Restorative Justice, Self-interest and Responsible Citizenship
Abstract
Lode Walgrave has made a highly significant contribution to the worldwide development of the restorative justice movement over the last two decades. This book represents the culmination of his vision for restorative justice. Coming to the subject from a juvenile justice background he initially saw restorative justice as a means of escaping the rehabilitation-punishment dilemma, and as the basis for a more constructive judicial response to youth crime that had been the case hitherto. Over time his conception of restorative justice moved in the direction of focusing on repairing harm and suffering rather than ensuring that the youthful offender met with a ‗just‗ response, and encompassing the notion that restorative justice was not so much about a justice system promoting restoration, more a matter of doing justice through restoration.
... No cabe duda de que instrumentos propios de la Justicia Restaurativa siempre deben entenderse respaldados por la autoridad pública, siendo para ello fundamental que una resolución judicial refrende lo acordado en los encuentros restaurativos. De este modo, se ven satisfechas funciones estabilizadoras, ya sea en un plano comunicativo como afl ictivo, que también son las que se esperan de la pena (Walgrave, 2008). Debe tenerse presente, que la pena contiene efectos negativos ya no sólo para el autor −dado su carácter estigmatizador y desocializador−, sino también respecto de la víctima. ...
... Es más, también para el acusado la víctima es su adversario, por cuanto el ofensor la individualiza como la responsable de su situación judicial −aprecia que su denuncia, por ejemplo, lo ha colocado en esta situación−. Todo ello da lugar, de acuerdo con lo que señalan Walgrave (2008), Braithwaite (2005) y Sherman (1993), a una suerte de negación de lo sucedido, que, en no pocos casos, su propio abogado defensor lo impulsa, dentro la estrategia que se está siguiendo. Precisamente, la actitud asumida por el acusado, al negar responsabilidad en los hechos, puede causar un gran impacto emocional en la víctima, pues lo valora como un ocultamiento de la verdad, profundizando la distancia y generando rencor, no sólo respecto del propio hechor, sino también hacia la sociedad, pues, de algún modo, ha tolerado que el sistema procesal admita tales prácticas. ...
El trabajo examina que debe entenderse por justicia restaurativa, exponiendo sus particularidades esenciales, realizando un paralelo con la justicia retributiva. En este sentido, se pretende dar cuenta de los problemas que puede representar la pena como instrumento de respuesta frente al delito y por que los procesos restaurativos permitirían ser más eficaces y con ello disminuir los rigores del sistema, con la siguiente reparación a la víctima y la asunción de responsabilidad por parte del autor. Para tal efecto, se analiza como se ha implementado la justicia restaurativa en diversos países y que se propone para la legislación chilena.
... Initially called the victim offender reconciliation project/program (VORP) through the Kitchner experiment (in Ontario, Canada), it was later renamed victim offender mediation. 35 This particular model involves the individual(s) who caused the crime (offender) in a structured encounter with the individual(s) who suffered the harm (victim) of the crime (Umbreit et al. 2005;Walgrave 2008;Zehr 2002). It aims, through physical interaction of victim and offender 36 to introduce a unique dimension of justice (or resolution, reparation) that addresses the root causes (for offender) and root insecurities (for victim). ...
... It is not rare for these individuals to serve as facilitators, support or accountability members in a group conference. This model is widely used for juvenile perpetrators in (Minnesota) USA, Canada, Ireland, 37 Australia, and New Zealand (Braithwaite 2002;Umbreit et al. 2005) with much success, as some proponents advocate for a full reform of the juvenile justice system (Walgrave 2008 In each of them, a concerted effort to be respectful was maintained. ...
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
Eine Analyse der Nachrichtenmedien wird wahrscheinlich zeigen, dass mehr Forderungen an den Respekt von internationalen Anführern als an Vertrauen gestellt wird. Diese Studie analysiert die Mikrodynamik der palästinensisch-israelischen Friedensgespräche in Oslo (1993) sowie die accra-liberianischen Friedensgespräche (2003) mit dem Fokus auf die Frage: Was ist Respekt und inwieweit könnte ‚Respekt‘—als kritischer Katalysator für Friedensprozesse und deren spätere Vereinbarungen—die Interaktion zwischen Konfliktparteien, die zu Verhandlungen bereit sind, beeinflüßen?
Die Fallauswahl erfolgte mittels Prozessverfolgung, während der ‚Respekt‘ in den beiden Ereignis-Transkripten aus den Gesprächen durch qualitative Inhaltsanalyse—unter Verwendung der Software MAXQDA—abgebildet und identifiziert wurde. Darüber hinaus wurden Interviews mit 15 Mediatoren—darunter ein nigerianischer Präsident und ein amerikanischer Botschafter—geführt und in die Analyse mitaufgenommen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen die Wesentlichkeit der Rolle des Respekts bei Friedensprozessen auf; sie weisen darauf hin, dass ‚Respekt‘ mindestens eine gleichrangige oder sogar noch eine größere Bedeutung als Vertrauen aufweist.
Zwei Disziplinen der Sozialwissenschaften – Kriminologie und Politologie – sind der interdisziplinäre Rahmen, in dem diese Studie ihren Anwendungsbereich operationalisierte. Restorative Justice (Kriminologie) ist eine vorherrschende Alternative im Strafjustizsystem, die Treffen zwischen "Opfern", "Tätern" und deren Gemeinschaften mit anerkennenswerten Ergebnissen ermöglicht. Die Theorie des Respekts in den internationalen Beziehungen (Politologie) stellt dar, dass die angemessene Berücksichtigung eines politischen Gegners ein kooperatives Verhalten fördern kann. Der Zusammenfluss dieser beiden Konzepte verdeutlicht den Begriff des Respekts und unterscheidet ihn vom Vertrauen. Darüber hinaus erzeugt dieser Zusammenfluss drei Typologien, mit denen ‚Respekt‘ in Friedensprozessen bewertet werden kann:Respekt als Modellierungsverhalten (RasMB); Respekt als Gleichgewicht (RasB); Respekt als gemeinsame Erfahrung (RasSE). Diese Typologien werden als Pfade von Respekt-Mapping eingesetzt, um die Verknüpfungen zwischen Respekt und den Vereinbarungen in den Gesprächen aufzuzeigen.
Was die Konflikte und ihre Lösung betrifft, so bietet diese Studie drei Beiträge für die Sozialwissenschaften. Erstens liefert sie einen theoretischen und methodischen Rahmen, um Respekt zu verstehen und anzuwenden. Dieser war in der akademischen Welt bisher recht vage. Zweitens zeigen die Ergebnisse der Untersuchung, dass Respekt dem Vertrauen vorausgeht, während die Rolle und der Einfluss des Respekts auf Mediationsakteure herausgearbeitet wird. Drittens stellen die drei Wege (Pfade) den Mediatoren ein einfacheres Rahmenwerk zur Verfügung, mit denen mit Konflikten und deren Antagonisten umgegangen werden kann. Dadurch wird weniger Komplexität beim Herbeiführen und Halten von Antagonisten am Tisch ermöglicht.
... Restorative justice (RJ) is a way of doing justice following an offense that is primarily oriented towards repairing individual, relational, and social harm (Walgrave 2013). RJ is distinct from the criminal justice mechanism that views the offense only as a deviation from legal norms, in that it views it primarily as affecting individuals and relationships (Johnstone and Van Ness 2007;Umbreit and Armour 2010;Zehr 2002). ...
... Such changes acted as triggers, motivating the victims to start a family process focused on the offense-a process that had until then been delayed by them, for various reasons. This link between the decision to initiate an RJ process and the change in the family is inherent to the RJ process as dealing with people and relationships (Walgrave 2013). It appears the victims are motivated by a strong desire to mend the relationships broken by the offense and its implications. ...
