The Status Quo in Justice
“Reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. Unreasonable people attempt to adapt the world to themselves. All progress, therefore, depends on unreasonable people.”
The ability to challenge the status quo is essential in any functioning democracy. It keeps power accountable, makes change possible, and allows injustice to be confronted. In the justice system, challenging the status quo means asking whether current processes still serve the public good or merely protect those in power.
I, like most authors, choose my words carefully. This particular injustice occurred in the justice sector. The irony is not lost on me.
What is Restorative Justice (RJ)?
Just in case you aren’t aware - restorative justice in New Zealand is a process that brings together the victim, the offender, and sometimes the community to talk about the harm caused by a crime and how it can be put right. It focuses on accountability, healing, and making amends, rather than just punishment. Often used in the justice system alongside or instead of court sentencing, it reflects Māori values like whanaungatanga (relationships).
This is what happened
In May 2024, I began working as an independent restorative justice facilitator for a registered RJ provider. Since then, I’ve co-facilitated over 60 pre-conferences and 14 full conferences, most involving complex family violence cases.
I enjoyed the work, which is complex and tough, and believe in RJ’s transformative potential. I was on track to become an accredited facilitator.
As I became more familiar with the sector, I grew concerned about the inequitable treatment of facilitators, particularly around pay and contract terms. These concerns intensified in December 2024 when the provider I contracted to unilaterally changed all facilitator contracts. The changes reduced rates and limited our ability to claim legitimate expenses. For emotionally demanding, nuanced work, the pay already resembled that of a semi-volunteer workforce - this made the situation worse.
In response, a group of facilitators formed to challenge the changes. We wrote to the board requesting they reconsider. Their reply was arrogant and dismissive and was mistakenly addressed to me who they incorrectly labelled the group’s spokesperson. They reaffirmed their position with one minor amendment and stated the board’s financial position was “not of your concern.”
I already knew the trust’s financial position as all registered not-for-profits financial statements are publicly available. As at 1 June 2024, they had over $640,000 in retained funds - well above their annual contract value with the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). I’ve since heard (anecdotally) their rationale was to build a buffer in case the MoJ cancelled their contract. Considering 99 percent of referrals come from the MoJ, what RJ work they expected to do without that contract remains unclear.
Our group sent a second letter proposing independent mediation. It wasn’t what i would have done, I doubted it would have any effect, but I went along with the group. This approach was rejected. Worth noting: the organisation exists solely to deliver restorative justice by bringing people together to repair relationships. Irony on irony.
Committed to getting answers, I submitted an Official Information Act (OIA) request to the Ministry of Justice. I wanted clarity on RJ contracting and funding as I suspected funds intended for facilitators providing services were being redirected, perhaps to give the board members something to manage that they understood. I also contacted another RJ provider to understand why funding varied so drastically. Missing the we’re-all-in-this-together memo, they declined to help.
All the information I obtained came from legitimate channels open to any New Zealand citizen. I was exercising my democratic rights. The only action I took was to share it with colleagues. Also worth noting: I’ve never received a single complaint - none from colleagues, management, the board, victims, offenders, or support people.
Then came the next board meeting. Without warning or explanation, my contract was terminated. I received no prior notice, no invitation to attend, and certainly no mention of performance-related issues that may warrant this action.
While my colleagues’ contracts remained in place, they were not happy. They still aren’t happy and have let the board know. The board has its head firmly in the sand (or an equally dark place I’ll leave to your imagination).
The only conclusion I can draw is that I was dismissed for my lawful actions as a private citizen, particularly my efforts to raise concerns and seek transparency. The fact this happened within a Ministry of Justice contracted service is deeply concerning.
What is happening now
If the board assumed that ending my contract would end the matter, they clearly don’t know me.
I won’t/can’t go into detail about what’s coming without tipping my hand - let’s just say a lot. If anyone knows a retired lawyer with a special interest in administrative or constitutional law who loves to fight the system and is keen to do some pro bono work - send them my way. 😎
I’ll leave it for now with an adapted quote from Pulp Fiction. I'm gonna get medieval on their ass.
Stay tuned!
