Book review: Just Interests: Victims, Citizens and the Potential for Justice
| Date | 01 May 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0269758019844839 |
| Published date | 01 May 2019 |
| Author | Matthew Hall |
| Subject Matter | Book reviews |
Book reviews
Robyn Holder
Just Interests: Victims, Citizens and the Potential for Justice
Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2018; xvi þ265pp.; ISBN 978-1-78643-402-9 (hbk).
Reviewed by: Matthew Hall, University of Lincoln, UK
DOI: 10.1177/0269758019844839
In this deeply thought-provoking volume, Holder challenges predominant notions of ‘justice’ as
constituting some form of singular standard to be achieved ‘for’ victims by a criminal justice
process. Instead the author demonstrates the ‘complex realizations of justice’ as experienced and
lived by victims as citizens with diverse and developing interests, which are both public and private
in their nature. The book is based on a series of three longitudinal interviews carried out with
primary victims of violence who were in contact with support services and for which a defendant
had been charged in the Australian Capital Territory. Data collection took place between 2009 and
2013. The interviews were carried out after charge, on completion of court proceedings, and again
some ‘six to eight months’ after the finalization of court proceedings. The original sample was 33
(27 women and 6 men), dropping to 19 (14 women and 5 men) by the time of the last interview.
The lay interviews are supported by further interviews with twelve public prosecutors in order to
provide an institutional context.
The views of the lay participants are at the heart of this volume. Through these data Holder
demonstrates that perceptions of justice amongst victims – which she categorised first and fore-
most as citizens – are complex and nuanced, reflecting combinations of both public and private
interests coming to form complex ‘integrated justice judgement[s]’ that lie behind ‘flat statements
of satisfaction or dissatisfaction’ (p. 210). As such, Holder’s findings in fact inherently and
properly resist easy classifications or summary. Central, though, to her argument is the realisation
that ‘public’ and ‘private’ justice goals are, from the perspective of citizen-victims, highly inter-
related. Hence ‘the citizen-victim draws on public policy narratives about ending violence and
places their personal desire to be safe within that frame’ (pp. 209–210). As such ‘when [citizen-
victims] interact on an individual basis with justice institutions their personal interests surface but
do not eradicate continuing attentiveness to public values and concerns’ (p. 219).
The real achievement of the book lies in its profound elevation of the victim debate beyond stark
needs-based analyses of what such people want from whom and at particular times, to focus more
centrally on victims as a multifaceted political constituency of active citizens, a status which both
predates and long endures after their victimisation experience. It is in this much broader context
that citizen-victims develop complex, multifaceted expectations of justice and indeed shape how
they ‘experience’ justice. The book will be required reading for anyone wishing to gain a deeper
International Review of Victimology
2019, Vol. 25(2) 271–274
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
journals.sagepub.com/home/irv
To continue reading
Request your trial