Open Circle’s Renee Handsacker Speaks to The Guardian on Restorative Justice for Sexual Assault
“The criminal justice system can require certain things of [alleged offenders], but it also requires them to kind of position themselves pretty fiercely as, ‘no, this didn’t happen,’” she says. “To me, that’s a kind of a soft option, as opposed to actually requiring someone to deeply engage in the harm that they’ve caused.” - Renee Handsaker as quoted by The Guardian.
It is well-established that sexual assaults are significantly underreported. One of the reasons for this is that victim-survivors may not wish to see the person responsible charged or face the prospect of imprisonment. Instead, the primary aim for these victim-survivors is to ensure that the person responsible understands the harm that they have caused and is prevented from enacting any further incidents of harm.
Despite this, our “one-size-fits-all” justice system rarely fulfils these aims, continuing to fall short of the expectations for justice held by many of those most impacted. While there have been numerous recommendations from law reform bodies, and calls for change from victim-survivors themselves to access to restorative justice as part of a suite of options that should be available in response to sexual harm, such options remain largely inaccessible to those who seek them.
A 2023 report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare revealed that only 7.7% of victim-survivors of sexual assault reported their assault to police. According to this report, their principal motivation for engaging with police and the justice system was to prevent future harm, and for the person responsible to comprehend the impact of their actions. Regrettably, these outcomes are rarely facilitated by the criminal justice system for several reasons. Those responsible often lack insight into how their actions constitute assault. Within the formal criminal justice process, very few offenders plead guilty, maintaining a denial of responsibility for their actions. Even when convicted, they may seek to minimise their responsibility in the hope of reducing any sentence, thereby also avoiding the need to recognise their behaviour and its impact.
Some critics of restorative justice argue that it is not appropriate for serious crimes like sexual offences. They cite a range of reasons which can include the suggestion that restorative justice is a “soft option”, allowing people to avoid accountability for their actions. Of course, given the high rates of attrition, very few sexual assaults—some say fewer than 1 in 100—result in a person responsible for such harm being tried, convicted and sentenced to imprisonment. However, even when this occurs, prisoners convicted of sexual offences may have limited access to meaningful behaviour change programmes in custody. It is not uncommon for people convicted of sexual offences to leave prison without accessing such programs (even if completing them is required for eligibility for parole), as they continue to avoid recognising the harm that they have caused. Restorative justice, by contrast, requires individuals to confront their actions deeply. Initiatives like CIJ’s Open Circle can engage the responsible person with accountability specialists up to 20 times over 12 months, a profound and challenging process that ensures genuine recognition and accountability for the harm inflicted.
Last Friday, February 7, The Guardian Australia published an enlightening piece on restorative justice for sexual assaults, featuring insights from Renee Handsaker, Principal Convenor of Open Circle. With rising rates of sexual violence, comprehensive discussions such as this are crucial for advocating the adoption of restorative justice alternatives, educating the public on non-criminal avenues for justice.
“The criminal justice system can require certain things of [alleged offenders], but it also requires them to kind of position themselves pretty fiercely as, ‘no, this didn’t happen,’” she says. “To me, that’s a kind of a soft option, as opposed to actually requiring someone to deeply engage in the harm that they’ve caused.” – Renee Handsaker as quoted by The Guardian.
We also wish to acknowledge that restorative justice is not appropriate for everyone nor suitable for every instance of harm, just as criminal justice cannot address every situation. We must develop a system that offers choices for those seeking justice, recognising that a singular approach cannot meet all needs.
We look forward to the release of the Australian Law Reform Commission’s forthcoming recommendations in relation to restorative justice for victim-survivors of sexual violence, and trust that governments will take meaningful action in response. For our part, with the support of our partners, we will continue to work towards making this option a reality for those who need it, including through our research and advocacy alongside people with lived and living experience, and our restorative practice, facilitating restorative processes for people who have experienced this form of harm.
Read the Guardian’s article here: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/ng-interactive/2025/feb/07/without-punishment-can-a-different-kind-of-justice-offer-something-more-to-sexual-assault-survivors-ntwnfb
Published 13 February 2025
Written by Elle Thielke in consultation with Renee Handsacker & Stan Winford