Restorative justice (RJ) is a way of doing justice following an offense that is primarily oriented towards repairing individual, relational, and social harm. This study examined how RJ processes, conducted following intrafamilial sexual abuse, helped restore the family relationship, and assessed their contribution to the healing and recovery of the victims and the family system. Twenty-three adults who have chosen to take part in RJ processes were interviewed for this study, including incest survivors, non-offending family members, friends, and RJ facilitators. We used a thematic approach within an experiential framework to analyze the qualitative data. Analysis of the interviews highlights the unique role played by the family affected by incest in the journey of recovery undertaken by the survivor and other family members. Together, the participants’ voices join into a multifaceted portrait of a highly complex process that enables survivors and their family to make themselves heard, become empowered, and grow towards recovery and restoration. The present study adds to recent studies on RJ in cases of sexual offense, and in the particular intrafamilial context. It enriches the literature with descriptions of the participants’ experiences, shedding light on the unique characteristics of RJ processes in incest cases. The study also refines the contribution of the RJ process as an alternative for or as complementary to legal or therapeutic processes, as well as in highlighting the importance of restoring the family system and the suitability of the process for incest cases.
... The horizons marked by contemporary justice reforms require restorative justice theoreticians to rethink its boundaries. The 'pyramid' models envisioning the integration of restorative justice within justice systems (Braithwaite, 2000;Dignan, 2002;Walgrave, 2008) should be updated and further nuanced to include the multiple 'doors', inside and outside the courtroom, that have emerged worldwide. In particular, there needs to be more theoretical and doctrinal discussion about the nature of defendants' rehabilitation in trauma-informed courts, the position of victims or their proxies in offender-focused programmes and the role of the community in specialised courts and in restorative justice. ...
... More generally, restorative justice scholars should be more actively engaged in legal writing. Scholars have attempted to address various legal challenges presented by the restorative paradigm, such as that of proportionality of punishment (Kirchengast, 2010), due process rights (Ikpa, 2007), retribution in restorative justice (Wenzel, Okimoto, Feather & Platow, 2008) and the relationship between restorative and punitive justice in general (Dancig-Rosenberg & Gal, 2012;Walgrave, 2008). Yet, most of the restorative justice literature is detached from the legal debate that has flourished around the development of other mechanisms such as problemsolving courts and diversion programmes, neglecting to address the doctrinal and normative concerns that legal scholars raise when considering the appropriateness of such programmes in a pluralistic criminal justice system. ...
... Victim-offender mediation is generally considered to be the original archetype in the modern emergence of restorative justice. It normally involves a structured meeting involving an impartial mediator who invites the two most evident protagonists in the aftermath of an offence to communicate with each other, with a view to arriving at appropriate restitution, compensation or reparation for the harm caused by the offence (Walgrave, 2008). Family group conferencing has been described as the 'most restorative practice' (McCold, 2000) and consists of an inclusive process that brings together the victim, the offender and their 'supporters' in order to find a socially constructive solution to the problems and harms caused by the offence (Roberts and Masters, 2000;Daly, 2002). ...
... Finally, the circle approach involves a group of participants arranging themselves in a circle and passing a 'talking piece' around the circle to assure that each person speaks, one at a time, in the order in which each is seated in the circle (Zehr, 2002;Van Ness and Strong, 2002). One or two 'circle keepers' serve as facilitators and the discussions are often more wide-ranging than in other restorative practice models because any member of the community can become involved (Walgrave, 2008). ...
This report presents the findings from an evaluation of the Youth Forums Project which is a Police and young people engagement initiative that uses restorative approaches, coaching skills and theatre arts to improve relations between the two parties. The research was commissioned by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Gloucestershire, with the support of Restorative Gloucestershire, and was conducted by a research team from the School of Natural and Social Sciences, University of Gloucestershire. The methodology comprised of participant observations and face to face interviews with Police Officers, young people and project facilitators at three Youth Forums in Stroud, Tetbury, and Gloucester, and later, at a structured Police follow up session in Gloucester. The young people involved were entered into the project through their membership of youth clubs and other youth initiatives and came from diverse backgrounds. The participating Police Officers were drawn from a range of different police roles and ranks and included neighbourhood officers, response officers and criminal investigators. The research is situated against wider national discourses on a perceived crisis in relations between young people and the Police.
... Nous intégrons ici la planification de l'avenir visant à sécuriser le futur en projetant la personne. . Ces dernières années ont vu plusieurs publications présentant la JR et le GLM comme des approches complémentaires Walgrave, 2008 (Braithwaite & Roche, 2001). Cela est différent de ce qui se passe dans la procédure de Justice pénale traditionnelle, où l'auteur d'infraction est découragé à prendre la responsabilité, ou bien il la prend passivement. ...
... (Braithwaite & Pettit, 1990). L'investissement dans la vie sociale serait une façon de réaliser son intérêt personnel, cela se concrétise au travers du respect inconditionnel de la dignité humaine, de la solidarité avec ceux qui sont en difficulté et en prenant la responsabilité active de promouvoir ces deux forces (dignité et solidarité) (Walgrave, 2008). ...
... Nous intégrons ici la planification de l'avenir visant à sécuriser le futur en projetant la personne. . Ces dernières années ont vu plusieurs publications présentant la JR et le GLM comme des approches complémentaires Walgrave, 2008 (Braithwaite & Roche, 2001). Cela est différent de ce qui se passe dans la procédure de Justice pénale traditionnelle, où l'auteur d'infraction est découragé à prendre la responsabilité, ou bien il la prend passivement. ...
... (Braithwaite & Pettit, 1990). L'investissement dans la vie sociale serait une façon de réaliser son intérêt personnel, cela se concrétise au travers du respect inconditionnel de la dignité humaine, de la solidarité avec ceux qui sont en difficulté et en prenant la responsabilité active de promouvoir ces deux forces (dignité et solidarité) (Walgrave, 2008). ...
Chapitre 1 : Introduction aux réflexions de Tony Ward et aux orientations « Good Lives »
Chapitre 2 : Les modèles de la désistance et la question temporelle TIM-E en lien avec le GLM
Chapitre 3 : L’opérationnalisation du GLM et des réflexions actuelles de Tony Ward
Chapitre 4 : Quand la Justice restaurative rencontre le Good Lives Model : contribution à une criminologie de la confiance
Chapitre 5 : Violence Sexuelle, le Good Lives Model et la Justice restaurative
Chapitre 6 : Le Good Lives Model appliqué à la problématique de la radicalisation : brèves réflexions et illustrations de cas cliniques en Quartier d’Evaluation de la Radicalisation.
Chapitre 7 : Programme de Parrainage de Désistance (PPD), un programme de Criminologie positive entre le GLM, la désistance et la Justice Restaurative
Chapitre 8 : L’approche des Plans de Vie en Réalité Virtuelle, une alliance entre le GLM et les perspectives temporelles TIM-E
Chapitre 9 : L’apport de l’orientation « Good Lives » du programme CéSURE auprès des femmes en détention
Chapitre 10 : Penser l’articulation des pratiques pénitentiaire et sanitaire pour un accompagnement global de la personne placée sous main de justice.
Chapitre 11 : GLM et EMDR sous l’angle temporel TIM-E en Centre Hospitalier spécialisé sur le Psycho-traumatisme.
Chapitre 12 : La dimension éthique dans le choix d’une prise en charge des délinquants sexuels : l’intérêt du Good lives model (GLM)
... Nous intégrons ici la planification de l'avenir visant à sécuriser le futur en projetant la personne. . Ces dernières années ont vu plusieurs publications présentant la JR et le GLM comme des approches complémentaires Walgrave, 2008 (Braithwaite & Roche, 2001). Cela est différent de ce qui se passe dans la procédure de Justice pénale traditionnelle, où l'auteur d'infraction est découragé à prendre la responsabilité, ou bien il la prend passivement. ...
... (Braithwaite & Pettit, 1990). L'investissement dans la vie sociale serait une façon de réaliser son intérêt personnel, cela se concrétise au travers du respect inconditionnel de la dignité humaine, de la solidarité avec ceux qui sont en difficulté et en prenant la responsabilité active de promouvoir ces deux forces (dignité et solidarité) (Walgrave, 2008). ...
