How Does Restorative Justice Work? A Qualitative Metasynthesis

Although restorative justice is often presented as a victim-oriented reform of criminal justice procedures, there is a relative dearth of research and theory into the experiences of victims within restorative justice. Recently Heather Strang, Lawrence Sherman and their associates started develop theory and research that attempts to fill this relative void. This article is an attempt to contribute to the further understanding of the effects of restorative justice conferencing on victims. Taking Strang and Sherman’s work as a starting point, it discussed various issues relating to research and theory of victims within restorative justice. First of all there is the need to pay more attention to victim variety within research into restorative justice. Needs, opinions and traits of victims differ from one victim to the next and one situation to the next. Generalized needs therefore must be qualified. Secondly the comparison between criminal justice and restorative justice is complicated....

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.

2021

This booklet is for anyone who is thinking about having contact with someone who committed a crime against them. It is based on interviews with people who were victims and survivors of lots of different types of crime. They describe why they wanted to communicate with the offender, what they got out of it, and how they felt when things didn't go to plan. The people we interviewed wanted to talk about their experiences to help other victims and survivors.

RJ4All Publications, 2020

This is the 2nd edition of Gavrielides’ 2007 monograph “Restorative Justice Theory & Practice: Addressing the Discrepancy”, a ground-breaking book that examines the harmful gap between the restorative justice theory and its application covering the UK, the U.S., Europe, and internationally. Data were obtained from four international surveys with over 300 restorative justice practitioners, using a combination of qualitative methodologies, including questionnaires, interviews and focus groups. The 2nd edition provides critical updates for restorative justice research, policy and practice. Restorative justice projects strive to restore peace after a crime has been committed by involving victims, offenders and community representatives in dialogue. Previous studies reviewed by Dr. Gavrielides have credited these programmes with such benefits as lower recidivism, and higher levels of satisfaction with outcomes among victims, offenders and community representatives, compared to the traditional criminal justice system. However, the author’s seven-year research programme uncovered a pervasive gap between restorative justice principles and current restorative justice operations. This gap is blamed for widespread difficulties such as insufficient funding for restorative justice, inadequate training and accreditation of practitioners, lack of faith and commitment among staff, and a tendency for restorative justice over time to become increasingly similar to the standard criminal justice system. Dr. Gavrielides warns that if these problems are not corrected, the original values and benefits of restorative justice may never be realised. Book Reviews “In a time when restorative justice has been embraced with unbridled enthusiasm by virtually every criminal justice network and dispute resolution stakeholder outside of the criminal justice system, Theo Gavrielides presents us with an original, comprehensive, and essential examination of the subject. This work should be read by anyone and everyone who is the least bit interested in the future health of the restorative justice movement.” Prof. John Winterdyk, Ph.D. Department of Justice Studies, Chair, Mount Royal College, Canada “Theo Gavrielides has provided a constructive and thought-provoking contribution to our understanding of the dynamics of one of the most significant contemporary developments in thinking about criminal justice.” Professor Nicola Lacey, LSE, UK “Restorative justice is a noble concept, but if the actual practice does not match the ideal, it could be discredited. That would be a great loss. Theo Gavrielides has brought together some challenging thoughts about this danger…” Dr. Martin Wright, European Forum of restorative justice and Restorative Justice Consortium, UK and EU It is a concise, engaging, innovative and informative book for practitioners and scholars. This comprehensive introduction to restorative justice provides a much-needed textbook for an increasingly popular area of study and practice, which can be used as a basis for further theoretical development and elaboration on the concept’s limitations and accountability. Dr. Effi Lambropoulou Professor of Criminology Department of Sociology, Panteion University of Social and Politic, Greece As a restorative justice practitioner for ten years, I continue to be impressed with the in-depth research Theo Gavrielides does in the field of restorative justice. He meets the challenges with provocative and cutting edge topics directly and succinctly… The struggle of theory vs. practice has been a difficult one in the field since restorative justice began mostly with practice. Gavrielides approaches this struggle with wisdom of historical roots and with encouragement that restorative justice is developing theory to catch up with practice. Linda Harvey Program Director and Founder of the Restorative Justice Council on Sexual Misconduct in Faith Communities, USA “Dr. Theo Gavrielides’ book provides a special journey from the underlying theoretical foundations to the daily practice of restorative justice. By his thought-provoking and critical approach, he gifts the restorative justice field with an essential analysis that bridges theory and practice in an interdisciplinary and multisectoral way” Borbala Fellegi, researcher and lecturer at the ELTE University, consultant of the Ministry of Justice in Hungary in the field of restorative justice, Hungary

