Hürriyeti Bağlayıcı Cezaya Mağdur Merkezli Yaklaşım: Onarıcı Adalet

Year 2018, Volume: 23 Issue: 39, 317 - 334, 12.12.2018

Harun Işık

Abstract

Ceza sistemi özellikle üç ana felsefenin etkisi
altında olmuştur: cezalandırıcı yaklaşım, faydacı teori ve onarıcı adalet. Suç
merkezli bakış açısına sahip olan cezalandırıcı rasyonalite sırf cezalandırmayı
savunmuştur. O, suça verilecek cezada suçu ve suçun şiddetini esas almaktadır.
Artan suç ve suçlu sayısına çözüm arayışlarının bir neticesi olarak cezalandırıcı
yaklaşım yerini faydacı teoriye bıraktı. O, suç merkezli bakış açısının yerine
suçlu merkezli yaklaşıma odaklandı. Faydacı teori ile birlikte 17. yüzyıldan
itibaren hürriyeti bağlayıcı ceza infaz sistemine adapte edildi. Bu teori ile
birlikte mahkûmların rehabilitasyonu gündeme geldi ve bu, 18. yüzyılın son
çeyreğinden itibaren İngiltere’de uygulamaya konuldu, özellikle dini temelli
olarak. Bu anlayışın bir yansıması olarak zaman içerisinde farklı iyileştirme
faaliyetleri de gerçekleştirilmiştir. Suç ve suçlu sayısındaki sürekli artış
suçu azaltma ve önleme arayışlarını da beraberinde getirmiş, bunun sonucunda da
onarıcı adalet 1980’den sonra Amerika, İngiltere ve Kanada gibi gelişmiş
ülkelerin ceza sisteminde uygulamaya konulmuştur. O, suç veya suçlu merkezli
olmaktan ziyade mağdur merkezli bir yapıya sahiptir ve farklı programlarla
suçlu ve mağdur arasındaki ilişkiyi düzeltmeye odaklanmıştır. Onarıcı adalet,
adalet sistemine bağışlama, uzlaşma, pişmanlık, zararı tazmin etme ve onarma
gibi yeni kavramlar getirmiştir. Bu çalışmada üç merkezi yaklaşıma, özellikle
onarıcı adalete odaklanılarak ceza felsefesi analiz edilmiştir. 

Keywords

Ceza sistemi, cezalandırıcı yaklaşım, faydacı teori, onarıcı adalet, suç, suçlu, mağdur

Victim-Centred Approach to Imprisonment: Restorative Justice

Abstract

The penal system has been under the influence of
particularly three main philosophies: retributive approach, utilitarianism and
restorative justice. Retributive rationale having crime-centred outlook defended
pure punishment. It grounds on offence and severity of it in the punishment to
be given the crime. As a result of the search for solutions to increased crime
and number of criminals, retributive approach gave its place to utilitarianism.
It focused on criminal centred point of view instead of crime-centred outlook.
After utilitarianism, the imprisonment has been adopted to the penal system
since 17th century. The rehabilitation of prisoners came into question with
this theory and this was introduced in the UK in the last quarter of the 18th
century, especially as a religious based. Different rehabilitation activities
have been implemented in the course of time as a reflection of this
understanding. The constant increase in the number of crimes and criminals
brought about the searching of the reduction and prevention of crime, as a
result of this, the restorative justice was practiced in the penal system of
developed countries such as the United States,
the United Kingdom and Canada after
1980. It has a victim-centred structure rather than crime or criminal centred
and is focused on correcting the relationship between the offender and the
victim with different programmes. Restorative justice has brought new concepts
into the justice system such as responsibility, repentance, forgiveness,
reconciliation, restitution, restoration and compensation. In this paper has
been analysed the philosophy of imprisonment focusing on three central
approaches, especially restorative justice.

Keywords

Penal system, retributive approach, utilitarianism, restorative justice, crime, criminal, victim