... Nous intégrons ici la planification de l'avenir visant à sécuriser le futur en projetant la personne. . Ces dernières années ont vu plusieurs publications présentant la JR et le GLM comme des approches complémentaires Walgrave, 2008 (Braithwaite & Roche, 2001). Cela est différent de ce qui se passe dans la procédure de Justice pénale traditionnelle, où l'auteur d'infraction est découragé à prendre la responsabilité, ou bien il la prend passivement. ...
... (Braithwaite & Pettit, 1990). L'investissement dans la vie sociale serait une façon de réaliser son intérêt personnel, cela se concrétise au travers du respect inconditionnel de la dignité humaine, de la solidarité avec ceux qui sont en difficulté et en prenant la responsabilité active de promouvoir ces deux forces (dignité et solidarité) (Walgrave, 2008). ...
... Nous intégrons ici la planification de l'avenir visant à sécuriser le futur en projetant la personne. . Ces dernières années ont vu plusieurs publications présentant la JR et le GLM comme des approches complémentaires Walgrave, 2008 (Braithwaite & Roche, 2001). Cela est différent de ce qui se passe dans la procédure de Justice pénale traditionnelle, où l'auteur d'infraction est découragé à prendre la responsabilité, ou bien il la prend passivement. ...
... (Braithwaite & Pettit, 1990). L'investissement dans la vie sociale serait une façon de réaliser son intérêt personnel, cela se concrétise au travers du respect inconditionnel de la dignité humaine, de la solidarité avec ceux qui sont en difficulté et en prenant la responsabilité active de promouvoir ces deux forces (dignité et solidarité) (Walgrave, 2008). ...
... In addition to the views of the experts above, Manan (2006) revealed that "restorative justice" contained principles, including: building joint participation between perpetrators, victims, and community groups in resolving an event or crime by placing perpetrators, victims, and the community as stakeholders who worked together, and directly trying to find a solution that is considered fair for all parties (Lazuardi et al., 2020). Walgrave (2004Walgrave ( , 2013 further simplifies the goal of restorative justice which is simply restoration by providing the opportunity of reintegration of offenders into the community without undergoing any additional punishment. ...
Among several policies and methods adopted to handle village fund corruption,
restorative justice method was found to be effective. The Indonesian government is
ranking very high in corruption, and village fund management is no exception. The
main objective of this research was to investigate whether restorative justice can
be an effective measure to check and stop village fund corruption, from the
perspective of Indonesian constitutional and criminal law. To achieve this
objective, the study adopted the normative legal research method, in which data
was collected from legal documents. The findings hinted at the fact that restorative
justice was a model of law enforcement characterized by recovery; and that this
concept believed in reconciliation and harmony, in accordance with the concept of
justice stated in Pancasila and the Indonesian constitution, a justice that is
humane, just and civilized. The study revealed that restorative justice in the crime
of corruption of village funds can be applied with state losses below IDR 150 million
and involves all parties, namely the perpetrator, BPD, Law Enforcement and APIP.
The study would be helpful in framing laws and regulations at the village fund
management level and initiate a paradigm shift in the domain of human justice.
... A chamada Justiça Restaurativa (JR) é comumente situada (GARLAND, 2002;DALY, IMMARIGEON, 1998;WALGRAVE, 2012;ACHUTTI, 2014) Ao apresentar-se como um sistema flexível, adequado à variedade das chamadas infrações e seus contextos, a JR difunde-se enquanto uma alternativa legal à chamada justiça retributiva, referente ao sistema de justiça formal (ZEHR, 2005;AGUINSKY et. al., 2008;BOONEN, 2011). ...
Apresentado no ST 28 - Violência, punição e controle social: perspectivas de pesquisa e análise
... Más allá de esta discusión, en diversas jurisdicciones se reconocen prácticas sustentadas en valores y principios de la justicia restauradora dentro del sistema penal tradicional. Dichas prácticas prevén que de no llegarse a un acuerdo o de incumplirse éste, el sistema penal opera como arena secundaria de solución (Cid Moliné, 2007), capaz de respaldar el eventual cumplimiento del acuerdo, aún de forma coactiva (Foley, 2014;Shapland, 2003;Walgrave, 2003Walgrave, , 2008Zehr, 2002). ...
En las últimas décadas, varias jurisdicciones han implementado una categoría de mecanismos destinados a inhibir o suspender el proceso penal a cambio de que la persona imputada cumpla satisfactoriamente algunas obligaciones.
Aunque en sus orígenes estas instituciones tenían por propósito la descriminalización de algunas conductas, actualmente tales mecanismos son vistos como vías para alcanzar otros objetivos como la reparación del daño, la mediación, la rehabilitación, la prevención de delito o una mayor eficiencia en la gestión de delitos.
Tales mecanismos son presentados como sustitutivos de la pena y una forma no intrusiva de reacción ante delitos menores. No obstante, aquellos resultan ser verdaderas fuentes de castigo penal.
Con base en una perspectiva multidisciplinaria, esta investigación defiende el carácter penal de estos mecanismos condicionales y visibiliza algunos aspectos estructurales y dinámicos de su diseño y práctica, en particular aquellos que contribuyen o promueven su aceptación por la persona sospechosa, independientemente de su culpabilidad o inocencia.
Over the last decades, several jurisdictions have implemented a series of procedural mechanisms intended to avoid the criminal procedure. Such institutions halt the criminal process with the condition that the accused successfully complies with some obligations.
Originally aimed to decriminalize some conducts, nowadays, those mechanisms are seen as instruments addressed to accomplish other goals, such as reparation, victim-offender mediation, rehabilitation, prevention, or greater efficiency to manage offenses.
Regardless of purposes, the conditional disposal of prosecution is presented as a substitute for punishment. However, this type of mechanisms works as a real source of punishment.
Based on a multidisciplinary perspective, this dissertation defends the penal nature of conditional disposal and draws attention to some structural and dynamic aspects of its design and practice, particularly those that contribute to or promote its acceptance by the accused, irrespective of his/her guilt or innocence.
... g penal model, it claims the transmutation of the punitive language (Hulsman 1993) by returning conflict to the involved parties (Christie 1977) so that, through participative dialogue, they can define the best responses to the needs of reparation of the harm caused (Parker 2005). The concept of 'restorative' can be sourced to Albert Eglash in 1977. Walgrave (2008 characterises it as 'an unfinished product', an 'unfinished term' (Achutti 2014: 57), as well as an open and complex concept that is still in transformation (Johnstone and Van Ness 2007: 8). The elements of what constitutes restorative justice are contested and subject to constant adjustment due to a 'plurality of various, changing prac ...
The solution of conflicts, cases of violence and harmful offences through alternatives to the penal system has been encouraged by Brazil’s Conselho Nacional de Justiça/National Justice Council (CNJ) since 2010. However, empirical studies that assess the impact of restorative practices when applied to domestic violence cases are sparse because most of them tend to highlight the retributive model’s insufficiency compared to the restorative model. In attempt to break away from that logic, the article analyses the insertion of practices of restorative justice regarding domestic violence by examining empirical studies carried out at the Rio Grande do Sul’s Justice Court, a pioneer in the employment of restorative justice. The study shows that restorative practices for domestic violence are residual, do not disrupt the traditional model and are not understood as restorative by women. Therefore, a broad and serious discussion about the model being implemented in Brazil is needed.
... A justiça restaurativa ganhou novo fôlego a partir (a) das experiências práticas pontuais de mediação vítima-ofensor no Canadá, no ano de 1974, e em outros países nos anos seguintes; e (b) da fragmentação (ou crise) inicial da criminologia crítica, com a emergência do abolicionismo penal como uma das suas principais correntes teóricas, a partir da segunda metade nos anos de 1970 (Anitua, 2008;Walgrave, 2008;Van Ness e Strong, 2010;Hoyle, 2010;Ruggiero, 2010Ruggiero, e 2011 Hulsman, como exposto acima, defendia a completa extinção do sistema penal, incluindo a justiça criminal e o sistema prisional. Apesar da radicalidade da sua proposta, Hulsman referia que não era racional manter em operação uma engrenagem punitiva marcada pela contraprodutividade, incapaz de atingir qualquer dos seus objetivos, e que se apresenta antes como um problema social do que como um mecanismo apto a promover a reintegração social do apenado (De Folter, 1986, p. 42). ...