RESTORATIVE JUSTICE is conceived of in this essay as a process in which all the stakeholders affected by an injustice have the opportunity to discuss the consequences of the injustice and what might be done to put them right. This is a process conception of restorative justice by which what is to be restored is left open. Rather, the form of restoration of victims, of offenders and of communities that count are those found to be important in such a restorative justice process. Beyond the process conception, there is also a values conception of restorative justice. The key value is that because injustice hurts, justice should heal. Responding to pain with 'another spoonful of pain' 1 is seen as a less satisfactory response than responding with healing or repair. A reason is that hurt tends to beget hurt, creating a vicious spiral of retribution and feuding. Alternatively, it is possible to flip this dynamic into one of healing begetting healing — a virtuous circle. I have argued that the key value of restorative justice is non-domination. 2 The active part of this value is empowerment. Empowerment means preventing the state from 'stealing conflicts' 3 from people who want to hang on to those conflicts and learn from working them through in their own way. Empowerment should trump other restorative justice values like forgiveness, healing and apology, important as they are. This means that if stakeholders in

British Journal of Criminology, 2015

This article examines the therapeutic benefits that restorative justice can engender for stakeholders of homicide. Qualitative interviews with participants from a single case study are used to reveal the various long-term emotional traumas caused by such crimes, as well as the many unanswered questions that remain post-conviction. In exploring one family’s journey of restorative justice, this article highlights the various aspects of restorative dialogue that can gave rise to positive emotional connections and, in turn, relational transformations between participants. Though such transformations are potentially life altering, this article also recommends caution, based on findings that certain adverse emotional reactions can be generated via the personal connections that emerge during dialogue. The article concludes that in order to properly address the wider harms caused by homicide, justice agencies should seek to utilize trauma-informed restorative practices via a parallel system of justice.

Ministry of Justice …, 2007

Introduction 6 Obtaining the views of victims and offenders 7 The report 8 2. Approaching restorative justice 0 Approaching offenders and victims 0 Did victims and offenders feel they had sufficient information about restorative justice? 11 The preparation meeting before JRC conferencing 3 Feelings and expectations prior to restorative justice 4 Reasons for taking part in restorative justice 7 Key points 9 3. Conferences and mediation 20 JRC conferences 20 Direct mediation: REMEDI and CONNECT 3 Indirect mediation: REMEDI and CONNECT 32 Key points 34 4. Overall views of restorative justice and interactions with criminal justice 36 Overall reactions to JRC restorative justice 36 Does restorative justice affect perceptions of the effects of the offence? 40 JRC: the interaction with criminal justice 4 Overall reactions to REMEDI and CONNECT direct and indirect mediation 43 Key points 44 5. Conclusion 46 The views of victims and offenders: general satisfaction 46 Occasions when there was some dissatisfaction 46 To meet or not to meet 48 References 50 Appendix Technical details of the interviews and questionnaires 53 Appendix 2 Additional tables 56 List of tables. Numbers of victims and offenders interviewed or responding to questionnaires 9 2.1 Did JRC participants have enough information? (percentages from final interviews) 12 2.2 Expectations of the restorative justice event (percentages from the final interviews) 16 2.3 Participants' reasons for participating in JRC conferences 8 3.1 Communication at the JRC conference (actual percentages) 24 3.2 The role of the facilitator (actual percentages) 26 3.3 Satisfaction with the conference (actual percentages) 27 3.4 Looking back at conferencing (actual percentages) 29 4.1 Overall reactions to JRC restorative justice from the conference group (actual percentages) 37 4.2 JRC: reactions to criminal justice (actual percentages) 42 0 This occurred in all schemes, though only JRC referred specifically to a 'preparation meeting'.

