JUST EMOTIONS: RITUALS OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE by MEREDITH ROSSNER
| Date | 01 December 2014 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2014.00692.x |
| Author | STEVEN CAMMISS |
| Published date | 01 December 2014 |
JUST EMOTIONS: RITUALS OF RESTORATIVE JUSTICE by MEREDITH
ROSSNER
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013, 208 pp., £65.00).
Restorative Ju stice (RJ) focus es upon `Harm, need , obligation, and
engagement'.
1
It takes seriously the harm caused to, and needs of, the
victim; the obligations of the offender to the victim, and of the wider
community to both victim and offender; and the engagement of all stake-
holders with an interest in the conflict (victim and offender, members of the
community, supporters, family and friends of both victim and offender).
2
RJ, however defined,
3
is concerned primarily with process rather than
outcomes;
4
mainstream criminal justice outcomes are imposed upon the
offender and the process sidelines the suspect,
5
while the victim and wider
stakeholders are, at best, resources to be utilized in the prosecution of crime,
primarily as witnesses.
6
Criminal justice, as Braithwaite famously put it, is
engaged in stigmatic shaming.
7
RJ, in contrast, after meaningful engagement
with all stakeholders,
8
promises `reintegrative shaming'.
9
The coming
together of victim, offender, and community shifts the emphasis to one of
inclusion, and thereby returns the conflict to the protagonists, countering
Christie's claim that the criminal justice process appropriates conflicts.
10
RJ has an `encounter conception of justice',
11
where the protagonists
discuss the offence, its impact upon the victim (and others), and the
motivation behind it. It can focus upon disposals and/or adjudication, and
includes a range of processes such as sentencing circles, restitution pro-
grammes, family group conferences, and victim/ offender mediation. It can
be an addition to a mainstream criminal justice process (such as a sentencing
circle after a formal court adjudication), or part of a caution or some other
formal diversion from prosecution. Alternatively, RJ can replace the formal
process, or be somewhere in-between, when implemented `in the shadow of
662
1 A.W. Dzur, Punishment, Participatory Democracy, and the Jury (2012) 39.
2 R. Graef, Why Restorative Justice: Repairing the Harm Caused by Crime (2001); G.
Johnstone, Restorative Justice: Ideas, Values, Debates (2002).
3 See G. Johnstone and D.W. Van Ness, `The Meaning of Restorative Justice' in
Handbook of Restorative Justice, eds. G. Johnstone and D.W. Van Ness (2007).
4 Although some claim that it is really about `process values': K. Pranis, `Restorative
Values' in id.
5 See, for instance, Carlen, who describes the defendant as a `dummy player': P.
Carlen, Magistrates' Justice (1976).
6 A. Ashworth, `Responsibilities, Rights and Restorative Justice' (2002) 42 Brit. J. of
Crim. 578±95.
7 J. Braithwaite, Crime, Shame and Reintegration (1989).
8 J. Larson Sawin and H. Zehr, `The ideas of engagement and empowerment' in
Johnstone and Van Ness (eds.), op. cit., n. 3.
9 Braithwaite, op. cit., n. 7.
10 N. Christie, `Conflicts as Property' (1977) 17 Brit. J. of Crim. 1±15.
11 Johnstone and Van Ness, op. cit., n. 3, p. 9.
ß2014 The Author. Journal of Law and Society ß2014 Cardiff University Law School
To continue reading
Request your trial