Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

Navigation

Retribution and Restoration

During the early years of the restorative justice movement restoration was often contrasted with retribution in an attempt to illustrate what was different about restorative justice. Some proponents then and now argue that there is no place for infliction of pain in a restorative response to crime. Others have adopted the position that restorative justice actually accomplishes retributive purposes, perhaps better than conventional punishment does.

Howard Zehr developed a much-used diagram illustrating the difference between what he called retributive justice and restorative justice. More recently he has moved away from his earlier position that the two were polar opposites, apparently convinced by Conrad Brunk that this conceded too much to retributivists.

Others, however, argue that retribution is antithetical to restoration; if the purpose of justice is to repair harm, how can that be done by inflicting harm? Lode Walgrave is one of the most articulate proponents of this position.

Still others had never been convinced that the two were in opposition, reasoning that restorative outcomes require something of the offender, something they would not have done if not for the outcome.

Following are articles exploring these issues:

Zehr, Howard. Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Crime and Justice. 

This essay examines common assumptions about crime and justice, which it terms a "retributive" lens or paradigm, and considers historical, biblical and practical alternatives. A "restorative" model is proposed that is based on the needs of victims and offenders, past ways of responding to crime, recent experiments and biblical principles. Topics include: the experience of crime; justice as paradigm; community justice; covenant justice; and the victim-offender reconciliation program and the role of the church.

Brunk, Conrad G. Restorative justice and the philosophical theories of criminal punishment.

Brunk, observing a lack of philosophical investigation of restorative justice by philosophers and even by advocates of restorative justice, examines key issues relating to restorative justice. His aim is to demonstrate the advantages of restorative justice in addressing the questions that traditional philosophical theories of punishment have sought to answer. Fundamental ethical questions or concerns have to do with the justice of legal punishment: should anyone be punished; who should justly be punished; and what forms of punishment can justly be inflicted? Brunk discusses major approaches to these questions: retributive; utilitarian deterrence; rehabilitative; restitutionist; and then restorative. In particular he examines restorative justice in relation to the following: the retributive concern for 'just deserts'; the utilitarian concern for deterrence and social protection; the rehabilitative emphasis on a therapeutic analysis of and response to offenses; and the restitutionist emphasis on an economic construal of and response to offenses. Brunk maintains that each of the other approaches at best addresses only one of the primary ethical and jurisprudential concerns in understanding and responding to offenses. Restorative justice, as against each of the other approaches, provides a much more satisfying, comprehensive, and effective understanding of the nature of wrongdoing and how to respond to it.

Walgrave, Lode. Has Restorative Justice Appropriately Responded to Retribution Theory and Impulses?

Lode Walgrave observes at the outset of this chapter that no society can survive without rules and enforcement of those rules. In view of this, for centuries the mainstream response in the West to crime has been punishment or retribution by public authorities. Advocates of restorative justice have challenged that approach in recent decades. Along the way restorative justice itself has been challenged. One challenge has been to the opposition between retributive justice and restorative justice. Walgrave, therefore, examines the relationship between retribution and restoration. After clarifying the differences between punishment and restoration, he explores retribution as a major philosophical justification for criminal punishment. He retains one argument for punishment from this philosophical position: namely, punishment as censure of wrongful behavior. This leads to his contention that restoration is a more effective and more ethical way of censuring such behavior. Then, extending his argument through comparison of the essentials of retribution and restoration, he posits that restoration can be seen as a kind of reversed retribution.

Daly, Kathleen. Does Punishment Have a Place in Restorative Justice? 

This paper presents preliminary findings from the South Australia Juvenile Justice Research on Conferencing Project. The author urges colleagues to rethink the oppositional contrast between restorative justice and retributive justice. Her experience from observing family or diversionary conferences in Australia is that routine practices do not reflect a model of strong contrasts.