Pretende-se, neste trabalho, abordar as principais críticas de Louk Hulsman ao sistema penal, para posteriormente verificar se podem ou não ser consideradas importantes também para a configuração de um modelo crítico de justiça restaurativa. Busca-se, com isso, apontar para a importância estratégica do pensamento e da obra de Hulsman para a estruturação da justiça restaurativa desde uma perspectiva crítica, atenta aos conhecidos problemas do sistema penal
... But we also assume that most corporations have good reasons to maintain public trust, reputation and right relations with their consumers and with their communities (Chiste, 2008). Such motivation of self-interest (Walgrave, 2008), together with an emerging socio-ethical awareness and a new understanding of 'corporate responsibility', might bring the big players to the table. A combination of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations might work. ...
... Duff (2003), por ejemplo, considera que el castigo es necesario para lograr la restauración; con castigo se refiere a que los perpetradores tienen que sufrir remordimiento y censura y a que la reparación debe ser onerosa. Al otro lado del espectro, Walgrave (2008) considera que el castigo es incompatible con la justicia restaurativa; para él, en la mayoría de los casos, la restauración se puede lograr de manera más eficaz sin una autoridad diseñada para causar sufrimiento. London (2011), por su parte, se encuentra en medio de estas dos posturas, pues, al igual que Walgrave, considera que el castigo es incompatible con la justicia restaurativa y no ve necesario el castigo para lograr la restauración; más bien, lo introduce después de encontrar que otros instrumentos para restablecer la confianza resultan inadecuados. ...
... Se fundamenta en la interacción activa y conjunta para la resolución de los conflictos derivados del delito, con la ayuda de un tercero facilitador (Marshall, 1999). A pesar de que hay diversas perspectivas teóricas (Braithwaite & Strang, 2000;Dignan, 2005;Hoyle & Fonseca, 2016;Johnstone & Van Ness, 2007a, 2007bWalgrave, 2007), todas parten de la existencia de un conflicto. ...
El objetivo principal de este artículo es conocer la capacidad de la justicia restaurativa de incidir en el desistimiento del comportamiento antisocial o delictivo, con el fin de identificar el rol de la mediación en los potenciales procesos de cambio (Prochaska & DiClemente, 1983; 1984) de los infractores. Los resultados muestran que es posible identificar infractores en todos los estadios del cambio. Entre los diversos factores relacionados con la motivación y con el proceso de cambio, la mayoría de los infractores identifican la mediación como un punto de inflexión o elemento significativo en ese camino hacia la vida pro social. Los resultados muestran la complejidad del proceso de cambio y la dificultad que los infractores tienen a la hora de conseguir, pero sobre todo de mantener, este cambio.
... Bolivar (2012) considers the lack of research on the role of community a "significant deficiency" (p. 18) for RJ theory and practice, whilst Walgrave (2008) blames the vagueness of the notion of community for this gap in empirical studies. Even though community, albeit vaguely understood, is an integral part of RJ ethos, theory, and practice, the operational understanding of community praxis therein is limited (Morrison et al., 2020). ...
The concept of community is pervasive but ambiguous, and there is a lack of research on the role of community in restorative justice. Employing both in-depth qualitative interviews and surveys, this qualitative study unearths the role of community in restorative justice in British Columbia, Nova Scotia, and Bangladesh and examines existing community praxis in those places. The study proposes a community engagement framework which consists of horizontal community and vertical community. The study argues that incorporation of both horizontal and vertical communities would strengthen the quality of relationships, while also fostering innovation and creativity in restorative justice.
... While some restorative justice proponents view restorative justice and punishment as incompatible (see, e.g. Walgrave, 2004Walgrave, , 2008 others are more willing to embrace the concept of punishment within restorative justice (see, e.g. Duff, 2002). ...
This article explores a range of normative, conceptual and practical issues that arise from utilising restorative justice with young people in custody in England and Wales, and considers the appropriateness of doing so within the coercive and oppressive space that prison occupies. It is suggested that, while there are some clear benefits for victims and offenders, there is a need to proceed with caution. This is because children who are incarcerated are particularly vulnerable in addition to simply their age owing to the resilience required to survive a penal system that can be isolating and dangerous, as well as their often complex needs, and difficult life histories. This is also because there is a need to ensure that the process adheres to the ethos of restorative justice, and does not divert attention from the current problems within the youth secure estate or the pressing need to continue reducing child imprisonment.
... The concept 'restorative justice' in criminology and penology is not absolutely clear; as Hoyle has put it: "There are almost as many definitions of RJ as there are academics interested in it, and considerable divergence over what practices and principles it embraces" (Hoyle, 2008: 794). However, the most popular definition has been suggested by Marshall (Roche, 2006;Newburn, 2007;Walgrave, 2008). According to Marshall, restorative justice is "a process whereby parties with a stake in a particular offence come together to resolve collectively how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future" (Marshall, 1996: 37). ...
The present paper focuses on the role of probation officers for juvenile
offenders in victim-offender mediation and on the main challenges for the
protection of victims’ interests. The general nature of probation officers’
duties has been characterized as ‘offender-focused’. However, according to
the Directive 2012/29/EU, restorative justice includes processes through
which the victim and the offender can participate actively in resolving the
problems that occur from the offence, with the help of an impartial third
party. The Greek juvenile justice system will be examined as a case study.
The analysis reveals that the Greek legislator has adopted a
‘quasi-restorative’ practice that promotes juvenile offenders’ rehabilitation
and socialization. This fact raises concerns regarding the ‘legitimation’ of
mediation process from a victimological perspective. Special emphasis is
given to the significance of the informed consent that should be provided by
the victims in order to participate in the process based on the procedural
justice theory.
... A rapidly growing field of research and practice, restorative justice has been viewed as a new social movement, an alternative approach to solving conflicts and responding to crime, a set of values and principles, a lifestyle or philosophy, a normative social theory of justice, a ground-breaking paradigm of justice, or a variety of programmes complementary to the criminal justice system (see Braithwaite, 2002;Daly & Immarigeon, 1998;Richards 2009b;Sullivan & Tifft 2001;Walgrave, 2008;Zehr 1990). While some of these conceptions have led to its applications in different areas of everyday life -such as schools and workplaces -, restorative justice has primarily found its gravitational centre within the criminal justice system, as an alternative way of dealing with the aftermath of crime. ...
Resumen: El presente trabajo analiza el potencial de la justicia restaurativa para reparar la pérdida de confianza social como daño social específico causado por la corrupción. Para ello, se delimitan conceptualmente las nociones de corrupción y confianza social, se describe cómo la corrupción deteriora la confianza social y se examinan los factores que permiten o impiden a la justicia restaurativa funcionar como una estrategia efectiva de reparación. Finalmente, se formulan algunas propuestas para el abordaje restaurativo de los delitos de corrupción.
Many jurists, especially those coming from the Romano-Germanic (or civil law) legal
tradition, are sceptical of restorative justice or simply do not fully understand it, especially in
criminal matters, even though it is part of supranational normative documents and laws in many
countries. Does the language we use play a role in jurists’ reluctance to embrace restorative justice?
What do legal professionals and scholars understand behind the vocabulary we usually use in the
restorative justice literature? We will argue that both the terms ‘justice’ and ‘harm’ can be
problematic from a legal perspective because they can lead to concepts that may cause confusion or
misunderstanding about restorative justice and should therefore be reconsidered. On the one hand,
the ‘justice’ part of the term restorative justice – which has already been criticised by restorative
justice scholars – presents some questionable ontological assumptions from a legal perspective. On
the other hand, jurists tend to understand the term ‘harm’ as referring to private relationships and
thus to negotiated transactions and monetary compensation of a civil nature, rather than to
criminal activity. So how can we better communicate to jurists the essence of restorative justice in
criminal matters in a way that respects their mindset and language?