International …, 2007

Although restorative justice is often presented as a victim-oriented reform of criminal justice procedures, there is limited research and theory into the experiences of victims within restorative justice. Furthermore, available research and theory is dominated by law-related disciplines and inadequately employ constructs and research methodology used to evaluate victim experiences outside of the criminal justice system. This article provides a starting point for a more fully developed understanding of victim experiences in restorative justice. The implications for restorative justice of relevant bodies of research from social and personality psychology are discussed. Theories relating to anxiety and anger, two common victim reactions to crime, are analyzed. Meeting the offender can effect victims" perceptions of control and attributions concerning the cause of their own victimization, which in turn may have either positive or negative effects on coping. In addition, the meeting may affect victims" feelings of anger and the propensity to forgive the offender, depending on the sincerity of the apology, the severity of the offence, and the justice values emphasized. The implications are not confined to academic research and theory, but also apply to the current debate concerning legal standards for restorative justice.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, 2023

Restorative justice was initially used for minor crimes, but it has been increasingly used to address the aftermath of violent crimes. Previous studies have indicated that restorative justice can be effective in reducing the harmful effects of violent victimization. However, there is limited research on how restorative justice can support victim recovery. This paper presents a theoretical framework to better understand the relationship between victim recovery and restorative justice. The framework identifies core recovery factors that are common to victims of different types of violence, as well as those that are relevant to the restorative justice process. Additionally, the framework highlights enabling factors that can facilitate the victim recovery process when present in restorative justice as well as inhibiting factors that can impede the victim recovery process if they are present in restorative justice.

Scholars and policymakers of restorative justice typically laud this justice approach as being ‘victim-friendly’ in its rules and practices. High levels of victim satisfaction with its outcomes are put forward to substantiate this claim. However, there has been little research that engages with the constitutive role of restorative justice in shaping conceptions of identities, practices and needs. To address this gap, this article develops an analytic framework through which to assess the victim-friendly approach of restorative justice processes across social and legal contexts. In so doing, it engages with three key elements of restorative justice processes: firstly, how this justice approach conceives victims; secondly, how it shapes its practices (and not just outcomes) to address their concerns; and thirdly, how it responds to individual needs. The paper argues that engagement with the constitutive processes can bring a fresh perspective to the relationship between victims and restorative justice.

Restorative justice: Emerging issues in practice and …, 2005

This chapter reviews two studies on restorative justice conducted in the past several years. One examines variability in the conference process and the second compares outcomes for court and conference cases. The studies show the strengths and weaknesses of ...

… justice cultivating common ground for victims …, 2001

Prison Life, 2024

This paper explores the complex interplay between restorative justice and traditional punitive justice systems. While proportional and rationalistic justice focuses on establishing some kind of disturbed equilibrium between crime and a normal state of affairs in society, or on preventing future crimes by increasing the costs of committing it for the offender, restorative justice focuses on the actual restoration of the type of social capital that has been degraded by time. Restorative justice thus works on healing and reconciliation, and tends to contrast sharply with punitive justice, which emphasizes retribution and deterrence. One of the main obstacles to a broad implementation of restorative justice is connected with community expectations. Most communities have been habituated to expect punitive justice and have internalized these expectations as their psychological way to achieve "closure" after a crime has victimized some members of the community or, indirectly, the community as a whole. Thus one of the challenges of modern restorative justice in practice is how to integrate it with more traditional views on punitive justice, which is the preoccupation of this brief paper.

International Review of Victimology, 2021

Reams have been written about the victim's position in restorative justice (RJ), but empirical studies remain surprisingly scarce. Conducting longitudinal studies with vulnerable victims of crime is especially fraught with difficulties, yet Bolívar has overcome many hurdles to base this comprehensive analysis of victim-offender mediation on data of a rare quality.

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.