Le traitement judiciaire des désordres mineurs. Médiation, réparation, admonestation

The last two decades have seen repeated low-level offences that increase social tensions and damage the environment. Have such offences really increased? Is there a greater awareness on the part of victims? Is there something wrong with non-judicial forms of punishment?
In any event, although many cases are closed without any follow-up, Milburn argues that the need to deal with these offences has been reaffirmed. The state prosecutors, who are central to the actions of the courts and alive to “zero tolerance”, have opted for the famous “third way”: they have created peri-judicial sentences intended to “restore social bonds”.
Milburn examines two common approaches:
– compulsory mediation, bringing the perpetrator of the crime face-to-face with his or her victim as a means of punishment;
– forcing young offenders to make good the damage they have done, a sentence intended to be “restorative” and educative, aiming to rebuild the link between the young person and the community.
According to Philip Milburn, whereas classic legal sentencing relies on sanctions, ‘restorative justice’ is based on the will of the accused and the social significance they attach to their acts. These innovations reflect, on the one hand, an approach seeking reparation in which the law is less important than involving citizens in formalizing self-regulation of community life and, on the other, a ‘neo-retributive’ approach that offers a legal response based on admonition and potential sanctions.