This book advances a normative argument that vicarious punishment is re-emerging in a variety of state actions resulting in the separation of families and confinement of caregivers. States deny individuals birthright citizenship based on the actions, behaviors, status, or group identity of their parents. Economically disadvantaged and minority citizens suffer the collateral consequences of mass incarceration when the state detains their parents or caregivers. Children in mixed-citizenship status families are experiencing the loss of a parent or caregiver through detention and deportation. The children of foreign fighters are suffering the vicarious punitive effects of denationalization and other state actions targeting their parents for their actions in a conflict zone as an anti-terrorism measure by their former country of citizenship. Vicarious punishment never went away in the case of Indigenous children separated from their families to punish their community for resisting assimilation and the extinguishment of their land claims. Their families continue to suffer from intergenerational trauma and child welfare interventions. Beneath these policy problems and legal issues lie two deeper ethical dilemmas that are the focus of this book. The first question is: What does the state and citizens owe to the individuals it detains, given their ongoing contributions in relationships to dependents? The second is: What does the state and citizens owe to innocent dependents in view of the collateral consequences of their caregivers’ detention, which has so often been influenced by prejudice against disadvantaged minority communities?
Environmental harm in Chile takes place in an economic, political, legal, and social context of extractivism. A multiscale process, extractivism involves the mobilisation of a significant amount and volume of natural resources, usually not processed, and the specialisation of areas or territories to produce one single type of product. As a policy, extractivism is encouraged by governments of different political colours from the Global South as a way to promote economic growth and social development. However, in Chile such policy has been disrespectful to nature, affecting seriously the balance of fragile ecosystems and the quality of life of populations who live already in poverty and social exclusion. In addition, environmental legislation in Chile is weak and contributes to abuses and environmental harm due to impunity. This chapter discusses the role of the state in the context of extractivist policies when considering responses to environmental harm from a restorative justice perspective. The authors suggest that the state should both recognise its own negligence and play a serious role in changing such a path in the future. However, the state as such cannot intervene as a third party in mediating between companies and communities but could promote the implementation of a collegial body, with representatives from different sectors of civil society, to identify and address environmental harm. Given the context, this chapter suggests and discusses the model of truth commissions.
The authors of this handbook on Restorative Justice are Professor Ivo Aertsen from Leuven University, Professor Jana D. Javakhishvili from Ilia State University and Dr. Lado Javakhishvili - who was a Head of the Crime Prevention Unit within the MInistry of Justice of Georgia at the moment when this handbook was written (2020). The handbook is published in Georgian language. The target audiences of the handbook are those lawyers, psychologists, mediators, social workers and other professionals who would like to enhance their understanding and knowledge on the issues of restorative justice and victim-offender mediation. The handbook could be used in universities and professional education settings.
O movimento restaurativo ganhou destaque na contemporaneidade ao ampliar as áreas de aplicação, mas sem desenvolver uma perspectiva crítica contra o paradigma punitivista e o discurso jurídico liberal em geral. Desta forma, para além da ostensiva neoconservadora, o risco de cooptação liberal da justiça restaurativa é agravado pela fluidez teórica e pela falta de unicidade finalística entre as vertentes restaurativas existentes. Neste panorama, a teoria marxista oferece relevantes contribuições para a consolidação de uma justiça restaurativa crítica, contraposta ao punitivismo e ao discurso jurídico penal liberal, que enfrenta a hegemonia opressora das instituições ao se apresentar como instrumento de empoderamento e responsabilização. Assim, para dar conta desta construção crítica, o presente artigo, por meio de uma análise bibliográfica e abordagem dialética, tem como objetivo identificar os possíveis contributos da teoria marxista ao desenvolvimento de uma justiça restaurativa crítica
Delinquent behaviour is predominantly an expression of adolescent developmental phases, but at the same time a possible entry into criminal careers. Where socio-educational measures and admonitions no longer help, society reacts with youth detention and imprisonment as a last resort, in doing so it brings the young people into an environment of violence and power. The concept of the socio-educational pilgrimage as an alternative measure to imprisonment takes the young people out of this context and offers space for reflection and self-efficacy. In this article, different concepts of Learning Walks for young offenders are discussed and theoretically analysed.
What does it mean to be doing restorative justice in different criminal justice contexts? In order to answer this question, we must first reflect on the general terms of restorative justice that make comparisons possible. Comparative research often takes for granted the existence of a tangible object for empirical study. As a result, it tends to overlook deep theoretical issues that have not been resolved and which have consequences. This is problematic because a sound understanding of theoretical issues and their implications is ultimately fundamental to any comparative project. In this chapter, I embark on laying the necessary theoretical groundwork to enable meaningful comparisons of restorative justice. I do this by exploring two general terms that are common to restorative justice in the implementing environment of criminal justice: (1) a relationship to criminal justice; and (2) a relationship to moral psychology. I proceed by examining the dialectical relation between restorative justice and criminal justice and where restorative justice sits in the broader criminal justice field. I then turn to develop a more adequate account of the moral psychology of restorative justice than currently exists. What it means to do restorative justice in criminal justice requires a sufficient understanding of both of these core elements. The preparatory theoretical standpoints that I pursue in this chapter facilitate the advancement of important issues central to contemporary comparative restorative justice inquiry.
We are living in a world where power abuse has become the new norm, as well as the biggest, silent driver of persistent inequalities, racism and human rights violations. The COVID-19 socio-economic consequences can only be compared with those that followed World War II. As humanity is getting to grips with them, this timely book challenges current thinking, while creating a much needed normative and practical framework for revealing and challenging the power structures that feed our subconscious feelings of despair and defeatism.
Structured around the four concepts of power, race, justice and restorative justice, the book uses empirical new data and normative analysis to reconstruct the way we prevent power abuse and harm at the inter-personal, inter-community and international levels. This book offers new lenses, which allow us to view power, race and justice in a modern reality where communities have been silenced, but through restorative justice are gaining voice. The book is enriched with case studies written by survivors, practitioners and those with direct experiences of power abuse and inequality. Through robust research methodologies, Gavrielides’s new monograph reveals new forms of slavery, while creating a new, philosophical framework for restorative punishment through the acknowledgement of pain and the use of catharsis for internal transformation and individual empowerment. This is a powerful and timely book that generates much needed hope.
Through a multi-disciplinary dialogue that uses philosophy and critical theory, social sciences, criminology, law, psychology and human rights, the book opens new avenues for practitioners, researchers and policy makers internationally.
Regulators desire punishment that restores individuals to monetary positions before the damage and deters future violations. Thus, enforcement effectiveness is partially a function of punishment severity. Under the Securities and Exchange Commission's oversight, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority provides enforcement and punishment guidelines for securities fraud cases. However, motivation crowding theory suggests extenuating and aggravating circumstances may complicate punishment. We investigate the concern that individuals charged with punishing securities fraud might be excessively tolerant, illustrated by recommended sanctions. Using two samples of participants—compliance examiners and securities arbitrators—in an experimental task that manipulates the fraudster's motivation, history, and personal gain, we find participants may be overly influenced by situational circumstances. Further, participants recommend monetary sanctions that fail to achieve regulators' restoration goals. We discuss practical implications of these findings for regulators. Further, we illustrate the need to extend motivation crowding theory to consider factors associated with non-direct financial benefits.
This research examined the role of guilt and shame proneness among people in custody in shaping attitudes toward restorative justice (RJ) and in predicting the effectiveness of RJ practices. Study 1 ( n = 110) examined the correlation between participant guilt and shame proneness and willingness to participate in an RJ process. It revealed that proneness to guilt, but not to shame, was correlated with willingness to participate in an RJ process. Mediational modeling showed that guilt proneness predicted willingness to participate in an RJ process via its strong correlation with regret and remorse. Study 2 ( n = 133) examined whether shame and guilt proneness affects the effectiveness of an RJ practice. It revealed that high guilt proneness predicted high willingness to participate in RJ, whereas shame proneness moderated the effectiveness of an RJ practice. These results can help practitioners and researchers develop interventions to promote the effectiveness of RJ programs.
