Restorative Justice

Differences between Restorative Justice and Conventional Justice

Andrew Rosenthal

Central Washington University: Law and Justice- Pierce County Center

The History and Meaning of Restorative Justice:             

Restorative Justice is a branch of punishment that deviates from the conventional spectrum and takes a look at the underlying issue of crime including the parties involved. It is defined as, “Restorative justice is a process to involve, to the extent possible, those who have a stake in a specific offense and to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations, in order to heal and put things as right as possible” (Zehr 37).  In essence restorative justice provides a alternate way of addressing both the bad act committed but also the resulting damage of the act caused to the victim and the community.

Historically restorative justice is not a new concept; it has taken place through a variety of forms. An early form of restorative justice was practiced by the Maori people, “restorative justice has its roots in the indigenous rituals of New Zealand communities where shaming of the offender was used as punishment for wrongdoings” (Gumz 1). This early form of restorative justice focused on targeting the bad act and making the offender feel responsible for the act. This is not the only early use of restorative justice; Native American tribes frequently practiced restorative justice through talking and sentencing circles (United Nations 219). These general concepts were able to take hold during the changes of society that occurred during the 1970s partially due to the feminist movement which called for raising awareness of the needs of crime victims. This idea took hold in Canada to a great extent and was able to progress to part of America, Australia, and New Zealand (Gumz 2). Although the American form of restorative justice is not as widespread and accepted as the Canadian form, it does have a strong place in the system.

Four Differences between Restorative Justice and Conventional Justice:

There are some distinct differences between how restorative justice and conventional justice operate. One big difference comes in the form which ‘punishment’ is implemented. In the regular justice model, punishment comes in the form of locking someone up, in turn having the person incarcerated acts as a way to punish them for the wrong they have committed. Restorative justice however, provides a system of meetings rather than simply incarceration to provide a more meaningful punishment (Zehr 21). These types of meetings are divided into victim/offender, victim/offender and family members, community conferences and community restorative boards provide a meaningful encounter to educate the offender.

Another big difference between the systems is the role of the offender. In the traditional justice system, an offender gets caught, and then is sentenced for the crime they committed and simply locked up to serve their time (Zehr 21). The restorative system, gives an offender a more active role in being accountable for the damage that has been caused, and repairing that damage as opposed to just being punished for breaking a law.

The victim’s role is also greatly changed between the systems. In the regular system, “many crime victims feel “left out” of their own proceedings, which causes them to feel frustrated and marginalized by the justice process” (Gromet 396). Traditional justice provides the victim with a minor role almost limited to a victim impact statement. In restorative justice however, the victim is a primary role-player with a similar importance as the offender with the ability to be actively involved with the meetings and directly confront the offender.

Almost absent in conventional justice is the role the community plays. Most of conventional justice occurs behind closed doors; the only real chance the community has to play a role is in the form of a jury trial, other than that the community is not really acknowledged as an important part. Through restorative justice, the community takes a more active rule, as being a party that has been damaged and needs to be healed. The community also plays a role in the process through being a part of community conferencing and community reparative boards.

Five Unique Benefits of Restorative Justice for Social Justice

To accurately describe five benefits of restorative justice in terms of social justice, first we need to gain a understanding of what social justice entails. In relation to social work it is described to include the ethical need to challenge injustice on a individual or group levels, protection those vulnerable to oppression, and provides equality and human relationships (Gumz 1).

                One benefit of restorative justice with regards to social justice is the attempt to save the offender from ostracizing themselves from society.  With restorative justice, the offender is able to maintain an active role in society and not be condemned as a person but have the act be condemned. It provides a way for an offender to have equal access to methods of rehabilitation and acknowledge the damage caused, and provides a method reintegrate into society (Gromet 2).

                The victim also sees some unique benefits, restorative justice allows, “Restore victims. Materially and psychologically, to where they were before the crime occurred” (Gromet 2). It allows the victim to have a equal and fair part of the process and confront the offender. It also works to compensate the victim for the damage that was caused which is not all that prevalent in traditional justice.

The community receives a few specific benefits from restorative justice that fits under the social justice tree. What was found in the Vermont study, the community is able to be more involved with the system and take up an active role. Restorative justice sees crime as not just a violation of laws but a violation of the public’s trust, and allowing the public to have a active role provides a sense of equality. It also allows the community to be compensated for the damage that was caused to them and move on in a positive direction as a result.

                The procedure of restorative justice provides a method which social justice principles are fulfilled.  Unlike traditional justice, restorative justice provides a means for all parties to be involved equally, “so that justice is provided to the offender, victim, and the community” (Gumz 3). Each party is not taken away from the equation and is given a fair opportunity to have an equal say in the process.

Another aspect of social justice that is prevalent among restorative justice and not conventional justice is human relationships. Restorative justice provides a sense to repairing harm done, not leave wounds to heal on their own. Restorative justice usually includes a face to face interaction between all parties involved (Gromet 2) which allows humans to directly confront and come to agreements about the harm that was done. The offender is able to come to terms with the actions they have taken and be involved in a direct discussion about the harm caused with the victim and community. This also allow the community to maintain its interest on healing wounds between its members and provides the victim the opportunity to deal with the offender as a human and confront them directly, empowering the victim. All of these aspects of restorative justice include human relations which is key part of social justice.