No abstract

Even if there has been some theoretical debate on the role of what has been called the 'community of care' in restorative justice (RJ) there has not been much research on, or analysis of, the implications of the role of significant others in its practice. This lack of reflection is especially evident in the case of the victims' community of care, despite findings that would indicate a systematic lack of participation of victim's supporters in restorative practices. Through the qualitative analysis of 35 interviews with victims of crime who consented to attend mediation (direct and indirect), an attempt to describe and discuss the characteristics of victim's communities of care that may become relevant for the practice of RJ is made. Results indicate that, despite a victims' need for company or support, victims tend to disclose few details about the offense, its consequences and the mediation offered as a way to protect their loved ones or to avoid possible negative reactions from their communities. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are offered.

It has been argued that every scientific decision is co-determined by underlying worldviews. Which worldviews have guided research on restorative justice (RJ) with respect to the topic of 'victims' restoration'? In the RJ literature, 'restoration' appears from different perspectives, but it is not clear what the implications that these different perspectives might have for RJ practice and research are. This paper aims to a) describe how in RJ literature 'restoration' has been defined and measured, trying to uncover tbe underlying approaches adopted in both theory and research, and b) analyze their implications and limitations for the development ofRJ theory and practice. The analysis shows that approaches differ in terms of how harm is defined and how the role of the victim is conceived, as well as with respect to the aspects that are considered to be most helpful for RJ practice. There also seems to be a gap between what has been theoretically defined and what has been empirically measured. Finally, it is concluded that tbe predominance of psychological models, the tendency to describe more than to explain, and the lack of a more comprehensive theoretical framework on victims' restoration are common characteristics of existing approaches.

This paper departs from the observation that the victim image leading public discourse has transformed in recent years: increasingly victims reject the traditional victim label implying helplessness and dependency to adopt the image of the emancipated victim that wishes to participate in the criminal proceedings. Restorative justice at first sight provides an answer to these emancipated victims’ wishes, offering them participation in criminal proceedings. Yet, using the concept of empowerment as an example and the community psychology perspective as a theoretical reference, our analysis suggests that restorative justice uses a restricted definition of empowerment: it reduces empowerment to developing self-confidence and new understandings of the offence, neglecting the behavioural component of empowerment. This characteristic of restorative justice seems to deny victims’ capacities to promote social change and inhibit them from reaching true empowerment

No abstract