Restorative Justice: The Ideals and Realities of Conferencing for Young People

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the nature and complexities of restorative justice. It uses Braithwaite's (Br J Criminol 42:563-577, 2002a) framework of constraining, maximising and emerging restorative standards to understand the interactions that underpin success and failure in practice, i.e., 'restorativeness'. Using qualitative data from observations of youth justice conferences in New South Wales, Australia, the roles of empowerment (as an example of a constraining standard), restoration of communities (as an example of a maximising standard) and remorse over injustice (as an example of an emergent standard) are examined. Findings confirm that restorative justice is best conceived as a continuum of dynamic process and outcome related values. Non-domination is paramount to achieving restorative justice. However, the presence, absence, and nature of other values such as storytelling, respectful listening, victim and support attendance, and apology are also important. They affect where a restorative event falls on the restorative continuum, and they affect the likelihood of other standards being met.

Learning to Manage Shame in School Bullying: Lessons for Restorative Justice Interventions

“…More recently, practitioners have come to refer to restorative practices (see International Institute for Restorative Practices website 5 ) and restorative living (Van Ness 2011) to describe ways in which we should engage with each other in everyday life and within which restorative justice conferencing can take place. Restorative practices seek to engage effective shame management responses be it verbally or non-verbally (Bolitho 2011), not within an intervention with a clearly defined beginning and end, but in the course of daily living to deal with conflict and continually improve prosocial interpersonal skills. If shame management is as important as we contend, then its role is central to any restorative justice procedure, but also transcends any finite procedure: A single and time-limited restorative intervention program cannot be expected to adequately counter the experiences of those who have transgressed or been the victim of another's transgression.…”

A neocolonial warp of outmoded hierarchies, curricula and disciplinary technologies in Trinidad’s educational system

“…disparities in academic outcomes, psychologically-harmed youth, deflated dreams, etc., which do have material consequences). Restorative justice is considered a philosophy, process, outcome and a set of techniques (Bolitho, 2012). As an alternative method for addressing conflict (Bolitho, 2012), restorative justice/practices entails a 'victim' coming face-to-face with his 'offender' so as together acknowledge the harm caused and co-determine an outcome (McCold, 2008;Crawford, 2015).…”

Laboratory Experiments: A Meaningful Contribution to Restorative Justice Research?

“…If it is the case that the success of the RJ process hinges upon the value of the interaction between the offender and the victim, then we may conclude that the presence of victims in the proceedings would influence offenders' experience of the restorative process. Indeed, Bolitho (2011) has found that apologies are offered more commonly in restorative conferences where victims are present. The presence or absence of the victim in the process may also have important implications for the offender's ability to reap outcome benefits associated with the offer of apology.…”