References

• BRAITHWAITE, J. “Restorative Justice and A Better Future” in A Restorative Justice Reader. Ed. G. Johnstone. Devon and Portland: Willan Publishing, 2003, p. 83-99.
• BRAITHWAITE, J. “Does Restorative Justice Work” in A Restorative Justice Reader. Ed. G. Johnstone. Devon and Portland: Willan Publishing, 2003, p. 320-353.
• BRODY, S. R. The Effectiveness of Sentencing: Home Office Research Unit Report. London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1976.
• BRUNK, C. G. “Restorative Justice and Philosophical Theories of Criminal Punishment” in the Spiritual Roots of Restorative Justice. M. L. Hadley. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001, p. 31-56.
• CAVADINO, M. and Dignan J. The Penal System: An Introduction. 3rd ed. London: Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2002.
• COYLE, A. Restorative Justice in the Prison Setting. London: International Centre for Prison Studies, 2001.
• CRAGG, W. The Practice of Punishment: Towards a Theory of Restorative Justice. London and New York: Routledge, 1992.
• DALY, K. “Restorative justice: the real story” in A Restorative Justice Reader. Ed. G. Johnstone. Devon and Portland: Willan Publishing, 2003a, p. 363-382.
• DALY, K. “Mind the Gap: Restorative Justice in Theory and Practice”, in Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms. Ed. A. Hirsch and et al. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2003b, p. 219-237.
• DUFF, A. and Garland, D. Introduction: Thinking about Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
• DUFF, A. “Restoration and Retribution” in Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms. Ed. A. Hirsch and et al. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2003, p. 1-35.
• FLYYN, N. Introduction to Prisons and Imprisonment. Winchester: Waterside Press, 1998.
• GARLAND, D. and Young P. The Power to Punish: Contemporary Penalty and Social Analysis. Vermont: Ashgate, 1992.
• HADLEY, M. L. Introduction: Multi-faith Reflection on Criminal Justice. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001, 1-29.
• HIRSCH, A. Von. “Censure and Proportionality” in A Reader on Punishment. Ed. A. Duff and D. Garland. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
• HIRSCH, A. Von. et al. Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms? Oxford and Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing, 2003.
• HIRSCH, A. Von. et al. “Specifying Aims and Limits for Restorative Justice” in Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms. Ed. A. Von Hirsch et al. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2003, p. 21-41.
• HOWARD, D. L. The English Prisons: Their Past and Their Future. London: Methuen & Co Ltd, 1960.
• HUDSON, A. B. Understanding Justice: An Introduction to Ideas, Perspectives and Controversies in Modern Penal Theory. Buckingham-Philadelphia: Open University Press, 2003.
• ISIK, Harun. What is The Role of Chaplaincy in The Delivery of Restorative Justice in Prisons in England and Wales? A Case Study of HMP Birmingham. MPhil Thesis, University of Birmingham, 2010.
• JENKINS, D. “Criminal Justice: Impediments to Reform” in Imprisonment Today: Current Issues in the Prison Debate. Ed. S. Backett, J. McNeill, A. Yellowless. London: Macmillan Press, 1988, p. 160-172.
• JOHNSTONE, G. Introduction: Restorative Approaches to Criminal Justice. Devon and Portland: Willan Publishing, 2003, p. 1-18.
• MARSHALL, C. D. Beyond Retribution: a New Testament Vision for Justice, Crime, and Punishment. Michigan, Cambridge: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. and Auckland: Lime Grove House Publishing Ltd., 2001.
• MCGOWEN, R. “The Well-Ordered Prison: England, 1780-1865” in the Oxford History of the Prison: The Practice of Punishment in Western Society. Ed. N. Morris and D: J. Rothman. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998, p. 71-99.
• MCLAUGHLING, E. et al. Introduction: Justice in the Round-Contextualizing Restorative Justice. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage publications, 2003, p. 1-18.
• MINOW, M. Between Vengeance and Forgiveness: Facing History after Genocide and Mass Violence. Boston: Beacon Press, 1998.
• MORRIS, T. “The Parlous State of Prisons” in Prisons Past and Future. Ed. J.C. Freeman. London: Heinemann, 1978, p. 81-93.
• MURPHY, J. G. “Marxism and Retribution”, in A Reader on Punishment. Ed. R. A. Duff and D. Garland. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997, p. 44-71.
• NESS, D. Van. “Proposed Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice” in Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms. Ed. A. Von Hirsch et al. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2003, p. 157-177.
• NEWELL, T. “Restorative Justice” in The Future of Criminal Justice: Resettlement, Chaplaincy and Community. Ed. C. James and P. Sedgwick, London: SPCK, 2002, p. 148-164.
• NOBLETT, W. Prayers for People in Prison. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
• POLLOCK, J. M. Prisons: Today and Tomorrow. U.S.: Aspen Publisher Inc, 1997.
• ROCHE, D. Accountability in Restorative Justice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.
• SHAPLAND, J. “Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice” in Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms. Ed. A. Von Hirsch et al. Oxford and Portland: Hart Publishing, 2003, p. 195-219.
• SUNDT, J. et al. “The Role of the Prison Chaplain in Rehabilitation” in Religion, the Community and the Rehabilitation of Criminal Offenders. Ed. T. P. O’Connor and N. J. PALLONE, New York, London, Oxford: The Harworth Press, 2013, p. 59-87.
• TEN, C. L. Crime, Guilt, and Punishment: A Philosophical Introduction. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987.
• WALKER, N. Why Punish: Theories of Punishment Reassessed. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
• WILLIAMS, J. E. H. The English Penal System in Transition. London: Butterworths, 1970.
• ZEHR, H. “Retributive Justice, restorative justice” in A Restorative Justice Reader. Ed. G. Johnstone. Devon and Portland: Willan Publishing, 2003, p. 69-83.
• ZEHR, H. Changing Lenses: A New Focus For Crime and Justice. 3rd ed. Scottdale, Pennsylvania, Waterloo, Ontario: Herald Press., 2005.
• ZEHR, H. and Toews B. Critical Issues in Restorative Justice. Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press and Cullompton, Devon: Willan Publishing, 2004.