The Mint House has signed a joint letter with over 45 other organisations and practitioners in response to the new ReHub policy. The letter, written by Why me? based on a consultation process with others in the restorative justice sector, outlines shared concerns about this policy.
In the letter, Why me?, The Mint House, and others urged the ReHub team to consider the following priority changes:
Replace the language of “presumption of unsuitability” with a requirement for enhanced safety and risk thresholds for complex and sensitive cases, and work collaboratively with the sector to establish what this would look like.
Monitor and publish the impact of the policy changes.
The letter and attached briefing also covered key issues raised by the sector:
Acknowledgement of the need for operational improvements
Presumptions that restrict victim choice and practitioner judgement
Practitioners’ views on the new presumption
Increasing barriers that further limit access to Restorative Justice
Contradiction with the Victims’ Code and statutory entitlements
A functional ban on Restorative Justice for certain offence categories
Risk assessment must be individualised, not determined by offence category
A localised model to improve efficiency and maximise resources
Current sector safeguarding and risk practices
Areas where national guidance would be valuable
How ReHub can best support safe delivery of RJ
Clarity and implementation concerns
Key calls from the sector
You can read the full letter and briefing, and see the full list of supporters on the Why me? website: