“恢复性司法理论国际研讨会”综述

2007年4月21日,由山东大学法学院主办的"恢复性司法理论国际研讨会"在山东大学新校图书馆报告厅举行。来自日本以及我国大陆和台湾地区的40多名刑事法学者和司法实务人员齐聚一堂,就"恢复性司法的理论基础"、"恢复性司法的价值取向"、"恢复性司法的实践模式"、"恢复性司法的具体运作"以及"恢复性司法引入中国的可行性"五个论题展开了热烈、广泛而又深入的探讨。现将此次会议研讨的主要问题与观点作一综述。     

美国疑难宪法案件司法审查的两种模式及其补充——以“个案宪法权利”的证立为视角

疑难宪法案件的形成有其思想和规范渊源。司法审查必须补充演绎正当的大前提,即证立“个案宪法权利”的正当性。宪法解释学模式通过回溯道德权利的理论渊源重构个案中的宪法权利以支持宪法裁判;恢复性民主商谈司法模式主张将制宪者达成宪法原则的民主过程嵌入宪法裁判之中,寄希望法官间通过协商方式达成低限度的理论共识支持未完全理论化司法协议作为裁判的结果。程序主义宪法观将司法审查的合法性置于民主理论的语境中,使司法审查的合法性问题能够在民主的语境中得到缓解。宪法解释学模式的一元论与恢复性民主商谈司法模式的多元论欲满足司法审查所承载的立法与裁判的双重责任,必须将司法审查视为原则的论坛、公共理性的典范,以弥合重新道德化解释与重新民主化商谈之间的裂痕。     

恢复性司法在环境犯罪中的法律适用问题探析

加强生态司法、加大对生态环境违法行为的刑事处罚是当前社会关注一个重要议题。在环境犯罪领域适用恢复性司法,有助于实现社会和谐,促进生态文明建设。生态理论是环境犯罪适用恢复性司法的理论基础;目前我国在环境犯罪领域适用恢复性司法具有可行性;"轻微性"和悔罪表现是环境犯罪领域适用恢复性司法适用的基本要件。     

恢复性司法的价值评析

彭海青在《中国刑事法杂志》2004年第3期上撰文《论恢复性司法》指出，恢复性司法的渊源可以追溯至人类早期的司法形式，即将犯罪看作是对人们的伤害，通过司法帮助被害人、犯罪人和社会治愈创伤。至20世纪90年代，恢复性司法已在西欧、北美、拉美、亚洲等十几个国家得到不同程度的发展和运用。恢复性司法的基本内容是将原来经司法程序办理的刑事案件，     

建立少年恢复性司法模式刍议

恢复性司法是一种全新的刑事法治模式,本文试从恢复性司法的内容、特征与价值功能等方面进行考察,并对其理论内核进行评析。在目前恢复性司法在我国的理论研究与实践现状的基础上,提出在少年司法制度中首先探索建立恢复性司法模式。     

政治哲学视野下恢复性司法论的中国诉求

恢复性司法论在国际上已成为一种较为流行的理论观点,并在一定程度上影响着我国的司法改革导向。作为一种理念和制度的创新,恢复性司法的基本路径是通过实施程序化的刑事和解,以恢复被犯罪破坏的社会秩序,并以西方的自由主义为其理论基础。如果从恢复性司法的政治哲学基础出发进行仔细考量,不难发现恢复性司法与我国司法职能之间的矛盾性,我国在司法改革中并不具备实行恢复性司法的历史前提和制度基础。     

西方恢复性司法与我国刑事和解的关系

近年来刑事和解制度在中国广泛兴起,对此制度,不少法学研究者都从＂恢复性司法＂的角度进行分析和解读。刑事和解制度尽管从理念上或是制度设定上看,都可以从＂恢复性司法＂中找到一些相似的方面,但是二者在本质上仍属于两种不同的司法模式。本文从渊源、参与者范围、改革动因以及处理方式等方面进行论证,以期对我国刑事和解制度的完善有所裨益。     

对未成年人犯罪“恢复性司法”模式的思考

司法实践中,针对未成年人犯罪的特点,人民法院在审判组织、审判程序等方面,不断进行探索。如在审判组织上,大多数法院设立了专门的审判组织审理未成年人犯罪案件;而在审判程序上,各地法院普遍在实践中大胆探索各类新的未成年人刑事司法模式,比如近年来实践中就有越来越多的法院开始探索"恢复性司法"模式。但在我看来,当下包括未成年人刑事司法中广泛实践的"恢复性"司法模式只是给传统的一些习惯做法贴上了"标签"而已。正是基于这样的印象,本文将考察当下未成年人刑事司法实践中被称作"恢复性司法"模式重在揭示这一模式是否有效的实现了恢复性司法的目标和理念,并在此基础上提出未成年人刑事审判"恢复性司法模式"的若干设想。     

镇江市首例恢复性矫正案例报告

本文是江苏省镇江市在社区矫正试点工作中,运用恢复性司法理论,尝试开展第一例恢复性矫正取得成功的案例报告。文章介绍了开展恢复性矫正的背景,详细报告了该案按预定程序实施的全过程,并对该案例所产生的成效进行了客观、简要评估。     

构建中国式恢复性司法若干问题的思考——以上海市轻伤案件委托人民调解为视点

"恢复性司法"是近年来国际上一项新的刑事司法制度.指在案件处理过程中让犯罪人与被害人面对面接触,通过犯罪人的道歉、赔偿、社会服务等,使被害人因犯罪所造成的物质精神损失得到补偿,使被害人因犯罪影响的生活及时恢复常态.同时也使犯罪人通过积极负责任的行为重新融入社区,并赢得被害人和社会的谅解。恢复性司法作为一项刑事司法改革措施.发端于二十世纪六七十年代的北美.最早的努力可以溯源于六十年代少年司法系统内被害人和加害者调解程序。1999年7月28日,联合国通过了《制定和实施刑事司法调解和恢复性司法措施》,2000年7月27日,联合国又通过了《关于在刑事事项中采用恢复性方案的基本原则》。在这一刑事司法改革浪潮的影响下,上海市大力推进轻伤害案件委托人民调解工作.这可以说是中国式恢复性司法模式的雏形。一、构建中国式恢复性司法的利弊因素分析     

Balancing justice goals: restorative justice practitioners’ views

Despite the importance of facilitators, staff, and volunteers to restorative justice programs, we know very little about what they think about the goals of restorative justice. This paper fills that gap by reporting the findings of a survey of restorative justice practitioners in Nova Scotia, Canada. Participants rated the importance of 29 justice-related goals such as punishment and accountability. The results show how respondents distinguish between, prioritize, and balance competing justice goals. A factor analysis shows how goals cluster together revealing more depth about how practitioners understand goals, such as accountability, that have different meanings depending on the context. The findings are particularly interesting because the restorative justice program in Nova Scotia is deeply embedded in the criminal justice system. The findings speak to concerns about whether programs rooted in the mainstream system risk being diluted by dominant criminal justice system discourses. I conclude that restorative justice practitioners can prioritize the values of restorative justice in a program that is deeply rooted in the mainstream criminal justice system.     

Making space for restorative justice in criminal justice and criminology curricula and courses

Restorative justice, rooted in the practices of indigenous people across the globe, has grown exponentially in both theory and practice since its beginnings in Canada in the 1970s. Restorative justice has influenced the interactions between offenders and victims, helped community members address crime and develop self-efficacy, and changed the way some countries rebuild after a history of oppression. Despite these restorative justice influenced changes, many criminology and criminal justice programs pay scant attention to restorative justice in curricula. This paper will examine ways to include restorative justice in criminal justice and criminology curriculum and the challenges involved in the process. The paper will then examine how the Law and Justice Department at Central Washington University has incrementally added restorative justice components to its curriculum, culminating most recently with the addition of a Community and Social Justice course. The paper will conclude with several examples of classroom activities and assignments that have helped connect students with the theory and practice of restorative justice.     

Rethinking the restorative–retributive dichotomy: is reconciliation possible?

While the use of restorative justice within Western criminal justice systems continues to grow, its philosophical foundations remain uncertain. This inconclusiveness impacts directly upon the theoretical discussion of restorative justice and its relationship with existing paradigms of punishment, precipitating debate regarding its ability to integrate within justice systems governed by retributive paradigms. Specifically, this ambiguity of definition renders debate regarding the extent to which restorative justice philosophy exists as an alternative punishment or an alternative to punishment, and its existence as complementary or axiomatic to retributive justice unresolved. The philosophy of restorative justice, identifying its central features and addressing those previous attempts of contrasting restorative justice with the prevailing paradigm of retribution is explored here. However, it is suggested that aspirations of reconciling restorative justice philosophy with the retributive paradigm will be ultimately unsuccessful, due to the persistent latent ambiguity regarding the central foundation upon which restorative justice philosophy is built. Such concerns are also present when seeking to affirm the continued opposition of retributive and restorative justice.     

Restorative Sentencing: Exploring the Views of the Public

Within the past decade, restorative justice has emerged as a truly global phenomenon. Although retributive justice has dominated the penal landscape, more recently, restorative principles at sentencing have attracted increased attention. Restorative sentencing emphasizes the importance of compensation and reconciliation between victims and offenders and pays less attention to establishing proportionality between the seriousness of the offense and the severity of the sentence imposed. Although voluminous (and proliferating), the scholarly literature on restorative justice has to date neglected one critical issue: public opinion with respect to this justice paradigm. Public opinion researchers too, have generally overlooked this topic. The goal of this paper is to determine which elements of the new paradigm generate public approval, and which features are likely to encounter or provoke public opposition, drawing upon related international research published in English over the past 20 years (1982–2002). The review reveals widespread support for restorative sentencing options, such as community service, compensation, and restitution, particularly when applied to young offenders. However, it also seems clear that public support for these alternatives to punitive sentencing options declines as the seriousness of the offence increases, suggesting strong public adherence to the retributive principle of proportionality in sentencing.     

Regenerative justice,beyond restoring

This paper outlines a new form of justice, called regenerative justice. Regenerative justice is the coupling of restorative justice with the notion of generative justice, which involves the explicit and intentional discovery and building of life meanings, as well as the consideration of the relationships that those meanings have with wrongdoing and ‘making things right’. This exploration comes about after first considering restorative justice, then providing a critique that uncovers potential blind spots in restorative practice. Logotherapeutic techniques, including: Socratic dialogue, attitude modulation, and dereflection, are used by therapists to help people discover meaning and purpose and have successfully assisted crime victims and offenders. Borrowing from these techniques and specific questioning approaches, restorative dialogue facilitators can enhance restorative practice, particularly in the phases of preparation for restorative dialogue and follow-up after restorative dialogue, by deliberately emphasizing meaning-building discussions (generative justice). Therefore, regenerative justice synthesizes the restoration of people and relationships with the generation of peaceful and healing meanings that can help stakeholders in wrongdoing make sense out of suffering and move forward with a sense of purpose. An example of this process is illustrated in a victim-offender dialogue in a crime of severe violence, where meaning-building can be particularly powerful.     

Is restorative justice for sexual crime compatible with various criminal justice systems?

In addition to the more conventional approaches of the criminal justice system, this article suggests that there is a need for restorative justice as another method of addressing sexual crime. In support of this view, the present article explores the possibility of a hybrid justice system based on a complementary relationship between restorative justice and the criminal justice system. An analysis of the limits of the criminal justice system and the need for restorative justice in the contentious area of sexual crime will be followed by a detailed examination of key justice considerations when trying to marry both criminal justice and restorative justice perspectives. Such considerations include: the meaning of justice; legislation; sentencing principles; due process; victims’ rights; and the location of restorative justice within/alongside/outside the criminal justice system. The aim of this article is to determine whether it is possible to reconcile two seemingly juxtaposed methods of justice delivery in the context of sexual crime in order to create a hybrid system of justice that best protects and responds to the rights and needs of victims and offenders.     

Anonymously restored: the natural partnership and mutual instruction of Alcoholics Anonymous and restorative justice

Today, western academicians continue to examine, learn from, and respect the many indigenous forms of what is often deemed ‘restorative justice.’ The following paper presents a similar process of learning through the Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) program. AA is a time-tested practice that persists because of its ability to promote personal and group harmony. It is isolated as a western subgroup that, like many indigenous justice traditions, contains a restorative fabric and may serve as an instructive case study. As a living model of restorative practice, AA is able to sharpen aspects of restorative justice theory, though this theory is also used to comment upon perceived weaknesses in the AA program. More generally, this paper seeks to raise awareness for restorative practice that occurs naturally in many western contexts. It is important that proponents/advocates of restorative justice begin to consider the ways in which unseen or anonymous allies may support the development and expansion of restorative justice.     

Immature offenders. A critical history of the representations of the offender in restorative justice

This paper reconstructs and discusses how the ‘offender’ is represented within policy documents, legal statutes and scholarly literature on restorative justice, published and circulated in England and Wales over the last thirty years. The research first outlines the most wide-ranging and recurrent images and implicit assumptions of the offender in restorative justice. A set of specific offender’s features will be singled out, and the ‘ideal offender’ of restorative justice will be profiled. The final step of this work consists of mapping out the cultural context within which this ideal has emerged, in a historical perspective. The overall goal is to shed light on some taken-for-granted images surrounding the offender in restorative justice, and on the cultural context within which they have developed. In this way, it is possible to contribute toward the critical re-assessment of restorative justice whilst considering implications beyond the British context.     

平和司法：恢复性司法的本土化——关于平和司法理念与实践的调研报告

平和司法是在学习国外恢复性司法理念、实证分析烟台市检察机关的办案实践、考察外地检察机关的先进经验的基础上提出的全新命题,是恢复性司法本土化的一个尝试。平和司法可分为司法心态(基础要素)、司法模式(手段要素)、司法境界(目的要素)三个层面,与恢复性司法最大的不同就在于它的层次性和层次之间的互动性。平和司法在执法理念上与传统的司法理念有很大的转变,与宽严相济的刑事政策相适应,符合社会主义法治理念的本质要求。实践平和司法将对维护社会和谐稳定、预防犯罪、节约司法资源、维护被害人和犯罪人合法权益具有积极意义。