The International Journal of Restorative Justice

About this journal  

Subscribe to the email alerts for this journal here to receive notifications when a new issue is at your disposal.

Issue 2, 2022 Expand all abstracts

John Braithwaite
John Braithwaite is a Professor at the University of Maryland, USA and Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University, Australia. Corresponding author: John.Braithwaite@anu.edu.au. Acknowledgements: Thanks to Eliza Kaczynska-Nay, Valerie Braithwaite, Estelle Zinsstag, Lode Walgrave, Albert Dzur, Ivo Aertsen, Fernanda Fonseca Rosenblatt, Gerry Johnstone, Claudia Mazzucato and Jane Bolitho for splendid suggestions on drafts.

    This article proposes a new philosophical framework for restorative justice: restorative justice is concerned with being, whereas conventional justice is implicitly focused on having. I will take two examples to illustrate that this quest for new forms of justice is more focused on being than on measures and on equivalences: mass atrocities on the one hand, and widespread sexual violence on the other (committed either within the Catholic Church, or in society in general that provoked strong reactions as shown recently by the #MeToo movement). These two situations seem very different from one another, but they reveal common features. In both examples, the aim of justice is to re-establish the individual and the political into their being. Massacres and rape have long existed, but there were traditional healing processes and an usnchallenged patriarchal order. Liberal societies decided to do without the consoling role of religion (that still exist but emigrated in privacy), and to contest violence even in the intimacy of societies such as patriarchal order. This explains why courts pay an increasing and overall transformed role in our democracies: they became an instance for recognition and not only of arbitration on rights. Justice plays a more central role because it deals with the symbolic efficacy of meaning, the fact that we are affected by our common values in a shared understanding of life. The function of justice is neither to solve problems nor to provide care for individuals, but to re-enact the reasons why we go on living together and to eventually modify them for a better future.

Antoine Garapon
Antoine Garapon was a juvenile court judge in France for several years. He currently teaches legal philosophy at Sciences Po Law School, Paris (France). He was a member of the French Independent Commission of Inquiry into Sexual Abuse in the Church (CIASE); he currently chairs the Commission for recognition and reparation for victims of sexual abuses committed by Catholic priests (CRR). Corresponding author: Antoine Garapon at antoine.garapon@gmail.com. Acknowledgements: This annual lecture for The International Journal of Restorative Justice was held online in December 2021. I am grateful to the respondents and participants as well as the reviewers of the Editorial Board for their insightful comments, and particularly to Ivo Aertsen, François Bernard, Tali Gal, Matt Lady, Jean Lassègue, Claudia Mazzucato, Kent Roach, Marlies Talay, Lode Walgrave, Andrew Wordsworth and Estelle Zinsstag. Many thanks to all of them for their support and patience!

Restorative justice practice in forensic mental health settings: bridging the gap

Keywords restorative justice in mental health, evidence-based practice, institutional settings, victims, ethics
Authors Gerard Drennan and Fin Swanepoel
AbstractAuthor's information

    The ‘clinic’ has developed sophisticated systems for responding to the challenge of serious mental health conditions. Mental health services combine hierarchical decision-making processes, with clear medical authority, with interventions that are required to be evidence-based to the highest standard. This is a system in which ethical, defensible practice is imperative to protect the public and to protect practitioners from legal liability in the event of adverse outcomes. Restorative justice interventions are powerful ‘medicine’. At their best, they change lives. However, the evidence base for formal restorative justice interventions when ‘administered’ to people with severe mental health difficulties is almost non-existent. It is into this relative vacuum of empirical support that initial steps are being taken to formalise access to restorative justice for mental health populations. This article will consider the challenges for applications of restorative justice in mental health settings and how the gap between the principle of equality of access and actual practice could be conceptualised and bridged. Recommendations include a rigorous commitment to meeting the needs of victims; a focus on the mental health patient’s capacity to consent rather than the capacity to benefit; practice-based evidence development and the inclusion of restorative justice awareness in all mental health practitioner training.

Gerard Drennan
Gerard Drennan is Head of Psychology & Psychotherapy at South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Fin Swanepoel
Fin Swanepoel is a Restorative Justice Practitioner at South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom. Corresponding author: Gerard Drennan at Gerard.Drennan@slam.nhs.uk. Acknowledgements: We wish to thank the reviewers of the first submission of this article for their helpful comments and suggestions as the article was significantly improved by their guidance. We also wish to thank our colleagues in forensic mental health services who are also working to introduce restorative justice practices in their settings. We have learnt so much from their vision and commitment. We have been sustained in our journey because we journey with them.

The case for using culturally relevant values in restorative justice programming for Australian Aboriginal prisoners

Keywords Australia, Aboriginal, prison, values, restorative justice
Authors Jane Anderson
AbstractAuthor's information

    Western Australia is experiencing high rates of recidivism among Aboriginal offenders. This challenge can be partly addressed by delivering culturally relevant programming. Its dearth, however, suggests two questions: what is culturally fit in the context of the prison, and how might such programming be constructed? This article responds to these questions by focusing on one element of culture, ‘values’, that is influential ideas that determine desirable courses of action in a culture. Firstly, a review of the literature and comparative analysis is given to the respective key values of Aboriginal culture and European and Anglo-Australian cultures. It also highlights the importance of repairing Aboriginal values with implications for providing culturally relevant prison programming. Secondly, a report is given on how an in-prison Aboriginal restorative justice programme (AIPRJP) was co-designed by Noongar Elders and prisoners and me, an Anglo-Australian restorativist. Using an ethnographic approach, the project identified a set of Aboriginal values for addressing the harms resulting from historical manifestations of wrongdoing by settler colonialism and contemporary crimes of Aboriginal offenders. Brief commentary is then given to the delivery of the AIPRJP, followed by a summary of findings and recommendations for using culturally relevant programming.

