For informal justice to be restorative justice, it has to be about restoring victims, restoring offenders, and restoring communities as a result of participation of a plurality of stakeholders. This means that victim-offender mediation, healing circles, family group conferences, restorative probation, reparation boards on the Vermont model, whole school antibullying programs, Chinese Bang Jiao programs, and exit conferences following Western business regulatory inspections can at times all be restorative justice. Sets of both optimistic propositions and pessimistic claims can be made about restorative justice by contemplating the global diversity of its practice. Examination of both the optimistic and the pessimistic propositions sheds light on prospects for restorative justice. Regulatory theory (a responsive regulatory pyramid) may be more useful for preventing crime in a normatively acceptable way than existing criminal law jurisprudence and explanatory theory. Evidence-based reform must move toward a ...

Restorative Justice: Assessing Optimistic and Pessimistic Accounts

Advocates’ claims about restorative justice contain four myths: (1) restorative justice is the opposite of retributive justice; (2) restorative justice uses indigenous justice practices and was the...

/pdf/restorative-justice-the-real-story-3mx4fppogt.pdf

Restorative justice The real story

Restorative justice is practice-led in most of its manifestations (see Miers 2001 ). Although the writings of John Braithwaite (e.g. 1989, 1993, 1999), Howard Zehr (1990), Martin Wright (1996) and others may be a source of inspiration for some practitioners and policy makers, there is also a certain reflexivity at work. The theory of restorative justice has to a large extent developed through practice, and will probably continue to do so. One consequence of this is that there is no single notion of RJ, no single type of process, no single theory. Tony Marshall suggests that a commonly accepted definition of restorative justice would be: 'a process whereby parties with a stake in a specific offence collectively resolve how to deal with the aftermath of the offence and its implications for the future' (Marshall 1999: 5). This usefully identifies three central elements in restorative justice: the importance of process, the notion of stakeholders, and the fairly wide-ranging aspirations for outcomes. In terms of restorative process, the keynotes are empowerment, dialogue, negotiation and agreement. Professionals should not be dominant: the voices of the stakeholders should be the loudest. The stakeholders are assumed to be the victim, the offender and the community. Turning to restorative outcomes, what is to be restored is broadly stated as 'whatever dimensions of restoration matter to the victims, offenders and communities affected by the crime' (Braithwaite 1999: 6). Restoration is often seen as a form of reintegration, of the community and of individuals. Outcomes are measured chiefly by the satisfaction of the stakeholders in each case, and not by comparison with the outcomes of like cases.

Responsibilities, Rights and Restorative Justice

The author provides a comprehensive discussion of the roots of the new reintegrative and restorative justice theories as well as the success of current, preliminary applications of these theories. Arguing that the traditional and opposing theories of the retributive paradigm and the treatment model offer only a simplistic choice between helping or hurting offenders, the author contends that these systems fail to address adequately the needs of communities and victims. In place of these two paradigms, he suggests a new model that he terms reintegrative or restorative justice. This new theory, based on specific cultural approaches to crime found in New Zealand, Japan, and elsewhere, seeks to address the needs of communities and victims through apology and reparation, a process that hopefully leads to the reintegration of offenders into society.

Restorative Justice and Earned Redemption Communities, Victims, and Offender Reintegration

Restorative justice has burst on the international scene as an umbrella concept and social movement. We review the major streams of activism and social thought that have made restorative justice a popular idea, consider the implications of its popularity as a social movement, and identify ways to move the idea forward. We propose that in order for the field to advance scholars and activists must (1) get beyond oppositional retributive-restorative justice model caricatures, (2) address the relationship of retributivism and consequentialism to restorative justice, and (3) use more precise terms and promise less. NOTE THAT THIS IS A COPY OF THE MANUSCRIPT SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION. PLEASE REFER TO THE PUBLISHED VERSION: Daly K. and R. Immarigeon (1998) “The past, present, and future of restorative justice: some critical reflections.” The Contemporary Justice Review 1 (1): 21-45.

Past, Present, and Future of Restorative Justice: Some Critical Reflections

Dissatisfaction with the current paradigm of criminal justice is leading to new programs with different visions. Some, such as restitution, can be incorporated into existing structures. Others, such as victim-offender reconciliation, point to a possible new approach to criminal justice—restorative justice. In some ways, restorative justice is simply a new application of an ancient vision. It is new wine from old vines. But those of us who celebrate the harvest are advised to remember the parable of new wine and old wineskins. Before we begin to pour—before we insert restorative features into familiar responses to crime—we would do well to reflect on what the consequences may be.

New Wine and Old Wineskins: Four Challenges of Restorative Justice

A reply to Andrew Ashworth

ndrew von Hirsch has been such a dominant figure in sentencing olicy that a new book by him is reason to take note. Censure and Sanctions is his third volume on the topic in three decades,: and although the book was prompted in part by passage of England's Criminal Justice Act, 1991, it will interest a broad international audience since yon Hirsch addresses a "set of questions" concerning proportionality. Five are of particular interest to him: censure and the rationale for proportionality, anchoring the penalty scale, hybrid models, intermediate punishments, and the politics of desert theory. 2 While his discussion advances desert theory, its additional value is that in a single slim volume we have a iucid depiction of the strengths and (to this reviewer, at least) the clear limitations of that theory. In this review : would like to summarize his thinking on each of the five questions and conclude by considering a sixth question as well.

Anchoring just deserts

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Daniel W. Van Ness

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

New Wine and Old Wineskins: Four Challenges of Restorative Justice

A reply to Andrew Ashworth

Anchoring just deserts