Legal Theory & Philosophy
I've had the pleasure of working with my best friend Professor Vasso Artinopoulou on this edited volume that resulted from an international event that we co-organised. The First International Symposium on Restorative Justice was held in Skopelos in June 2012 bringing together international experts to debate what matters in restorative justice philosophy. The result was "Reconstructing Restorative Justice Philosophy" published by Ashgate.
This volume is novel in the use of a deconstructive and reconstructive approach, where the fundamental underpinnings of restorative justice are interrogated through a critical analysis of restorative justice philosophy. This book pioneers a new method when considering restorative justice, with the current concepts being challenged and tested by new questions and methodologies, particularly those which are not in the mainstream restorative justice literature. The introduction of other disciplines, including philosophy, human rights and political thought into the debates and questions surrounding restorative justice allows for a deeper understanding of the various complexities which face theorists, practitioners and policy-makers. The complete investigation of the fundamental principles through an international lens provides a fresh, thought-provoking perspective on restorative justice and its philosophy.
Since 2005, I have been exploring new theoretical avenues for what we call "punishment". Using the notion of pain, I explore how it can deconstruct us and then through catharsis deliver us in a better place. Some publications include:
Gavrielides, T. (2013). “Restorative Pain: A new vision of punishment” in Gavrielides, T. and V. Artinopoulou (Ed). Reconstructing Restorative Justice Philosophy, Ashgate Publishing: Furnham, UK, 311-337.
Gavrielides, T. (2014). “Reconciling the Concepts of Restorative Justice and Imprisonment”. The Prison Journal. doi: 10.1177/0032885514548010.
Gavrielides Theo (2005) “Some Meta-theoretical Questions for Restorative Justice”, 18:1 Ratio Juris, pp. 84-106. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9337.2005.00287.x