This article has two objectives, both of which are new. First, it presents a new framework of punishment in nine dimensions, which makes it possible to distinguish systematically between different conceptualizations of the nature of punishment. Second, using the framework, it discusses the relationship between restorative justice and punishment, showing that some cases of restorative justice constitute punishment from the perspectives of some of the punishment positions in the framework but not for others. Thus, according to some positions, restorative justice (mediation, conferences, circles, etc.) is punishment.
This article draws on Robinson, McNeill and Maruna’s argument about the adaptability of community sanctions and measures, observed through four distinctive penal narratives, in order to shed light on the regional development of community service in Wrocław, Poland. While the managerial adaptation of community sanctions is underpinned by an inter-agency cooperation to fulfil the goals of the system, the contemporary rehabilitation iteration has become a toolkit of measures predominantly phrased around risk management, the reparative discourse seeks various means to repair harm and the punitive orientation represents the turn to desert-based and populist sentencing frameworks. In this article, the first three are reflected upon along with the emerging, restorative adaptation of community sanctions. The last one is added to expand on the findings of this author’s previous research, which suggests the viability of the restorative orientation for community service in Poland. A brief discussion of how punishment, probation and restorative justice can be reconciled is followed by the introduction of Polish probation and the role of probation officers in delivering community service in Poland. Although the penal narratives are visible in the Wrocław model to different degrees and in various combinations, more research is required to evaluate the viability of a progressive orientation to punishment during a gradual optimisation of community orders.
Restorative Justice (JR) involves ethical, philosophical and political principles in understanding human conflicts in different contexts. Considering the importance and scarcity of studies related to the training processes of facilitators in restorative practices, the objective of this study was to understand the meanings produced about participation in these formations. Representatives of each social group enrolled in a training in restorative practices were interviewed. From the thematic analysis of the interviews, the analytical axes "for what," "who" and "how" were created. The results showed that the participants had changes in the quality of listening, communication, and understanding of conflict and punishment. However, the participants were unsure of facilitating restorative circles, which demonstrates the need for more practical exercises. Building the group's conversational context can help align expectations and decrease anxiety levels and dropout rates during the training process.
The aim of the project is to analyze the relations between the standard of institutional
guarantees of judicial power, the status of common courts and judges, judicial ethics, the principles of judicial proceedings and those systemic factors in the judiciary area which materially aff ect the nature of power exercised by the courts. The concept of “independence of judges and courts” is essential in that respect. The changes in functioning of the judiciary model and their social perception cause that a connotation which is given to both terms by the legitimation of judicial power is more and more important again.The legitimation of judicial power has been presented on three levels: institutional, ethical and social one. The analyses and views presented may become subject to debate. That is why a substantive discussion with the participation of
multiple parties is required. It is supported by the observation, shared by all
the papers presented, that the issues referred to have universal characteristics, present also in th e legal systems of other countries. The legitimation is
needed for each judicial power.
This paper explores the possibility of applying restorative
justice to white collar crime. Three approaches in the evolution of the
concept of restorative justice are identified and evaluated, and the suitability of one of them for socio-economic crimes is verified. The author
specifically analyzes the functioning of restorative justice principles
and objectives for socio-economic crimes, and examines which restorative processes would be most appropriate, considering that concepts
like harm, victim, offender and community must be adapted to address
this type of crime in a restorative way. Improving restorative justice
within the criminal justice system can give the opportunity to rethink
penal institutions from a restorative perspective. However, relying on a
too broad concept could result in restorative justice losing its distinctiveness and being absorbed in the criminal justice system.
This chapter sees the author develop a ‘theory of injustice’ that will provide the basis for a victimological perspective on justice processes. The chapter commences with some reflections on the consequence of viewing justice and injustice as poles of one dimension. As the author exposes his theory of injustice, he argues that the issue at stake is the manner in which this theory connects to victim’s participation in justice processes and criminal proceedings. Acknowledging that victims need to communicate their experience in justice processes, Pemberton casts doubt on the extent to which this is best understood in terms of reducing their stress symptoms: becoming less anxious or changing the sentence. He proposes that the justice process itself can be an important site for reconnection: of victim experience with society and with important symbols of shared values. This critical stance has some degree of synergy with the restorative justice perspective and central to his proposition is the need to understand that injustice concerns a relationship of victim with his or her self, rather than a relationship with other persons. The second requirement is to appreciate that this self is only accurately understood if it is conceived as being-in-the-world. Only then does the experience of injustice come into its own—when it amounts to an ontological assault. The arguments put forward in this chapter require a fundamental re-think about the way we experience our victimisation and by implication, the traditional ways in which we have come to think about activism.
RESUMO Este estudo é um ensaio que visou analisar de forma crítica a abordagem punitivista do sistema de justiça criminal no âmbito da violência doméstica e familiar contra a mulher e apontar caminhos alternativos, sem, contudo, descartar as contribuições de um referencial feminista. Busca uma congruência entre os pontos relativos à criminologia crítica do direito penal com o enrijecimento do sistema punitivista, a fim de averiguar se o modo de tratamento da Lei Maria da Penha é o mais adequado. O sistema de justiça percebe a mulher como objeto inserido em um esquema predeterminado de violência, e, a partir disso, nega-lhe voz. Proteger mulheres refere-se diretamente a fortalecer as mulheres e a conferir a elas papel de protagonista da própria vida. A justiça restaurativa pode ser usada como incrementadora da democracia brasileira, facilitando a chamada 'criação coletiva da justiça' e potencializando o efeito efetivamente justo das decisões e fortalecimento da cidadania, desde que bem estruturada.
The concept of "youth policy" is relatively new. In Europe, it was not until 2001 that the EU took its first coordinated step by publishing the White Paper "New impetus for European youth", calling for a new framework of cooperation. Within it, the first seeds of CSYP were planted as the EU asked its member states and its own institutions for the inclusion of the youth dimension across policies and programmes. In 2005, the European Youth Pact was introduced to mainstream the youth dimension in EU policies (i.e. the European Employment Strategy, the Social Inclusion Strategy and the Education and Training 2010 Work Programme), focusing on three areas: employment, integration and social advancement; education, training and mobility; and reconciliation of family and working life. In 2009, a big step was taken with the publication of "An EU strategy for youth-Investing and empowering". This was then renewed covering the period 2010-2018 with two main objectives: to provide more and equal opportunities for young people in education and the job market; and to encourage young people to actively participate in society. To this end, the strategy adopted a dual approach. Firstly, by generating youth initiatives targeting "young people to encourage non-formal learning, participation, voluntary activities, youth work, mobility and information". Secondly, by "mainstreaming cross-sector initiatives that ensure youth issues are taken into account when formulating, implementing and evaluating policies and actions in other fields with a significant impact on young people" (European Commission 2015: 3). It was agreed that the priorities for EU cooperation would be set every three years through work cycles. The 2014 EU Work Plan for Youth focused on youth empowerment, cross-sectoral cooperation and development of youth work to better contribute to addressing the effects of the crisis on young people.
This paper engages the efforts to develop a mid-range theory to complete the vaguely defined paradigmof restorative justice. Advocates of the Maximalist model have been critical of a voluntary process-baseddefinition and proposed a more expansive definition. An analysis of stakeholders needs is proposed as atheoretical structure to evaluate the restorativeness of different models. A Purist model of restorativejustice based on a voluntary cooperative approach is proposed, which is shown to be holistic in responseto stakeholders needs. The author defends the ‘diversionist perspective’ and the process definition ofrestorative justice. The Maximalist model’s assumed roles for community and society as direct stakeholdersis shown to incorporate both retribution and treatment goals. The cornerstone of the Maximalist model,court-imposed ‘restorative sanctions’, is criticized as a non-restorative practice. A three-fold typology ofrestorative practices based upon victim reparation, offender responsibility, and communities-of-carereconciliation is proposed which places the Purist model within a holistic approach and distinguishesfully restorative from partly restorative practices.
