Title: An Overview of Restorative Justice Around the World
Date: April 22, 2005
Place: Eleventh United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, Bangkok, Thailand
Author: Daniel W. Van Ness, Director, Centre for Justice & Reconciliation at Prison Fellowship International
Abstract: This presentation by Daniel W. Van Ness provides a comprehensive overview of the global development of restorative justice in criminal justice systems. Restorative justice, rooted in both global and indigenous conceptions of justice, offers an alternative approach to addressing crime through methods like victim-offender mediation, conferencing, and circles. It seeks to repair harm through outcomes such as apologies, restitution to victims, and community reparations. The use of restorative interventions by police, judges, prison officials, and probation authorities varies across regions, often supported by specific legislation. The presentation also addresses critiques related to human rights concerns, leading to the United Nations’ endorsement of the Declaration of Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters.
The 11th United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice: Enhancing Criminal Justice Reform through Restorative Justice
The Eleventh United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice was held in Bangkok, Thailand, from 18 to 25 April 2005. One of the key workshops, held on 22 April 2005, focused on the theme of “Enhancing Criminal Justice Reform, Including Restorative Justice.” This workshop, organized by the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy with support from the Government of Canada, brought together participants from various parts of the world to discuss the current state, challenges, and opportunities of restorative justice as an element of criminal justice reform.
Restorative justice has gained considerable momentum worldwide, increasingly adopted as an alternative approach to traditional criminal justice systems. Unlike retributive systems that focus primarily on punishment, restorative justice aims to heal and restore relationships between victims, offenders, and the community, thereby fostering reconciliation and reducing recidivism. This article provides an overview of the discussions at the workshop and the current landscape of restorative justice globally, as presented by Daniel W. Van Ness, Director of the Centre for Justice and Reconciliation at Prison Fellowship International.
Roots of Restorative Justice
Restorative justice is both an ancient and a modern concept. While it has been widely popularized in recent decades, the practice draws heavily from indigenous traditions of conflict resolution that aim to restore harmony within the community. For example, restorative conferencing draws from traditional Maori practices in New Zealand, while circle practices are inspired by First Nations customs in North America. This revival of indigenous methods has been crucial in shaping restorative approaches, emphasizing collective responsibility, reparation, and the healing of social bonds.
In addition to indigenous roots, other influences have contributed to the development of restorative justice. The victim rights movement of the 1970s and 1980s emphasized the need to include victims in the justice process, highlighting the inadequacy of systems focused solely on punishing offenders without regard for the needs of victims. Movements advocating for restitution, victim support, and participation in justice processes have underlined the injustice of excluding victims from meaningful involvement.
Defining Restorative Justice
There is no universally accepted definition of restorative justice, but it generally falls into two broad categories—process-based and values-based definitions. Process-based definitions emphasize encounters between stakeholders, including victims, offenders, and community members, while values-based definitions emphasize outcomes, such as repairing harm and promoting values like inclusion, empathy, and reintegration.
The United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) endorsed the “Declaration of Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters” in 2002. This document avoids taking sides in debates about definitions, focusing instead on providing a set of principles for restorative processes and outcomes that emphasize inclusion, voluntariness, fairness, and proportionality.
Restorative Processes and Outcomes
Restorative processes encompass a wide range of approaches, including victim-offender mediation, conferencing, and peacemaking circles. Each of these processes provides an opportunity for those affected by a crime—victims, offenders, their families, and community members—to actively participate in resolving the harm caused by crime.
- Victim-Offender Mediation: This is one of the most widely practiced forms of restorative justice, where victims and offenders are brought together by a trained facilitator to discuss the crime, the impact it had, and how the offender can make amends.
- Conferencing: Originating in New Zealand, conferencing involves not only victims and offenders but also their families and friends, and often representatives of the justice system. It emphasizes communal support and accountability.
- Circles: Derived from Indigenous practices in Canada, circles are often the most inclusive form of restorative process, allowing any member of the community to participate. Sitting in a circle, participants take turns speaking until a collective resolution is achieved.
Restorative outcomes focus on making amends to those affected by crime, which can include apologies, restitution, community service, or other agreed-upon actions to repair harm. These outcomes differ from conventional justice outcomes, as they aim to heal relationships and restore social harmony rather than simply penalize the offender.
Global Adoption and Use of Restorative Justice
By 2005, restorative justice had become a component of the criminal justice systems in over 80 countries, with the number continuing to grow. In some regions, restorative programmes are experimental, while in others they form an integral part of national justice policies.
Police: In countries such as New Zealand, the UK, and South Africa, police have adopted restorative practices as a means of diverting young offenders from the formal justice system. Police-led restorative processes offer offenders the opportunity to make amends without the burden of a formal conviction, which can have a lasting impact on their future.
Prosecutors and Courts: Prosecutors in several countries, including Austria, have the authority to divert cases to restorative processes before trial. This allows for a resolution that focuses on repairing harm while avoiding formal criminal records. Courts also make use of restorative processes, either by referring cases before sentencing or by incorporating restorative agreements into sentencing orders. In Finland, for example, courts can suspend sentences if parties successfully reach and fulfill an agreement through restorative means.
Probation, Prisons, and Parole: Restorative practices are also increasingly used within probation and parole settings. In Japan, probation officers may facilitate meetings between offenders and victims to enable the offender to apologize and make amends. In other countries, such as Canada and South Africa, restorative processes are used to assist prisoners in rebuilding relationships with their families and communities, especially when reintegrating after release.
The Impact and Effectiveness of Restorative Justice
Research findings consistently demonstrate the effectiveness of restorative justice across various criteria. Studies show that both victims and offenders are more satisfied with restorative processes compared to conventional court procedures. Victims report a greater sense of safety and empowerment after participating in restorative justice, while offenders are more likely to understand the impact of their actions and experience empathy for their victims. Importantly, restorative justice has been associated with lower rates of reoffending compared to conventional criminal justice interventions.
A notable example of restorative justice’s success is the Sycamore Tree Project, a programme used by Prison Fellowship International in several countries. It facilitates meetings between prisoners and surrogate victims, providing offenders with an opportunity to understand the harm caused by their actions and encouraging them to take steps toward rehabilitation. The programme has been linked to significant positive behavioural changes among offenders.
Challenges and Critiques of Restorative Justice
Despite its successes, restorative justice faces a number of challenges and critiques. One significant concern is the issue of due process and the protection of participants’ rights. Critics argue that the informal nature of restorative processes may leave room for power imbalances or coercion, particularly if proper safeguards are not in place. The “Declaration of Basic Principles” aims to address these concerns by emphasizing the importance of voluntariness, fairness, and procedural protections for all parties involved.
Another challenge is the integration of restorative justice within established criminal justice systems. Some countries have fully embraced restorative practices, while others face resistance from practitioners accustomed to punitive approaches. The workshop highlighted the importance of legislation that either eliminates barriers or actively supports the adoption of restorative practices, while also ensuring consistency with human rights standards.
Conclusion
The 11th United Nations Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice provided a critical opportunity to assess the growing influence of restorative justice as a means of criminal justice reform. Restorative justice offers an alternative vision
of justice that resonates with traditional community-based forms of conflict resolution, focusing on healing rather than punishing. It has demonstrated its value across different stages of the criminal justice process, from diversion and sentencing to probation and parole.
The lessons shared during the workshop underscore the need for more widespread adoption of restorative approaches, supported by appropriate legislation and guidelines that protect the rights of all participants. The growth of restorative justice since the 10th UN Congress is evidence of its potential to transform justice systems worldwide, and its continued adoption will contribute to more humane, just, and effective responses to crime in the years to come.