violent crime and character disorder
Naturally our aim is always Justice. But in the case of Psychopathic Behavior Disorder or Psychopathy we do not know why these people act as [...]
proper sentencing and release.
In "Columbine" Dave Cullen analyses the "shooters" skillfully and has done much research.Cullen concludes that Eric harris the lead shooter was a psychopath. i suggest [...]
Florida & related courts, judges, & lawyers
Par for the course, Holland's inadequate lawyer was AV-rated by his peers. Just when one thinks that what passes for the legal system in Florida [...]
Sequencing the administration of justice to enable the pursuit of peace: Can the ICC play a role in complementing restorative justice?
from the article by Tim Murithi: The notion of justice remains an essentially contested concept. In fact there are multiple dimensions to justice. Retributive justice seeks to ensure prosecution followed by punishment for crimes or atrocities committed. Restorative justice strives to promote societal harmony through a quasi-judicial process of truth telling, acknowledgement, remorse, reparations, forgiveness, healing and reconciliation. Retributive or punitive justice is generally administered by a state-sanctioned legal institution or through the remit of international law. Restorative justice draws upon a range of mechanisms including truth commissions and other societal reconciliation institutions.
It's time to make the punishment fit the white-collar crime
from the Nelson Mail (NZ) editorial: ....it's not easy to maintain a clear-eyed focus on justice. Very few New Zealanders will feel that this is what happened when Blue Chip co-founder Mark Bryers entered the dock on Thursday to be sentenced on 34 charges. Most, and particularly the Blue Chip investors who have lost their nest eggs, will feel that his sentence was a perfect case of the "slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket".
Proposed "three strikes" legislation in New Zealand
from the May 2010 newsletter of Rethinking Crime and Punishment: In recent months, the three strikes legislation has created concern across the political and ideological spectrum. The Maxim Institute, sponsored a speaking tour by Professor Warren Brookbanks and Senior Lecturer Richard Ekins of Auckland University. They also published an excellent report setting out the facts about the three strikes legislation. ....Brookbanks and Ekins report “Criminal Injustice and the Three Strikes Law” considers the legislation is both wrong and unjust for the following reasons:
Life without the possibility of parole
to say that kids do not know right from wrong is a cop-out. i was in and out of lockup as a kid and i [...]
your cousin: life without parole in North Carolina
Faye, I wanted to respond to your message since I was the author of this blog entry regarding juveniles who receive life without parole sentences [...]
Life without possibilty of parole
I have a cousin in North Carolin Prisons as of today, he was sentence to life in prison w/o possibility of parole in a crime [...]
Restorative justice considers the merits of cases not just rules…
from Lorenn Walker's entry on Restorative Justice and Other Public Health Approaches for Healing: The disturbing case of Albert Holland whose lawyer failed to adequately represent him points out a growing problem with our traditional courts: the focus on the law and rules vs. the facts and merits of particular cases in making rulings. Most American legal cases are being decided on procedure and law, “the rules,” and not on equity or the merits of cases. See Michael J. Sandel’s Democracy’s Discontent: America in Search of a Public Philosophy. The merits are about people and the particular facts about their unique experience in every conflict. Our courts should be places where people can go to find fairness and justice. Court should be a place where people know they can go to have the facts of their cases heard and considered by other people, judges, who care.
'Pizza thief' walks the line
From the Los Angeles Times article by Jack Leonard: If he ever returns to prison, Jerry Dewayne Williams knows he'll probably never get out. To stay clear of trouble, he has left behind the Compton neighborhood where police knew him and cut ties with friends from wilder days. Once a hard partyer, the 43-year-old says he prefers the company of a mystery novel or a "Law and Order" episode on television. Williams is one of more than 14,000 felons who, under California's three-strikes law, face a possible life sentence if they commit another felony. But few, if any, grasp the reality of that threat better than Williams.
Panel: Tribunals as restorative justice
from Erin Walrath's blog: Just a day ago I attended a panel titled Tribunals as Restorative Justice. The purpose behind this attendance was to orient myself with the judicial side of tribunals. Technically, I would argue that there is not another side of tribunals but I am sure that others would disagree with me. (Assuming that some others see tribunals as a sort of a SA Truth and Reconciliation equal, though they are quite different). The panel was a number of Korbel professors... with a range of knowledge regarding law, international law, and tribunals. Restorative justice was the primary concern. It incorporates a focus on victims, the harm done and the needs of those harmed, obligations and accountability, and participation of relevant stakeholders. According to Susan Sharpe (in Restorative Justice: A Vision for Healing and Change) there is an aim to put key decisions in the hands of those most affected by crime, make justice more healing and, ideally, more transformative, and reduce the likelihood or future offenses. Restorative justice is more common in European court systems but it seems is making its way into the US, especially in juvenile cases... so I have heard. To follow a true R.J. model then, the victim is involved in the process and feels heard and satisfied at the outcome, offenders must understand how their actions affect others and accept responsibility for them, outcomes must repair the harm done and address the reasons behind the offense, and both the victim and offender gain a sense of "closure".
