Restorative Justice: From Theory to Practice
Over the last thirty years, restorative justice has caused a phenomenon of global interest stemming from a number of different stakeholders within the criminal justice system. The increasingly fast pace in which different theoretical claims and normative aspirations have been generated to support restorative justice practices has been unprecedented. Concurrently with the increase of these numerous volumes of theoretical debates, fears have been created that they might not be in accordance – or at least at same speed – with the practical development of the restorative notion. More importantly, they seem to pay none, or little attention to the alarming warnings principally coming from experienced practitioners in the field, who become increasingly concerned about a developing gap between the well-intended normative understandings of restorative justice and its actual implementation.
In 2007, I published "Restorative Justice Theory & Practice: Addressing the Discrepancy." The book was written to give the opportunity to people who had experienced restorative justice in practice to identify problems which they faced during implementation and which could help us understand the gap that exists between the theoretical and practical development of restorative justice. To achieve this, original fieldwork was carried out that did not merely observe the space that the gap creates, but also looked down into it in the hope of finding its causes and the practical problems that continue to encourage it. While restorative justice practitioners and theoreticians from around the world ask “why are criminal justice officials not letting the restorative movement to advance?”, this book asked “what is wrong with the movement”? I based my findings largely on two international qualitative surveys that questioned leading practitioners, researchers, evaluators and policymakers through the methods of in-depth, face-to-face interviews and postal questionnaires. My conclusion was simple: the restorative justice movement is its own worst enemy!
Eight years later and having served the restorative justice movement for over 15 year, I can now safely claim that I there is a strong power and interest battle tearing restorative justice professionals (e.g. practitioners vs theoreticians) apart. This battle also involves types of practices (e.g. mediation vs family group conferencing) as well as fundamental principles (e.g. voluntariness vs coercion). Although constructive debates are always essential for the advancement of criminal justice doctrines, it is my conclusion that if the restorative movement does not restore its own power straggles, the consequences will be severe.