Abstract
This chapter offers an in-depth overview of restorative justice, highlighting it as a differentiated and innovative response, especially from the victim's perspective. By providing a consistent theoretical basis on the foundations, values, and principles of the restorative approach, it attests to the intrinsic value of that dimension. The focus on the direct influence on victims, notably at the level of reparation, is evidenced by various studies centered on the impact of this model of reaction to crime. The recognition of its benefits is reflected in the global dissemination of restorative practices throughout the world, with a few international experiences in this field being identified. By providing a significant contribution to the global understanding of restorative justice, this chapter emerges as a must-read for researchers, a valuable source of guidance for policymakers and an enlightening guide for students and interested readers.
TopIntroduction To Restorative Justice
As Restorative Justice emerges as a revolutionary narrative in the intricate plot of conflict resolution, its differentiation and innovation in the contemporary legal sphere become evident as it transcends the barriers of traditional penal systems. This new paradigm, whose cornerstone rests on the reconstruction of social relations through dialogue and reconciliation (Carabellese & Giustina, 2023), acquires a singular importance when it is analyzed from the victim's point of view, due to the strength it gives to their role and the consideration of issues that until then were obliterated, such as the question of reparation for the harm caused by the conflict (Pemberton et al., 2008).
It is a common accusation that victims have been abandoned for centuries, in a scenario where the State takes the lead and postpones the real needs of victims in favor of its public interests (Gromet, 2012; Andrade & Martins, 2023). The focus on breaking the law, past criminal behavior, and the need to hold offenders accountable has materialized in the marginalization of the victim (Umbreit & Armour, 2010). Removed from the criminal discussion and subjugated to a position of mere spectator (Mishra & Kumar, 2016), this figure does not benefit a participation that allows them to actively contribute to the pacification of the conflict and in a way that allows their expectations to be met.
The secondary role to which victims are consigned generates a deep disbelief in the traditional criminal justice system, which can seriously compromise the delivery of justice (Oliveira, 2015). This discredit is often exacerbated by the actions of crime control bodies by subjecting victims to processes of secondary victimization (Orth & Maercker, 2004), the impact of which is likely to exceed that effectively caused by the crime (Csaba, 2022). The insensitive and blaming treatment that victims can experience when they come into contact with the criminal justice system (Campbell, 2005; Choi & Severson, 2009) is coupled with a ritualistic and bureaucratic culture, which not only makes it impossible for victims to understand their position (Amodio, 2016), but also does not allow them to reach a response in a reasonable amount of time (Pinto, 2008)..
Although the satisfaction of the victim's interests does not occupy a privileged place within the framework of the aims of criminal justice, the victim does have a specific interest in the realization of justice (Santos, 2014). Based on the assumption that their belief in a fair process is influenced, among other factors, by the opportunity to express their views and opinions, respect for the authorities and feelings of trust in the court (Jacovides, 2023), the treatment given to victims by the traditional criminal justice system narrows the margins for the legitimization of justice.
Reparation of harm is another dimension that shapes victim’s perceptions of justice and feelings of satisfaction (Strang and Sherman, 2003). However, it is largely neglected. If, on the one hand, some victims feel a desire for revenge and prefer justice centered on punishing the offender (Darley, 2002; Darley & Pittman, 2003), on the other hand, some victims feel unable to attribute an emotional meaning to the victimization (O'Hara & Robbins, 2009), to approach the emotional and psychological wounds caused by the crime and to find mechanisms to control the reactions experienced, such as anger and anxiety (Pemberton et al., 2006). For these victims, discussing the event and a genuine apology can help in the process of restoration and emotional healing (Petrucci, 2002). For other victims, material restoration will also be important, in the form of compensation for the losses and tangible damage caused by the crime (Pemberton et al., 2008).
Key Terms in this Chapter
Restorative Circles: A practice in which participants, including victims, offenders, and community members, come together in a circle to discuss the crime, share perspectives, and make collective decisions about how to deal with the consequences.
Facilitator: Impartial and qualified professional who guides and supports the restorative justice process. Their role is to facilitate effective communication between the parties involved, promoting constructive dialog, and helping to find solutions to repair the harm caused by the crime.
Restorative Conferences: Restorative practice that involves the victim, the offender and other people affected by the crime, such as friends, family, and community representatives, in a group decision-making process about the best solution to the conflict.
Restorative Practices: Methods and approaches that aim to promote reconciliation, repair, and relationship-building after conflict through dialogue facilitated by an impartial third party. They include restorative circles, restorative conferences, restorative conferences, and other strategies that involve dialogue, listening and active participation of affected parties in the search for consensual solutions.
Harm: Injury or damage caused to a person or property as a result of a criminal event. It can encompass physical, emotional, property or moral dimension. It involves taking into account all the adverse consequences that affect the victim's quality of life.
Reparation: Process or result of restoring harm caused by a conflict. It involves efforts to compensate, restore and promote the recovery of affected parties, aiming to mitigate the negative impacts of the conflict event. It seeks to restore equilibrium, giving the affected parties the opportunity to rebuild their lives in a meaningful way.
Victim-Offender Mediation: Collaborative process involving the presence of an impartial mediator who facilitates a structured discussion between the victim and offender about issues related to the crime.
Restorative Justice: Model of reaction to crime focused on restoring relationships damaged by the criminal event and repairing the harm caused, through a process of dialogue and reconciliation between the affected parties, usually the offender, the victim, and the community.