Victim-offender mediation and conferencing with juvenile offenders in the netherlands

Abstract

Conclusions: Our first conclusion is, that in general, the victim has a good position in The Netherlands compared to most other European countries. Second, concerning forms of mediation and restoration, we conclude that, although VOM was introduced in the Netherlands a few years before conferencing, conferencing is generally preferred in cases involving juvenile offenders. There are only two local experiments conducting VOM exclusively with juvenile offenders, and about 12 projects experimenting with conferencing in these cases. A third and striking conclusion is, that there is no central organisation and initiative in The Netherlands. VOM, conferencing, and other forms of RJ have a short history in the Netherlands and experiments are still being conducted by different organisations, spread over the country in various local projects. There is still no nationwide network, nor has any specific legislation been passed on mediation in penal matters. RJ has not yet gained a firm foothold in the Netherlands and the political situation does not make this any easier. The main focus seems to be to get tougher on crime, which does not provide fertile ground for RJ. The future of restorative practices are, therefore, still uncertain. Four, we conclude that it is within this particular context that a peculiar form of mediation could flourish, with a passive and merely facilitative role for the mediator, deviating from the usual role of the mediator in civil matters and from the more intensive and more lengthy professional training approved by the NMI. © 2005 Springer.