No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Public Opinion and the Experts’ Views on Restorative Justice
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2025
Abstract
The Act on Mediation Procedure will be effective in 2007 in Hungary. The acceptance or refusal of the instruments of restorative justice among population and prosecutors has been tested by empirical surveys.
Sommaire
A la veille de l’entrée en vigueur de la loi qui introduit la médiation dans la procédure hongroise, deux enquêtes d’opinion ont été menées sur l’acceptation de la justice restaurative, l’une par les citoyens, l’autre par les magistrats du ministère public.
Resumen
En las proximidades de la entrada en vigor de la ley que introduce la mediación en el procedimiento hungarés, se han llevado a cabo dos encuestas de opinión sobre la aceptación de la justícia restaurativa, una para los ciudadanos y otra para los fiscales.
Information
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © 2006 International Society for Criminology
Footnotes
(1)
The research project “Researching restorative justice : innovative means in the Hungarian criminal justice system” (Reg. number : T 037854) was financially supported by the Hungarian Scientific Research Fund.
References
(2) Johnstone, G. (2004), “How and what terms, should restorative justice be conceived?”, in Zehr, H. and Toews, B. (eds.), Critical Issues in Restorative Justice, Criminal Justice Press, Monsey, New York, p. 8.
(3) De Haan, W. and Loader, I., “On the emotions of crime, punishment and social control”, Theoretical Criminology, Vol. 6 (3), 2004, pp. 243-253.
(4) Zvekic, U. and Kertész, I. (2000), Bûncselekmények áldozata a rendszerváltás országaiban (Victims of crimes in the states of change of regime), Nemzetközi vizsgálat eredményei, UNICRI - BM Kiadó, Budapest.
(5) The analysis is planned to be followed by the attitude-survey of the judges, probation officers, policemen, and professionals of penitentiary institutions.
(6) It has to be emphasised that the prosecution sample is not representative, although according to the data available from the year 2003, the system of prosecution includes 1423 persons.
(7) Kerezsi, K. (2004), “The Presence of the Different Dimensions of Crime Prevention in the Examination of Attitudes Self-image and crime prevention : the relations between the images the interviewees have of themselves and of crime prevention”, in Victims and Opinions, Vol. I, (ed. : Irk, F.), National Institute of Criminology, Budapest, pp. 125-160.
(8) Sajó, A. : Látszat és valóság a jogban (Appearance and reality in law), Közgazdasági és Jogi Könyvkiadó, Budapest, 1986.
(9) Data calculated without the “does not know” results.
(10) Data calculated without the “does not know” and “no answer” results.
(11) The “does not know” and “no answer” results as well as the “as-as” (agrees and disagrees) answeres were excluded in the above calculation.
(12) See: British Crime Survey (BCS); Pfeiffer, Ch., Windzio, M. and Kleinmann, M. (2005), “Media Use and its Impacts on Crime Perception, Sentencing Attitudes and Crime Policy”, European Journal of Criminology, Vol. 2 (3), pp. 259-285.
(13) On the reasons and possible explanations of the decrease of criminality see: Blumstein, A., “The Crime drop in America”, and Tonry, M., “Explaining European crime trends”. The plenary lectures were held at : The First Annual Stockholm Criminology Symposium: “Recognizing Knowledge to Reduce Crime and Injustice” 15-17 June, 2006.
(14) Ashworth, A. and Hough, M., “Sentencing and the Climate of Opinion”, Criminal Law Review, 1996, pp. 776-787. Doob, A. and Roberts, J.V., “Public punitiveness and public knowledge of the facts : some Canadian surveys”, in N. Walker and Hough, M. (eds)., Public Attitudes to Sentencing. Surveys from Five Countries, Aldershot, Gower, 1988.
(15) Hough, M. and Roberts, J. (1998), “Attitudes to punishment : findings from the British Crime Survey”, Home Office Research Study 179, Research and Statistics Directorate Report, Home Office, Research and Statistics Directorate, London, 1998, p. 69.
(16) Hutton, N. (2002), “What the Scottish Public think about Crime and Punishment”. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Sentencing and Society Centre for Sentencing Research, Univ. of Strathclyde, Glasgow, June 27-29., p. 12-13.
(17) The diagram indicates the division of answers in percentage in both of the exemplars.
(18) Pokol, B., Jegyzetek az erkölcs és a morál szerepérõl a modern társadalmakban (Notes on the role of morality and ethics in the modern societies) [http://jesz.ajk.elte.hu/pokol23.html],
(19) Duff, A., “Restorative Punishment and Penal Restoration”. Plenary lecture at the “Positioning Restorative Justice” conference. International Network for Research on Restorative Justice for Juveniles, 16-19 September, 2001, Leuven, Belgium.
(20) Pokol, op. cit.
(21) Braithwaite, J., Crime Shame and Reintegration, New York, Cambridge University Press, 1989.
(22) Szabó, A., “A bûn és a büntetés erkölcsi kérdései” (Moral questions of crime and punishment), Fõiskolai Figyelõ, 1996/2. sz. p. 23.
(23) Strang, H. and Sherman, L.W., Repairing the Harm : Victims and Restorative Justice [http://www.sas.upenn.edu/jerrylee/research/rj_utah.pd].
(24) Gönczöl, K. (2006), “Szolgáltassuk az igazságot!” (Let us serve justice!), in Kovacsics Jné (szerk), Egy élet az igazságügyi statisztika szolgálatában. Ünnepi kötet a 70 éves Vavró István tiszteletére, ELTE AJK, Budapest, pp. 52-53.