Restorative justice interventions, which focus upon repairing the harm caused by an offence, are consistent with the approach advocated by reintegrative shaming theory. However, some have argued that remorse and empathy play a more important role in restoration, and that a focus upon disapproval and the emotion of shame may be misguided. This article analyses theoretical distinctions between shame and guilt before discussing their role in restorative interventions. It is argued that emotions like empathy, remorse and guilt will spill over into feelings of shame, and that it is the resolution of these emotions that is critical for successful justice interventions.
One major goal of face-to-face restorative justice (RJ) is to help heal the psychological harm suffered by crime victims (Braithwaite, 2002). Substantial evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has shown that this can be accomplished (Strang, 2002) and more trials are underway (Sherman & Strang, 2004). These outcomes are even more clearly, if less rigorously, demonstrated through retrospective interviews of victims about their feelings before and after RJ took place. We review the responses of victims (N= 210) who participated in trials in Canberra (Australia) and in London, Thames Valley, and Northumbria (UK). Despite substantial variations in offense types, social contexts, nation and race, before-after changes revealed by qualitative and quantitative data are all in the same beneficial direction.
Child welfare systems in the United States are failing to include families in making plans, and this reduces their success in stabilizing children's placements and promoting children's well-being. A North Carolina study demonstrates how one restorative practice—family group conferencing (FGC)—advances family participation in child welfare planning. A sample of 27 conferences showed that the 221 family group members outnumbered the 115 service providers at the meetings. Family group members were usually satisfied with the conference process and decision and saw the plans as primarily reached through consensus, following a trusted leader, and bargaining. Satisfaction with the decision was reduced when bargaining was employed. Manipulation was more likely to occur when conference preparations were inadequate.
Many neighbourhoods in the Netherlands have reached the stage of colliding subcultures, and interpersonal conflict. The young live next to the old, the rich next to the poor, single people next to families, the white next to the brown and the black, the established next to the outsiders. In some places, this social-cultural abundance leads to fear, uncertainty, and irritation. Not everybody is as understanding and tolerant of diverse lifestyles and thinking patterns as another person is. In places, this diversity leads to new behaviour patterns and institutions. Multi-ethnic community boards are starting to function as mediatory panels for settling disputes between neighbours and neighbourhood residents. In this article we claim that community mediation - a form of alternative dispute resolution designed to resolve interpersonal conflict in the neighbourhood - is both an attempt to rejuvenate the idea of community and a new way to settle differences and interpersonal conflicts between neighbours in the Netherlands. One might even argue that the neighbourhood is a level too high for social intervention and that instead one should focus on a lower level in the lifeworld: the house, the block, or at most, the street.
If shaming is crucial to crime control, then is not the task of controlling crime hopeless in modern urbanized societies? It is argued here that any such pessimism must be qualified by a broader understanding of shame in human history. First, the article considers the arguments of Elias that shame became more important in the affect structure of citizens with the demise of feudalism. Elias did not consider the movement away from shame and towards brutal punishment in crime control directed at the lower classes in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This period culmintated in a demonstration of the failure of stigmatization and punitive excess, opening the way for reintegrative ideals to gather support in the Victorian era and beyond. Finally, drawing on Goffman, it is argued that there are some neglected ways in which shaming can have more power in the city than in the village. Overall, there is no structural inevitability about the impotence of shaming in industrialized societies; there is no inexorable march with modernization towards a society where shaming does not count.
The literature on restorative justice and reoffending consists largely of comparative analyses of traditional and restorative interventions and suggests small but significant differences or no differences in reoffending. We gathered data from conferencing observations and police records to explore the variable effects of conference dynamics and offenders' characteristics in predicting future offending. We found that youthful offenders who were observed to be remorseful and whose outcomes were reached by consensus were less likely to reoffend. This finding suggests that when attention is focused on the benefits of conferencing, it is possible to identify elements of conferences that are associated with reductions in crime.
This paper adds to a growing body of Australian research on conferencing and re-offending. We gathered data from conference case files and offending history records for 200 young offenders who were conferenced in southeast Queensland from April 1997 to May 1999 to assess the impact of offender characteristics and conference features on future offending behaviour. After 3 to 5 years following their conference, just over half (56%) of the young offenders in our sample went on to commit one or more offences. Bivariate analyses showed that offenders' age at conference, age at first offence, gender and prior offending history were associated with post-conference offending. Survival analysis demonstrated how these offender characteristics impacted upon estimated probabilities of re-offending. However, the conference measures were not significantly associated with post-conference offending because of little to no variation. We conclude that while there remains uncertainty about how conference features are related to re-offending, what offenders bring to their conference is highly predictive of what they do afterwards. Yes Yes
Restorative justice conferencing, in response to youthful offending, has grown in popularity around the world. While there is now substantial empirical evidence that shows offenders and victims are satisfied with outcomes and perceive the process as generally fair, available data on reoffending have produced mixed results. Uncertainty about how conferencing affects future offending may result from how reoffending is analysed. In this paper, I used survival analysis to reanalyse data from the Bethlehem, Pennsylvania Restorative Policing Experiment and assessed two methodological approaches: a standard comparative approach to examine differences in reoffending between offenders in conference and court and a variation analysis to examine differences in reoffending within conference and court groups. Comparative analyses showed that violent offenders referred to conference were less likely to reoffend compared to violent offenders referred to court. There were no differences in reoffending for property offenders in conference and in court. Variation analyses showed that female offenders attending conferences were less likely to reoffend than male offenders in conferences. There were no differences in reoffending for males and females in court. These results suggest that there is value in comparing the effects of traditional and restorative interventions, as well as assessing how variation within interventions is related to future offending.
The author suggests that a theory of justice must find a place for mercy. History shows that in the administration of justice, mercy has generally been used in an occult and discretionary manner, sometimes in an arbitrary way. Since 1970, pardon has been mostly applied in the context of the Criminal Records Act and is viewed as a relevant tool for the reestablishment of the reputation and the reintegration of criminals to society. The author takes into account the point of view of philosophers and Jewish authors who have thought about mercy in the context of the Holocaust and war and against humanity crimes. She emphasizes the idea that mercy is not to forget the past, but rather an act of justice towards a better future, an act of hope favouring the rehabilitation of criminals and their reintegration into society and a means to ensure a long-lasting peace after a criminal conflict.
If creating a safer community is merely reduced to controlling and disciplining the most vulnerable groups, their opportunities for participation and emancipation are blocked. Installing such a crime prevention model leads to the further exclusion of these groups. Starting from research that focuses on the interagency relationships within community crime prevention, this article offers a model of creating some possibilities to create a safer community on the one hand and that holds back the dynamics of social exclusion on the other. It focuses on the relations between (community oriented) welfare agencies on the one hand and police agencies on the other hand. Starting from the empirical data, two polarising models are put forward in order to analyse and evaluate this co-operation: a consensus model and a conflict model. Referring to a normative framework, it will be argued that a conflict model has to be preferred in order to develop a socially just crime prevention model.
This article seeks to examine the relevance of the continental European tradition in critical criminology for the theoretical elaboration of criminological theory today. The first step towards an answer is a rather descriptive one: how did critical criminology develop historically on the European continent? That is the theme of the first section. In the second section, the social and cultural developments which accompanied the heyday of critical criminology in the 1970s will be analysed, and an exposé will be given of the spectrum of the different critical perspectives on the continent. The same cultural sociological line of thought will be followed in the explanation of the rather abrupt decline of critical criminology shortly after in the third section. The need for a normative counter-weight to present-day, managerial political discourse which follows from these analyses also forms the prelude to a reaffirmation of critical criminology in section four. Because many of its original concepts and presumptions no longer fit very well to the changed political and socio-cultural reality of the late 1990s, a reconstruction of critical criminology is proposed in section five.
