Restorative Justice and Court Backlogs: A Smarter Way Forward with the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts
A Guest Article by Adam Timberlake (Doctoral researcher University of Gloucestershire and Inspector, Metropolitan Police Service)
What if justice could be delivered faster, more meaningfully and with victims at the centre of the process?
As we know, restorative justice doesn’t mean soft justice, it means justice that’s built around the needs of those that are most involved.
Restorative justice isn’t about leniency, It’s about accountability. The transformative power of RJ remains well recognised by everyone. The process enables victims to find peace along with a feeling of justice having been served. Offenders can reconnect with their communities by making restitution while escaping the negative social effects that formal convictions typically cause to first-time offenders and those who are young or vulnerable. The system benefits from RJ because it gives power to victims while rebuilding their dignity while increasing public confidence in the system.
Restorative can also be ‘smarter’ justice: it can reduce the burden on courts and the criminal justice system.
Restorative justice presents a better solution for the justice system - it creates a direct connection between victims and perpetrators to give victims a voice and the opportunity to ask questions about their harm and explain offence impact and receive meaningful restoration. Offenders receive encouragement to accept responsibility while performing reparation work and gaining insight about their actions' effects. And it works. RJ delivers satisfaction to victims at rates between 85% to 90%. Accountability with impact represents the true nature of this approach instead of leniency.
Justice can exist without needing to be slow or impersonal or reactive. There is a better way.
My career in policing and criminal justice spans more than 28 years through multiple policy changes and governmental shifts and continuous reform efforts across different countries. My professional experience includes directing restorative justice and out of court resolution programs while supporting national policy development. I was delighted to be personally invited to contribute to the discussion by the 2025 Leveson Inquiry into Crown and Magistrates Courts. I have witnessed that minor adjustments in justice procedures produce improved results for all parties in the system.
The need for change is clear. The Crown and Magistrates Courts face an insurmountable workload at present. Victims face prolonged waiting periods that sometimes span multiple years before obtaining any form of resolution. Offenders experience prolonged uncertainty about their future while waiting for the legal system to make its decisions. The Criminal Justice System (CJS) functions poorly under its current strain to deliver outcomes that addresses the needs of any party involved.
What’s more, over 75% of Magistrates’ Court decisions result in fines or community orders while the Crown Court hands down non-custodial sentences in approximately 20% of cases. The court system processes these individuals who experience cycles of poverty and trauma and addiction or impulsive conduct by channelling them through an expensive and time-consuming judicial process which perpetuates trauma.
On potential solution is the greater use of Out of court resolutions (OOCRs), which already exist as a policing tool for first time and ‘low level’ offences. This policing process handled more than 200,000 cases in 2022 thus saving both court time and public funds. However, they are not without challenges, particularly for victims who may become marginalised because their voices are excluded from these decisions. Without careful implementation, OOCRs risk becoming procedural formalities, focused on administrative efficiency rather than delivering meaningful justice.
That’s where restorative justice can make the difference.
The inclusion of restorative justice in OOCRs as part of a deferred prosecution, leads to a complete transformation of the overall process. The victims shift from being passive viewers to active participants who help determine what will happen in the case. The shift of offenders progresses from basic compliance to actual accountability. Communities gain from a justice system which restores instead of punishing.
My suggestions on this now appear in sections of the 2025 Leveson Inquiry findings, presents methods to merge restorative justice with OOCRs and deferred prosecutions to decrease court delays and boost victim satisfaction while creating a more efficient, compassionate and effective justice system. A message that I was delighted to see endorsed by the Restorative Justice Council.
This isn’t about being soft on crime: the delivery of smarter justice represents our goal because it serves victims along with communities and upholds the long-term integrity of the criminal justice system.
The Current System Presents Multiple Problems
The court backlog persists as a long-standing challenge that has grown significantly worse during recent years. The number of Crown Court cases in backlog reached above 64,000 in mid-2023 and now exceeds 75,000. The number of people forced to wait longer than a year for their court case has increased by 28%. The majority of Magistrates’ Court decisions lead to either fines below £250 or community orders as their final outcome.
The heavy reliance of current justice systems on punitive measures for minor offences produces delays and inefficiencies while ignoring opportunities for rehabilitative justice outcomes and real offender transformation. In effect, we are clogging up the justice system with cases that could, and should, be handled far more efficiently.
"Justice delayed is justice denied"
Victims experience stress, uncertainty, and traumatisation. Defendants experience prolonged periods of uncertainty while their situations lead to employment termination as well as mental health deterioration and family disruption. Courtroom time and judicial resources get wasted on cases which can be resolved more effectively through out of court processes that benefit all participants.
