Restorative Justice

Restorative justice is a different way of thinking about crime, a new view of the crime problem that has been gaining support in many parts of the world over the last two decades. There is significant controversy about the definition of restorative justice and what should and should not be included under its umbrella. There is agreement, however, that restorative justice begins with the premise that crime is more than lawbreaking and that justice cannot be achieved by simply punishing the wrongdoer. Van Ness and Strong (1997) have identified three core principles of restorative justice:

• 1.
  If crime is about harm, then justice requires healing or repair. There may be a number of different ways to repair harm, and repair will have different meanings in different contexts.
• 2.
  Harm cannot be repaired without input from those most affected by crime. Victims, offenders, and community members must be provided with opportunities for input and participation in the justice process.
• 3.
  Repairing harm requires that society rethink the roles of government and community in the response to crime. Justice systems and justice professionals should offer legal authority, policy support, and resources in a facilitative approach to problem solving as opposed to serving as experts in a case-driven response.

Under the restorative justice paradigm, crime is defined by the harm done to victims. Therefore, the primary reaction to crime should not be punishing or even rehabilitating the offender but repairing and compensating for the harm caused by the crime. Harm can include material losses, physical injuries, psychological consequences, relationship problems, and social dysfunctions, for which the offender is held accountable and is primarily responsible for repairing. Focusing on repairing harm does not preclude efforts to rehabilitate offenders but actually supports those efforts because sincere rehabilitation requires that offenders acknowledge the harm they caused and work toward making amends. Repairing the harm, in turn, sets the stage for reintegrating offenders into the community.

Unlike the formal justice system, which directs most of its attention toward establishing guilt and determining punishment for offenders, restorative justice focuses on allowing victims to have significant input into plans for holding offenders accountable and for repairing the harm the victims have suffered. Victims include the individual victim, those close to him or her who were affected, and also the [Page 323]community. Communities are affected by crime, and members of a community are considered stakeholders in the restorative justice process. The community plays an important role in setting the terms of reparation agreements and in monitoring and supporting offenders through their completion.

According to John Braithwaite (1989), restorative justice is essentially a community solution. Crime is best controlled when members of a community are the primary controllers, actively participating in shaming offenders and then helping them to reintegrate into the community. Justice systems and justice professionals should no longer dominate the business of crime control; however, they are important in helping facilitate, provide resources, and enforce agreements designed to repair harm and hold offenders accountable. Restorative justice is sometimes described as a three-dimensional balanced approach to crime because it views victims, communities, and offenders as “customers” of the justice process. All three receive services under a balanced approach, and all three should be actively involved as participants in the system (Bazemore and Umbreit, 1997).

...