History of Restorative Justice
Restorative justice has much of its historical roots in indigenous cultural practices of conflict resolution across the globe.1 “The roots of restorative justice models... stem from traditional Aboriginal methods of conflict resolution that rely on community involvement and the implementation of holistic solutions.”2 In America, restorative justice has been influenced by the restorative circles of indigenous communities, including the Navajo.3 Most traditional Native American communities would not have spent the energy or resources to construct a jail and maintain an incarcerated population. They were adept at working things out – through restorative practices - to the satisfaction of affected individuals and the community. In Africa, many countries have traditional and customary laws that implement restorative justice. In Rwanda, a traditional way of solving conflict is through the Gacaca courts, which is a system focused on rehabilitation and reconciliation within communities.4 Uganda and Tanzania are two other African countries where traditional law often handled conflicts with restorative justice.3
All of these traditions have a strong emphasis on collective responsibility and an interest in reducing behavior that negatively affects the group.6 Many of the early societies would place the blame on the community instead of the individual for a crime committed. For example, the Ifugao of Northern Luzon in the Philippines would view deviance “as a community problem, and a community failure,” instead of an individual problem.6 This view of crime contributed to their use of restorative justice in order to create and maintain harmony within their communities. For many early societies, reconciliation among the victim and the offender was extremely important and “‘punishment’, in today‘s sense, was the exception rather than the norm”.6
Moving forward in time, the international community of Western nations and Russia began to recognize the usefulness of restorative justice. During six international prison congresses held between 1878 and 1900, “restorative practices and restitution were strongly advocated” and victim’s rights were increased.6 During the 1970s, in North America, restorative justice practices began to be more prominently recognized and considered again. Canada was one of the first modern countries to establish a restorative justice system in their governmental policies and based many of their practices on the “First Nations’” methods of the indigenous people of Canada.7 In a landmark case in 1974, two prisoners in Canada asked their judge to allow them to meet with the victims of their crime in order to atone for their mistakes.7 This proved to be a success, and soon various adaptations of restorative justice began to spread through Canada, the United States, and Europe.7 RJPs have become standard practices for juvenile justice in nations including Ireland8, New Zealand (heavily influenced by its own aboriginal population)9, and Brazil10. The mosaic of national, state, municipal, and school district restorative justice oriented regulations that have since taken shape is a subject that (thankfully!) could fill a book, and is too broad and dense for this summary. A thorough description would certainly be a welcome addition to this movement.
All of these trends throughout human history have helped to shape restorative justice into what it is today. Its adaptation to the many different cultures and communities where it has been implemented may be viewed as a demonstration of how durable and consummately human the restorative justice model is.
Terms and Definitions
Listed and defined below are terms that are often used in the language of Restorative Justice Practices (RJPs). How one talks about RJPs may be of equal importance to how it is implemented. For example, some processes may use terms such as “victim”, “offender”, “perpetrator”,etc., but many others avoid such terms, to remove the power imbalance and pre-judgment that can often be attached to them.
If you have more resources to suggest to add to our page, please send them to us here!
1. http://www.arjaa.org/index.php?page_id=10
2. http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/rr00_16/p2.html
3. http://www.cfcj-fcjc.org/sites/default/files/docs/hosted/17445-restorative_justice.pdf
4. https://www.issafrica.org/uploads/m161c4.pdf
5. http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/about/bgjustice.shtml
6. http://www.internetjournalofcriminology.com/gavrielides_restorative_practices_ijc_november_2011.pdf
7. http://www.arjaa.org/index.php?page_id=10
8. http://www.iyjs.ie/en/IYJS/Pages/WP08000064
9. http://www.tikkun.org/nextgen/twenty-years-of-restorative-justice-in-new-zealand
10. https://juliasteiny.com/2015/10/01/how-dominic-barter-developed-restorative-justice-in-brazil/
All of these traditions have a strong emphasis on collective responsibility and an interest in reducing behavior that negatively affects the group.6 Many of the early societies would place the blame on the community instead of the individual for a crime committed. For example, the Ifugao of Northern Luzon in the Philippines would view deviance “as a community problem, and a community failure,” instead of an individual problem.6 This view of crime contributed to their use of restorative justice in order to create and maintain harmony within their communities. For many early societies, reconciliation among the victim and the offender was extremely important and “‘punishment’, in today‘s sense, was the exception rather than the norm”.6
Moving forward in time, the international community of Western nations and Russia began to recognize the usefulness of restorative justice. During six international prison congresses held between 1878 and 1900, “restorative practices and restitution were strongly advocated” and victim’s rights were increased.6 During the 1970s, in North America, restorative justice practices began to be more prominently recognized and considered again. Canada was one of the first modern countries to establish a restorative justice system in their governmental policies and based many of their practices on the “First Nations’” methods of the indigenous people of Canada.7 In a landmark case in 1974, two prisoners in Canada asked their judge to allow them to meet with the victims of their crime in order to atone for their mistakes.7 This proved to be a success, and soon various adaptations of restorative justice began to spread through Canada, the United States, and Europe.7 RJPs have become standard practices for juvenile justice in nations including Ireland8, New Zealand (heavily influenced by its own aboriginal population)9, and Brazil10. The mosaic of national, state, municipal, and school district restorative justice oriented regulations that have since taken shape is a subject that (thankfully!) could fill a book, and is too broad and dense for this summary. A thorough description would certainly be a welcome addition to this movement.