Jane Anderson
Jane Anderson is Adjunct Research Fellow at School of Population and Global Health, The University of Western Australia, Australia. Corresponding author: Jane Anderson at jane.a@westnet.com.au. Acknowledgements: I extend my appreciation to the Noongar Elders and prisoners of the South West of Western Australia who co-designed the AIPRJP. My thanks go to the prison superintendent and staff for supporting the initiative. I am grateful to the peer reviewers for their constructive criticism which has led to substantial improvements to this article.

Towards a restorative justice approach to white-collar crime and supra-individual victimisation

Keywords restorative justice, white-collar crimes, supra-individual victimisation, spokespersons at restorative meetings, eligibility criteria
Authors Daniela Gaddi and María José Rodríguez Puerta
AbstractAuthor's information

    This work examines the feasibility of extending the implementation of restorative justice to the field of white-collar crime for a specific class of victimisation: that which people experience as a group (i.e. supra-individual victimisation). For this purpose, we analyse some key issues and outline a number of criteria for determining who would be able to speak on behalf of supra-individual victims of white-collar crime in restorative meetings. Some initial proposals are offered, based on four types of supra-individual victimisation, which would provide a framework for the selection of spokespersons who could attend restorative meetings in restoratively oriented criminal proceedings.

Daniela Gaddi
Daniela Gaddi is an Adjunct Professor of Criminology and Criminal Law at the Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona (UAB), Spain and a community mediator.

María José Rodríguez Puerta
María José Rodríguez Puerta is Professor of Criminal Law at the Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona (UAB), Spain. Corresponding author: Daniela Gaddi at daniela.gaddi@uab.cat.

Diversion and restorative justice in the context of juvenile justice reforms in Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam

Keywords children’s rights, juvenile justice, restorative justice, diversion, implementation challenges, Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines
Authors Le Thu Dao, Le Huynh Tan Duy, Ukrit Sornprohm e.a.
AbstractAuthor's information

    Diversion is an important vehicle for delivering an alternative model of youth justice, one that is, hopefully, grounded in principles of children’s rights and restorative justice. Several Asia-Pacific countries, often with international assistance, have sought to develop alternative processes and programmes to which children in conflict with the law can be diverted to. In some instances, these have included restorative justice programmes. This article provides an overview of the implementation of a restorative justice approach, as a youth justice diversion measure, in four South-East Asian countries: Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam. It describes juvenile justice reforms in these countries, particularly as they relate to the implementation of diversion and restorative justice and reflects on the factors that may have affected the success of these reforms. Every one of these countries has achieved a measure of success in implementing diversion and restorative justice, although restorative justice has occupied a different place in these reforms. The article offers a general overview of key challenges and notable successes encountered during that process, as well as an opportunity to consider the role of tradition, culture and public expectations in the implementation of restorative justice principles in the context of juvenile justice.

Le Thu Dao
Le Thu Dao, PhD, is professor at the Comparative Law Institute, Hanoi Law University, Hanoi, Vietnam.

Le Huynh Tan Duy
Le Huynh Tan Duy, LLB, LLM, PhD, is Head of Criminal Procedure Law Division of the Ho Chi Minh City University of Law, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Ukrit Sornprohm
Ukrit Sornprohm, LLB, LLM, LLD (Candidate), Project Manager (Rule of Law and Criminal Justice), Thailand Institute of Justice, Bangkok, Thailand.

Yvon Dandurand
Yvon Dandurand, Professor Emeritus, Criminology, University of the Fraser Valley, Abbotsford, Canada. Fellow, International Centre for Criminal Law Reform. Corresponding author: Yvon Dandurand at Yvon.Dandurand@ufv.ca.

Kenneth Laundra
Kenneth Laundra is Associate Professor of Sociology at the Department of Sociology & Criminal Justice, Millikin University, Illinois, US. Corresponding author: Kenneth Laundra at klaundra@millikin.edu.
Conversations on restorative justice

A talk with Marian Liebmann

Authors Albert Dzur
Author's information

Albert Dzur
Albert Dzur is Distinguished Research Professor, Departments of Political Science and Philosophy, Bowling Green State University, USA. Corresponding author: Albert Dzur at awdzur@bgsu.edu.

Jamie Buchan
Jamie Buchan (PhD) is a Lecturer in criminology at Edinburgh Napier University, Scotland. Corresponding author: Jamie Buchan at J.Buchan@napier.ac.uk.

Susan L. Brooks
Susan L. Brooks (J.D.) is Professor of law at the Thomas R. Kline School of Law, Drexel University, USA. Corresponding author: Susan L. Brooks at sb589@drexel.edu.

Lindsey Pointer
Lindsey Pointer (Ph.D.) is an Assistant Professor at the Vermont Law School, Vermont, USA. Corresponding author: Lindsey Pointer at lpointer@vermontlaw.edu.

Vince Mercer
Vince Mercer is the restorative coordinator of the AIM Project, UK. Corresponding author: Vince Mercer at vincemercer@hotmail.co.uk.