consultation document, ‘Diversionary and Community Cautions: Draft Code of Practice‘, drafted to implement the new two tier cautionary framework as laid out in the Policing Crime Sentencing and Courts Act (2022). These statutory disposals need to be considered in conjunction with the non-statutory community resolutions disposal which overall form a framework of Out of Court Resolutions – the new term agreed by the National Police Chief’s Council for Out of Court Disposals.
So what does it mean for Restorative Justice? We have asked our policy consultant, Trevor Watson, to highlight the key issues. “Why me? have been aware of these proposals for some time and, as a member of the Out of Court Disposal stakeholder group we have been keen to try to influence the thinking around the code of practice.”
“This new Code of Practice is a key document as it sets out how statutory and non-statutory out-of-court resolutions are intended to work from April 2024.” The two tier statutory out of court disposals consist of diversionary cautions (the higher tier) and community cautions (the lower tier) which must contain conditions and can have sanctions if these conditions are not complied with. An assessment for suitability for a Restorative Justice process can be a condition for either of the cautions.
“As usual, the devil is in the detail” comments Trevor. “There are a lot of process descriptions within the consultation document and it will certainly be a challenge for Police operational staff to digest and deliver the intended outcomes.”
As an example, Trevor highlights, the guidance rightly contains references to both victims and offenders taking part in Restorative Justice processes voluntarily and identifies that the appropriate condition to include in the statutory framework would be a referral for suitability assessment to a Restorative Justice service.
However the example given in Appendix D does not accord with this guidance suggesting an example of a restorative condition would be attendance at a Restorative Justice conference where both parties agree to it. “Hopefully this will be resolved before the final publication” added Trevor.
Trevor has also commented “Overall we see this framework as positive and the opportunity to increase victims access to Restorative Justice however we have suggested the inclusion of a reminder that Restorative Justice should be available for victims and offenders either within or without the criminal justice process. This is important as we know from experience that victims can sometimes seek to have answers to their questions following the finalisation of court processes and offenders may seek to repair the harm after the court process has finished.”
“We certainly encourage the Restorative Justice community to seize the opportunity to engage with the consultation document and provide feedback to the Ministry of Justice.”
See a copy of our response to the Ministry of Justice consultation