All of these trends throughout human history have helped to shape restorative justice into what it is today. Its adaptation to the many different cultures and communities where it has been implemented may be viewed as a demonstration of how durable and consummately human the restorative justice model is.
Terms and Definitions
Listed and defined below are terms that are often used in the language of Restorative Justice Practices (RJPs). How one talks about RJPs may be of equal importance to how it is implemented. For example, some processes may use terms such as “victim”, “offender”, “perpetrator”,etc., but many others avoid such terms, to remove the power imbalance and pre-judgment that can often be attached to them.
- Community- “A group of people who live in the same area (such as a city, town, or neighborhood), a group of people who have the same interests, religion, race etc.” The Student Peace Alliance wants to call attention to the reality that when most people think of the word community, we often think strictly of where we live, or people that are similar to us, but in fact, community may be found wherever we share space. Our schools, classrooms, universities, dormitories, study groups, and clubs can all be seen and experienced as unique communities.
- Equality- “The state of being equal, especially in status, rights, and opportunities” Equality is an important factor for RJPs. Without a strong sense of equality, individuals may be afraid to speak up and voice their opinion. Having everyone share their thoughts and feelings leads to a better chance of reconciliation and forgiveness.
- Facilitator- “The definition of facilitate is "to make easy" or "ease a process." What a facilitator does is plan, guide and manage a group event to ensure that the group's objectives are met effectively, with clear thinking, good participation and full buy-in from everyone who is involved.” A facilitator is a key participant in RJPs. Their neutral status helps to create a calm environment for RJPs to take place.
- Forgiveness- “To stop feeling anger toward (someone who has done something wrong): to stop blaming (someone).” It is important to remember that a person cannot be forced to forgive and it is not a requirement for restorative justice to be effective. While it is often a by-product of RJPs, positive outcomes can still be achieved without it. On another note, the very concept of “wrong” may be fruitfully shifted through RJPs, where participants have a chance to see actions through the lenses of others’ experiences.
- Offender- “A person who commits an illegal act: A person or thing that offends, does something wrong, or causes problems” This is another term that can create an imbalance of power, prejudgment, and potentially harmful sense of identity. While a person may have committed a crime, they too can be victims of systemic violence and having the label of an offender may limit the possibility of empathy for them.
- Perpetrator- “A person who perpetrates, or commits, an illegal, criminal, or evil act” This term is similar to offender, and for the same reasons is often avoided during RJPs.
- Power- “Power can be defined in many ways. Most simply, it is the ability to get what you want . . .” “Power” may also be usefully understood as existing in three essential forms: “power over,” “power with,” and “power within.” Restorative Justice Practices in general tend to dismantle power over and increase power with and power within.
- Punitive- “Intended to punish someone or something, extremely or unfairly severe or high.”
- Reconciliation- “The act of causing two people or groups to become friendly again after an argument or disagreement.”
- Restorative Justice Practices- “The term ‘restorative justice practices’ refers to facilitated group practices that emphasize shared understanding and repairing any harm experienced in connection with the actions of one or more individuals. Restorative justice practices may include community conferences, victim-offender dialogues, family group conferences, or restorative circles, and have been increasingly used in juvenile settings and school systems.”
- Victim- “A person who has been attacked, injured, robbed, or killed by someone else: a person who is cheated or fooled by someone else: someone or something that is harmed by an unpleasant event (such as an illness or accident)” When participating in restorative justice, it may be wise to avoid this word. While it is important to acknowledge someone’s pain within a conflict, labeling someone as a victim may shift the power balance, encourage pre-judgment of the conflict, and establish an identity – at least temporarily - which may be harmful in its own way.
- Zero-Tolerance- Mandated automatic punishment, such as suspension or expulsion, for infractions of a stated rule. -Zero-tolerance practices have become more common in school systems, leading to more punitive experiences and often costly consequences.
If you have more resources to suggest to add to our page, please send them to us here!
1. http://www.arjaa.org/index.php?page_id=10
2. http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/rr00_16/p2.html
3. http://www.cfcj-fcjc.org/sites/default/files/docs/hosted/17445-restorative_justice.pdf
4. https://www.issafrica.org/uploads/m161c4.pdf
5. http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/rwanda/about/bgjustice.shtml
6. http://www.internetjournalofcriminology.com/gavrielides_restorative_practices_ijc_november_2011.pdf
7. http://www.arjaa.org/index.php?page_id=10
8. http://www.iyjs.ie/en/IYJS/Pages/WP08000064
9. http://www.tikkun.org/nextgen/twenty-years-of-restorative-justice-in-new-zealand
10. https://juliasteiny.com/2015/10/01/how-dominic-barter-developed-restorative-justice-in-brazil/