This article deals with the emotional dynamics of restorative conferences, focusing on the functions of shame, as enunciated in the theories of Moore, Scheff and Retzinger. According to these researchers, the restorative justice conferences aim to redirect aggressive emotions and elicit shame and other hurt-revealing emotions that can lead to empathy. These approaches are confronted with the views of the guilt-theorists Tangney and Baumeister who argue that guilt is related to empathy and reparation, whereas shame tends to provoke avoidance or rejection of responsibility. The view that guilt is the more moral emotion appears to turn Braithwaite’s theory of reintegrative shaming upside down. In accordance with recent research results of the Braithwaite group, it is concluded that guilt is an important aspect of the restorative process. But guilt has limited affect resonance possibilities, misses the other-regarding aspects of remorse and does not seem to incite the offender to reconsider his or her identity. In conclusion, it is argued that (reintegrative) ‘shaming’ is a dubious concept.
The origins of this Special Issue of Theoretical Criminology can be located in a ‘Modernizing Criminal Justice’ conference that we both attended in London in June 2002. The high-profile event was co-sponsored by John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, the Metropolitan Police and the FBI. Broadcasting crews were on hand to digest the plenary speeches of senior representatives of the British government, the judiciary and law enforcement agencies. It was also a highly corporate event, promoting the commercial products of global security and IT companies specializing in criminal justice ‘problem solving’. The opening session of the conference featured a slow motion replay of the 9/11 attacks on the Twin Towers with a voice-over informing the audience that the course of criminal justice had changed forever. This ‘post 9/11’ global war on crime and terrorism theme echoed throughout the plenary speeches and keynote sessions. What was striking was the relegation of the scheduled criminology workshops to the margins of the conference. This set off a discussion between us, during a coffee break, about why academic criminological knowledge was extraneous to the interests of the policy audiences brought together by this conference. And, of course, this quickly moved to discussion of whether criminologists should have a central place in such a forum. But while this is how our interest in criminology and public policy was initially sparked, we later found ourselves trying to pinpoint, more systematically, the different positions criminologists have taken on questions of their relevance and status within larger public policy debates.2 Our purposes in this introduction, and in the Special Issue that follows, are twofold. One aim is to outline a range of views that have been offered by academic criminologists on the discipline’s public status and its relationship to public policy formation and intellectual practice. A second goal is to argue the need for a diversity of ‘public criminologies’ wherein explicit value is placed on moving policies in more progressive directions. Our own point of view is that much more could be done than at present, particularly since there would seem to be broad criminological consensus about many policy issues facing us including punitive policies around the globe as well as the detrimental consequences of a range of harms and risks.
The long-standing relationship between criminal justice policy and the advice of criminologists has been ruptured in the past two decades. Three interrelated factors help to account for this displacement of criminological thought: (1) the rise of neo-liberal forms of governance which have made traditional forms of criminological knowledge and preferred sites of intervention increasingly superfluous to the practice of governance; (2) the ascendancy of a highly symbolic public discourse about crime; and (3) the transformation of the criminal justice system by new technologies of detection, capture and monitoring. While criminologists continue to influence the development of specific criminal justice policies, the combination of these three developments pose additional hurdles for our ability to shape criminal justice policies in a rational manner.
This paper seeks to establish connections between John Braithwaite's theory of reintegrative shaming, the recent interest in `relational justice' and the `ethic of care' of feminist philosophy. Following Heidensohn (1986), it uses the figures of Portia and Persephone to represent, respectively, the ethics of justice and of care, and presents empirical material on victim-offender mediation, Family Group Conferencing (FGC), and Japanese approaches to social control to argue that procedures which allow for the expression of caring as a response to offending are both theoretically well-founded and practically feasible. The paper concludes with some reflections on the dangers of the current trend of penal policy in Britain. It is our hope that this paper will be considered not as a finished argument but as an encouragement to further debate and theorizing.
Despite its accumulated theoretical and empirical heft, the discipline of criminology has had distressingly little impact on the course of public policy toward crime and criminal justice. This article addresses the sources of that troubling marginality, with special emphasis on the powerful disincentives to greater public impact that operate within the discipline itself and the research universities that mainly house it—including the pressure to publish ever more narrow research in peer-reviewed journals at the expense of efforts at synthesis and dissemination that could serve to educate a broader public. Achieving a greater voice in the world outside the discipline will require a concerted move toward a more explicitly public criminology, and seeing to it that the work of such a criminology is more reliably supported and rewarded within the universities and the profession as a whole.
The origins of diversion in juvenile justice are discussed, as are the meaning of and various rationales for diversion. Judicious nonintervention is clarified. The diver sion movement has to a large extent been preempted or coopted by law enforcement agencies, in part by police because of their dominant, narrowly conceived social control function. More particularly, diversion has offered police a solution to the dilemma posed by pressures for control and the decarceration of status offenders. Questions are raised about the future of diversion in the juvenile justice system, drawing on English and Scottish experiences.
Restorative justice proponents tend to focus their attention on criminal justice initiatives in a small number of developed countries, but restorative processes (which encourage citizens to negotiate among themselves, rather than rely on professionals to adjudicate), and restorative values (which emphasize the importance of repairing and preventing harm), can be found across a wide range of regulatory fields. Teachers, social workers, corporate regulators, civil mediators, members of truth commissions, diplomats, and peacekeepers all—at least some of the time—practice a variety of restorative justice. Consideration of these often-neglected examples can help refine current restorative justice theory and practice, which in turn has insights to offer practitioners and researchers in these fields.
Criminology was born in the age of reason to apply “reason” to justice, tempering the expression of moral indignation with the economics of deterrence. Modern criminology is now poised for reinventing justice around the emotions of victims, offenders, and society. One prime example is restorative justice. Others include wider use of biomedical mental health treatments for offenders, programs to make justice officials more aware of the emotional impact of their words on citizens, and programs to help justice officials manage their own emotions. Research can advance theory and innovations as a basis for a new paradigm of “emotionally intelligent justice.”
Empirically, justice might be immanently holistic—with procedural, distributive, restorative, and social justice positively correlated. Restorative justice may be about creating spaces where the various imperfectly correlated facets of holistic justice might cohere. State institutions of justice (such as criminal courts) with deeply embedded traditions of narrowing the meaning of justice (to proportional punishment, for example) are less fertile soil for holistic justice than civil society. Beyond a move to holism and to civil society, the contributions to this special issue imply a move to what Sherman calls “emotionally intelligent justice.” This means nurturing the expression of vulnerable emotions and trying to avert the provocation of aggressive or stigmatizing emotions.
Major changes in the governance of crime are occurring within, on the margins, and outside the public sphere. Exemplified by the development of risk assessment, crime prevention, community safety, insurance, and private security, these changes call into question traditional modes of crime control and challenge existing criminal justice values. This article asks what exactly is on offer when security stands as the justification for public and private action, to whom, and at what cost. It goes on to identify several significant paradoxes entailed in the pursuit of security, whose attendant costs need to be taken into account. Yet, whereas punishment provokes us to ask why, how, and in what measure the state may inflict pain upon its citizens, security has not been thought to require special justification because in many ways it seems preferable to punishment. The paper contends both that security is in need of special justification and that it is necessary to develop guiding principles in order to regulate its pursuit. This leads to the larger question of whether and in what manner it is possible to regulate the ‘security society’ so as to ensure accountable, fair, and inclusive provision of protection.
This article proposes three principles which justice should incorporate if it is to move beyond the closures and exclusions of white man's justice. After a brief review of feminist and critical race theory literature that establishes the white, male character of justice in modern liberal societies, the principles of discursiveness, relationalism and reflectiveness are explained and discussed. Their implications for restorative justice are discussed. Oppression and inequality are suggested as concepts that can guide the operation, context and limits of discursiveness, relationalism and reflectiveness. In the final section, the problem of relativism against universalism is discussed, and its relevance to the development of restorative justice suggested.