Speaking about Restorative Justice

Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2023

The rapid growth of restorative justice (RJ) has brought myths into the literature. Daly (2002) is among the most important demythologization attempt in the literature. This paper revisits the four myths that were discussed in this seminal paper: (1) RJ is an oppositional concept to retributive justice; (2) RJ is rooted in Indigenous justice and the past dominant form of justice; (3) RJ is a care response as opposed to a justice response; and (4) RJ has the potential to transform people. This paper first examines whether these four myths remain pervasive in the post-2002 RJ literature. Reviewing the post-2002 literature suggests that demythologization has almost taken place. This paper then seeks to highlight theoretical gaps in the post-2002 RJ. Corresponding to the four myths identified, this paper offers four areas of RJ that warrant further debate and research. These are (1) institutionalization of RJ, (2) decolonization of RJ, (3) role of masculinity in RJ, and (4) mechanisms of how RJ works.

SASI, 2023

Introduction: Conventional criminal justice systems are often dominated by punitive approaches, which focus more on punishing offenders as a form of revenge and their separation from society. However, this approach has drawbacks in achieving broader goals, such as victim recovery, reducing recidivism rates, and building safer communities. Purposes of the Research: This study discusses the power of restorative justice transformation in changing the paradigm from punishment to healing. Restorative justice offers an alternative approach to responsibility, reconciliation, and healing. Methods of the Research: Literature research methods are used to understand restorative justice, including its concepts, practices, impacts, challenges, and benefits. Literature Data is systematically identified, collated, and analyzed. Results of the Research: Restorative justice is a powerful approach to changing judicial paradigms, with its principles emphasizing reconciliation, responsibility, and participation. The impact of restorative justice on perpetrators includes behavior change and responsibility, while on victims, it includes recovery and reconciliation. Implementing restorative justice requires collaboration, adequate resources, and active participation from stakeholders. Restorative justice has the potential to create a more humane, equitable, and sustainable justice system, as well as bring recovery and reconciliation to individuals and communities affected by crime.

Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 2007

This article reviews the now extensive literature on the varied arenas in which restorative justice is theorized and practiced-criminal violations, community ruptures and disputes, civil wars, regime change, human rights violations, and international law. It also reviews-by examining empirical studies of the processes in different settingshow restorative justice has been criticized, what its limitations and achievements might be, and how it might be understood. I explore the foundational concepts of reintegrative shaming, acknowledgment and responsibility, restitution, truth and reconciliation, and sentencing or healing circles for their transformative and theoretical potentials and for their actual practices in a variety of locationsfamily abuse, juvenile delinquency, criminal violations, problemsolving courts, indigenous-colonial-national disputes, ethnic and religious conflicts, civil wars, and liberation struggles. Restorative justice, which began as an alternative model of criminal justice, seeking healing and reconciliation for offenders, victims, and the communities in which they are embedded, has moved into larger national and international arenas of reintegration in political and ethnic conflicts. This review suggests that there are important and serious questions about whether restorative justice should be supplemental or substitutional of more conventional legal processes and about how its innovations suggest potentially transformative and challenging ideas and "moves" for dealing with both individual and group transgressive conduct, seeking peace as well as justice.

Ch 13 in Australian Violence Crime, Criminal Justice & Beyond, Federation Press, 2016

Australian scholars have been at the forefront of debates and research regard- ing restorative justice and other non-traditional criminal justice responses to violence that have been advocated in recent decades. In her discussion of sexual violence, Daly (2011: 9) distinguishes between ‘conventional’ justice and ‘innovative’ justice responses: the former being concerned with helping victims to ‘cope be er’ with the criminal justice processes, the la er with ‘addressing those things that many victims say they want, but rarely experience in the criminal justice system’. She sees the two types of responses as ‘residing on a continuum’ but does not explain what is ‘innovative’ about innovative justice responses. A recent report suggests that innovative justice has a wider focus: ‘improving victim’s access to justice and experience of justice, while also focus- ing on o ender rehabilitation and community repair’, the emphasis being on ‘trying new approaches and creating a “menu” of justice options, recognizing that not all cases require the same justice response’ (Centre for Innovative Justice 2014: 11).

2014

Restorative justice has become a global phenomenon in criminal justice systems. Resonating with, and in some cases drawing from, indigenous conceptions of justice, it offers both an alternative understanding of crime and new ways of responding to it. Restorative processes include victim-offender mediation, conferencing and circles; restorative outcomes include apology, amends to the victim and amends to the community. Restorative interventions are being used by police, prosecutors, judges, prison officials and probation and parole authorities. Restorative interventions have developed somewhat differently from region to region, but in many cases, countries have found it useful to adopt appropriate legislation. Human rights and other objections or critiques of restorative justice have been raised. Due in part to this, the UN has endorsed the Declaration of Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters. An overview of restorative justice around the world 1 We brought the needle to sew the torn social fabric, not the knife to cut it.

The Palgrave Handbook of Australian and New Zealand Criminology, Crime and Justice, 2017

With a focus on the emergence, development, and use of restorative justice (RJ) in Australia and New Zealand, this chapter provides an overview of the types of RJ practices used, their history and implementation in youth and criminal justice systems, and their role in contemporary justice practices. Consideration is also given to major research conducted on the use of RJ in Australia and New Zealand related to RJ goals of victim redress, offender accountability and reintegration, and community involvement in RJ processes. Future directions for research and practice are also provided.

Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 2003

In this article, Donald Schmid reviews trends towards restorative justice across several common law jurisdictions, most notably New Zealand and the United States. He examines different models of restorative justice and concludes that, while none of these practices will completely eliminate the need for other, court-based criminal justice processes, they have a large number of practical and social advantages over more traditional approaches.

2010

The increasing popularity of restorative justice has prompted new and varying applications of its core principles. The authors of The Promise of Restorative Justice highlight the ways that these new ideas now spark innovations both throughout the criminal justice system and in arenas as diverse as business, education, athletics, and the aftermath of ethnic conflict. They offer fresh approaches to addressing the problems of crime and other human conflicts in ways that productively incorporate the values of mutual respect, accountability, and ultimately reconciliation between offenders and victims.

Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 2018

Over the past few decades, a novel approach to crime and conflict resolution has been gaining ground around the world. 'Restorative justice' revolves around the notions that crime is primarily a violation human relationships; the chief aim of the justice process should be to reconcile those most directly affected by the offending behaviour while addressing the injuries they suffered; the resolution of crime-related conflicts demands a positive effort on the part of victims and offenders and the assumption of responsibility by the community. Restorative justice is not a new concept-It was a prevalent justice model in early civilizations in Europe and Asia and remains so among many indigenous communities around the world. This paper outlines the broad philosophy of restorative justice, comments on the differences between restorative justice and other prevailing conceptions of justice and identifies the constitutive elements necessary for a restorative justice practice. The paper then considers contemporary restorative justice practices, presenting information on guiding principles, procedures and goals and identifying concerns that need to be addressed in the design and implementation of such practices.