The world is not as it should be: Punitiveness as a response to societal change
by Kim Workman of Rethinking Crime and Punishment: ....As a policy, three strikes does a lot more than provide harsher punishment. It also takes discretionary authority away from the judiciary, who traditionally have had the flexibility to vary sentences in response to judgements about the nature of crime, the victim and the offender. In the United States, studies showed a long-term trend toward increasing skepticism and lack of confidence in the legal authorities. This in turn had led to: a. A tendency to ignore judicial orders and the law; b. Greater tolerance of vigilantism or extralegal behaviour of citizens; c. Jury behaviour which nullifies the law.
Internally displaced people in Colombia: Victims in permanent transition
by Dan Van Ness I have just received a copy of a research study on the peace negotiations in Colombia: Internally displaced people in Colombia: Victims in permanent transition: Ethical and political dilemmas of reparative justice in the midst of internal armed conflict by Sandro Jiménez Ocampo, et al. From 2004 to 2007, the Colombian Government conducted peace negotiations with paramilitary groups. One of the issues negotiated had to do with the claims of people who had been killed or forcibly displace from their land, lands that were held by the combatants when the negotiations began. Forced displacement and deaths continued during the course of the negotiations, creating new claims. While reparation to victims was supposed to be a prominent outcome to the negotiations, the difficulties of negotiating peace in the course of a violent conflict together with the absence of the victims of displacement from the negotiation meant that there were claims of serious inadequacies with the results.
Review: When Brute Force Fails: How to have less crime and less punishment
from Robert H. Frank's review in the New York Times: Law enforcement policy in the United States rests implicitly on the “rational actor” model of traditional economics, which holds that people take only those actions whose benefits exceed their costs. This model says that crime will be deterred if the expected punishment is strong enough — a prediction that has not been borne out in practice. Although long sentences are now common and the incarceration rate is five times what it was during most of the 20th century, the crime rate is still two and a half times the average of 1950-62.
Braithwaite rocks! Again.
This video is a superb introduction and overview of restorative justice. I am using it for the culimating video in my course on restorative justice. [...]
John Braithwaite video introduction to restorative justice
John Braithwaite is a leader in restorative justice (and in many other fields). He teaches at Australian National University which has now posted an 18 minute video in which he explains the basic theories and applications of restorative justice. It is well done, and is presented in segments, which means it can be used in whole or in part.
Criminal justice organisations want new Titan prisons abandoned.
Can you believe this, at a time when you can’t open a newspaper without reading about someone being murdered, when carrying of guns is commonplace, 1,000’s of criminals are getting away without prison sentences and some of our prisons only hold foreigners thirty-five leading criminal justice organisations have today written to Justice Secretary Jack Straw calling for the Government’s plans for three Titan prisons to be abandoned.
Justice and an ethic of care
[Bloggingheads.tv] recently hosted an interesting discussion between two psychologists—Michael McCullough and Dacher Keltner–on the evolutionary role of revenge and its place in contemporary society. The whole discussion is worth listening to but about 28 minutes into the videocast they discuss the idea of restorative justice, which takes repairing relationships to be central to the idea of justice. Repairing relationships is the main feature of an ethics of care as well, and it seems to me this is where an ethic of care is able to fill out our notion of justice.
Dangers of the big tent
In making the case for restorative justice, Erik Luna invokes the familiar narrative of a pathological American criminal justice system—political demagogues pushing ever tougher sentencing policies on an uninformed public, resulting in wildly escalating prisons populations and fiscal burdens—and asserts that restorative justice cannot possibly do any worse. Indeed, he suggests, restorative justice may bring about a change in heart among the demagogues: the theory and principles of restorative justice may force policymakers “to reevaluate their own intellectual commitments and the merits of their chosen sentencing methodologies.

Document Actions

Restorative Justice Online - Featured Video

Restorative Justice Library Search

Search 11427 publications on restorative justice