Reconciling the Notions of Restorative Justice and Imprisonment

Abstract

Restorative justice (RJ) in the secure estate is widespread internationally, although piecemeal and inconsistent in its application. It exists in the form of many practices such as mediation, conferencing, circles, and panels. As the interest in RJ continues to grow, this research takes a step back to ask how reconcilable RJ is with incapacitation. Through a combination of normative thinking, literature review, and primary research that applied qualitative methodologies over a 3-year period, the article examines where the two notions meet in their intentions and expected outcomes. A new classification of restorative practices in prisons is proposed, placed in the context of case studies of existing programs from around the world.

The Role of Proneness to Guilt and Shame Among People in Custody in Promoting Restorative Justice Processes

“…Gavrielides (2014) proposed dividing the RJ process in prisons into preparatory and delivery practices. The former include all the unilateral processes, such as offending behavior and victim awareness practices, whereas the latter consist of programs that include direct and indirect meetings between the perpetrator and victim, or others who have been harmed by the offense.…”

Restorative Justice Programs in Czech Prisons: The Role of Perceived Usefulness and Familiarity with the Program

“…We examine the interest of respondents in the implementation of five types of restorative programs which are most often discussed in research and practice (Gavrielides, 2014; Goulding et al, 2008; Van Ness, 2007). First, we draw attention to victim awareness and empathy programs , prompting participants to realize that crime does not “only” lead to damages in terms of property or health, but also poses serious mental and emotional distress to the victim.…”

“…1 Nevertheless, restorative justice programs and practices in prisons are still less common (Crocker, 2015). One of the reasons may be that some proponents of restorative justice consider imprisonment to be a retributive measure which is, more or less, in conflict with the basic principles of restorative justice (Edgar & Newell, 2006; Gavrielides, 2014). From a practical point of view, working with victims and offenders is easier in a community setting than a carceral setting (Van Ness, 2007).…”

“…Notwithstanding, the many projects conducted around the world clearly show that restorative justice programs and practices in a correctional environment can be very beneficial (e.g., Barabás et al, 2012; Edgar & Newell, 2006; Goulding et al, 2008; Robert & Peters, 2003), especially if we consider rehabilitation to be one of the primary goals of imprisonment (Dhami et al, 2009). The specific objectives and forms of such programs may vary--from victim-offender mediation which helps prisoners to develop empathy for the victim while facilitating meetings between them and their families or community members before prison release--to resolving conflicts between inmates or between prison staff and inmates (Gavrielides, 2014; Goulding et al, 2008; Van Ness, 2007). Although the benefits of restorative justice for victims are well known (Wemmers, 2002), these measures also have the potential to increase the inmate's chances of successful reintegration back into society.…”