Restorative Justice

Restorative Justice (RJ) is based on understanding the violation of people and relationships when crime is committed. It has been a part of Canada’s criminal justice system for over 40 years.

• Originating from aspects of Indigenous legal and faith traditions and critical criminology, it is a harm reduction-centered approach to justice that seeks to provide healing, reparation, and reintegration. This is done through facilitating opportunities for those harmed and those responsible for harm to communicate and address their needs in the aftermath of crime.
• In recent years, there has been growing recognition of the mainstream criminal justice systems’ limited ability to adequately meet victim and survivor needs. This recognition has increased national interest in RJ.
• By encouraging meaningful engagement and accountability it operates on 4 principles:

What does it look like?

Restorative Justice models can be implemented in any stage of the criminal justice process through pre-sentence and post-sentence processes. It involves, 3 main parties: the victim/survivor, the offender, and the local community. These models usually involve a 3rd party facilitator such as a respected community member, or Elder for Indigenous community-based programs, who accompany the parties through exploration, preparation, dialogue, and follow-up. Voluntary participation of all parties and the accepting of responsibility from the offending party is necessary for restorative justice models to be used

From: UC Riverside

Why do we need it?

Due to inherent power dynamics and imbalances in GBV cases, it is necessary for justice approaches to prioritize victim/survivor needs by restoring power to those who have been harmed. In the aftermath of GBV, it is common for victims and survivors to feel dehumanized and disempowered. By allowing them the opportunity to decide what happens next and how it happens in their process of pursuing justice, approaches such as RJ can be empowering and transformative to victim/survivor healing processes. Theorists and practitioners explain that RJ is a beneficial alternative or complement to no-so-adequate criminal justice processes because they prioritize victim experiences, and grants them the power to be the central starting point for pursuing justice.

Cons: Skepticism/Controversiality

Many employed in fields which intersect with GBV, such as victim service workers, often express concern and skepticism, and reacted with caution or even dismissal of RJ approaches for victims/survivors. These advocates caution RJ approaches specifically for gender- and power-based crimes, and therefore, explore additional responses to GBV which they believe better prioritize victim/survivor needs.

Victims have reported negative opinions on the sincerity and genuineness of the offender, and express fear over likelihood of reoffending. Others also raise concerns that RJ processes can create more harm if not facilitated adequately, especially for cases where relationship and power dynamics can further complicate processes.

• Some RJ practices may be too offender-focused and fail to meet victims/survivors’ needs due to several factors
  • These factors include:

“domestic violence is probably the most problematic area of application, and here caution is advised” - Howard Zehr, an American criminologist, referring to the start of the modern RJ movement

• in a literature review on RJ processes in intimate partner and family violence, conducted by Alan Edwards and Susan Sharpe who are both RJ advisors/practitioners, evidence demonstrated that the risks mentioned above are realistic. The documented outcomes showed that domestic violence victims have been further harmed through inappropriate discussion originally intended to help them.

Pros: Benefits to Healing

On the other hand, many studies have also demonstrated the fact that victims/survivors want to know their options and have the ability to decide which justice option they want to pursue.

“although the project of achieving gender equality has not been central to restorative justice, its commitment to equality in social relationships is certainly consonant with this goal” - Melanie Randall, a feminist law professor, on the resonance between RJ principles and feminist scholarship.