Despite this, RJ faces persistent under use despite wide political and academic support and the strong body of evidence for its effectiveness. For example, restorative justice demonstrates high victim satisfaction rates (85–90%) and reduces reoffending by 14% but remains underutilised. However, The Office of National Statistics (ONS) reports that the offer of RJ to victims, as is an established right in the Victims code of Practice, in only recalled in 5.6% all cases.
A Smarter Approach: Out of Court Resolutions + RJ
What if low-level offences like minor theft, public order offences, or drug misuse could be resolved without the need for a lengthy court process?
Well, the good news is that in many cases, they can!
Out of court resolutions (OOCRs) and deferred prosecutions allow police to deal with low-level cases directly, offering conditional cautions or community-based outcomes that still hold people accountable. In 2022, the police processed 207,768 cases through OOCRs, and the public accepts these resolutions when delivered transparently and with consistent application.
What’s more, restorative justice is already being used as an OOCR by many police forces – but it isn’t consistent: as the APPG for RJ described it, we have a ‘postcode lottery’ on whether or not restorative justice is available for both victims and offenders.
The system is in place and the evidence of RJs impacts are clear. What we have been proposing is using this established approach to help deal with the extensive and growing court backlog by removing cases that would have been suitable for OOCRs from that backlog and using restorative justice-based OOCRs instead.
The data for diversion of suitable cases to OOCRs is compelling. When applied properly, we believe that such an approach could decrease the Magistrates Court backlog by 20%, thus removing more than 70,000 cases. This would represent a total reduction in court time of around 1.3 million hours and nearly 500,000 fewer hearings.
The Crown Court backlog contains a significant number of cases that will result in non-custodial sentencing. These are the cases that are most suitable for diversion yet may not have reached such diversion due to a wide range for reasons including lack of receiving remembering or being able to access an RJ offer. Deferred prosecutions using OOCRs could resolve many such case. Significantly reducing the court backlog whilst providing opportunities for victims and offenders to engage in what the evidence shows are powerful outcomes including:
- 85–90% victim satisfaction
- 14% reduction in reoffending
- £9 saved for every £1 invested
Support for this approach is growing. National Police Chiefs Council Joint Operations Improvement Board supported this proposal as aligning with the National Criminal Justice strategy. The Restorative Justice Council, MPs from across parties, through the Restorative Justice All-Party Parliamentary Group, back it. The political sector along with judicial institutions have demonstrated their commitment to change. We need hands-on implementation at this point.
What Needs to Happen
Our proposed solution exists in reality rather than theory. It’s practical, tested, and ready.
Target Low-Level Offences for Diversion: OOCRs with RJ should be used to handle court cases involving theft under £200 along with drug possession and minor assaults and public order offences since these matters comprise many court cases.
Victim Engagement as Standard: RJ should be offered to victims as a standard practice during all diversion processes. Such measures boost satisfaction levels while preventing the public from seeing the system as providing lenient sentences.
Use Existing Resources: Many forces have staff on adjusted duties. These officers can deliver OOCR and RJ interventions, taking pressure off the front line.
Standardise the Process Nationally: One unified framework must be developed to achieve uniformity as well as transparency and fairness in every jurisdiction.
Invest in Digital Tools: Systems that can track outcomes, monitor compliance, and flag suitable cases automatically.
Legislative Reform: The Criminal Justice Act 2003 and the Crime and Courts Act 2013 need amendments to allow post-charge diversion and Deferred Prosecution Agreements for individuals along with judicial referral at early hearings.
Ensure Oversight and Safeguards: Every diversion program requires judicial supervision to operate. Court proceedings must become active when a defendant fails to comply with the terms of their diversion. This is about accountability, not avoidance.
Scale Successful Models: The successful RJ and OOCR programs operating in Essex and Norfolk and Suffolk should serve as models for expansion. Their data and delivery models can be adapted nationally.
Build Public Awareness and Trust: Many people still misunderstand RJ. A national awareness campaign would help eliminate misconceptions about restorative justice by showing its benefits for victims while lowering reoffending rates and enhancing justice effectiveness through personalised approaches.
Measure What Matters: The justice system should evaluate its success by measuring resolution rates as well as victim satisfaction levels and decreased reoffending rates and operational efficiency. The new performance framework must include these targeted goals.
A Justice System That Works for All
The justice system operates well yet it faces severe overload while remaining poorly optimised. The tools along with evidence and support enable us to offer alternative methods.
Through restorative justice, victims gain a voice while offenders obtain accountability, and the system gains a critical pressure relief mechanism. Deferring prosecutions with out of court resolutions which have proper structure and resources enable efficient and effective processing of thousands of cases.
The path to justice delivery stands as the best solution for achieving a true justice system. The 2025 Leveson Inquiry supports this direction. The time has come for policymakers along with practitioners to execute this plan.
Let’s stop debating the backlog. Let’s start restoring justice.