Retributive and Restorative Justice

The emergence of restorative justice as an alternative model to Western, court-based criminal justice may have important implications for the psychology of justice. It is proposed that two different notions of justice affect responses to rule-breaking: restorative and retributive justice. Retributive justice essentially refers to the repair of justice through unilateral imposition of punishment, whereas restorative justice means the repair of justice through reaffirming a shared value-consensus in a bilateral process. Among the symbolic implications of transgressions, concerns about status and power are primarily related to retributive justice and concerns about shared values are primarily related to restorative justice. At the core of these processes, however, lies the parties’ construal of their identity relation, specifically whether or not respondents perceive to share an identity with the offender. The specific case of intergroup transgressions is discussed, as are implications for future research on restoring a sense of justice after rule-breaking.     

Evaluating Restorative Justice Programs in Taiwan

This paper aims to evaluate four restorative justice programs in Taiwan: (1) a mediation system; (2) deferred prosecution and conditional suspended sentence; (3) a youth justice system; and (4) the Taiwan Restorative Justice Initiative. In this paper, models proposed in Marshall (Restorative justice: An overview. London: Home Office, 1999) and Braithwaite (British Journal of Criminology 42:563–577, 2002b) are used as criteria to evaluate the four programs. Based on governmental documents, official statistics, and the findings of previous empirical studies, this paper will examine whose needs and power is focused and what types of value are highlighted in those four programs. This paper finds that current restorative justice programs in Taiwan place greater emphasis on offenders than on other parties such as victims and communities. In addition, maximizing and emergent standards that Braithwaite identifies are implemented more in Taiwan’s restorative justice programs than constraining standards. This paper suggests that restorative justice practices in Taiwan need to be more concerned with victims’ needs and interests, and to strengthen constraining types of restorative justice values.     

Restorative Justice and “Empowerment”: Producing and Governing Active Subjects through “Empowering” Practices

During the last quarter-century, restorative justice has emerged as a widely-utilised response to crime in Western nations. This article, which stems from a Foucauldian genealogy of restorative justice, argues that its embeddedness within the discourse of “empowerment” renders restorative justice a politically acceptable response to crime. “Empowerment”, it is argued, is one of many conditions of emergence of restorative justice. The discourse of “empowerment” underpins restorative justice in tangible ways, and has informed legislation and policy in Western jurisdictions. This article seeks to problematise the taken-for-granted nature of this discourse. It argues that the discourse of “empowerment” produces restorative justice subjects who are increasingly governed and governable. As “empowering” restorative practices are targeted towards “disempowered” individuals and communities, concerns are raised about the potential of restorative justice to disproportionately impact upon socially marginalised populations and to increase social exclusion.     

Do Retributive and Restorative Justice Processes Address Different Symbolic Concerns?

In support of a unitary conceptualization of retributive justice (justice through the imposition of punishment) and restorative justice (justice through dialogue aimed at consensus), three studies using hypothetical and recalled experiences of victimization found that people’s endorsement of, and satisfaction with, either justice notion depends on the symbolic meaning of the transgression. In Study 1, perceiving the transgression as a status/power violation was uniquely related to the endorsement of retributive justice, whereas perceiving it as a violation of shared values was uniquely related to restorative justice. In Study 2, motivation to restore status/power was related to retributive responses, whereas motivation to restore value consensus with the offender was uniquely related to restorative responses. In Study 3, a scenario experiment, respondents called for greater additional sanction when the applied justice process (retributive vs. restorative) did not fit the salient meaning of the transgressions compared to when it did (status/power vs. values).     

Restoring the Victim: Emotional Reactions, Justice Beliefs, and Support for Reparation and Punishment

Psychological responses to criminal wrongdoing have primarily focused on the offender, particularly on how (and why) offender punishment satisfies people’s need for justice. However, the restoration of the victim presents another way in which the “psychological itch” that injustice creates can be addressed. In the present article, I discuss two lay theories of how crime victims can be restored: a belief that the harm caused to crime victims should be directly repaired (a restorative justice approach) versus a belief that victim harm should be addressed via the punishment of the offender (a retributive justice approach). These two lay theories are discussed with regard to their emotional and ideological determinants, as well as situational and chronic factors that can affect whether people adopt a reparative or punitive “justice mindset” in dealing with victim concerns (and crime in general).     

Is there such thing as ‘global sex trafficking’? A patchwork tale on useful (mis)understandings

This article intends to respond to a recent call (e.g., Zhang Global Crime 10(3):178–195, 2009; Brunovskis and Surtees International Migration 48(4):1–38, 2010) for more innovative studies and methodologies in order to move beyond the current discourse on human trafficking. We do so by describing three ethnographic fragments on the dynamics of (dealing with) sex trafficking within Europe. The concepts of ‘friction’ and ‘collaboration’ (Tsing Cultural Anthropology 15(3):327–360, 2000, 2005) are used to analyse these fragments. These concepts refer to creative processes that occur as people interact across differences. They give insight into how universal ideas on freedom and justice enable collaboration between parties involved in fighting human trafficking who do not necessarily share a common goal. We conclude that the presented method of ‘patchwork ethnography’ is useful in studying sex trafficking as it implies a strong focus on connections between ‘sites of diverse knowledge’, without losing sight of individual stories of people making those connections. ‘Patchwork ethnography’ is innovative and it allows researchers to expose and untangle the workings of the supposedly all-powerful phenomenon and the encompassing, uniform, hegemonic discourse surrounding human (sex) trafficking.     

Estimating Juror Accuracy,Juror Ability,and the Relationship Between Them

This article advances a method based on standard test theories and measurement models to determine correct verdicts for jury trials, and to estimate juror accuracy, juror ability, and trial difficulty (and the relationships among them). With five vignette cases and 1,318 juror eligible adults as the subjects, the model consistently identified verdicts that accorded with the judge’s instructions on the law as correct. With the correct verdicts, the strength of the relationship between juror accuracy and juror ability was found to be substantial. These findings suggest that the assumption of equivalent accuracy of jurors underlying the Condorcet’s jury theorem (Condorcet, Essai sur l’Application de l’Analyse a la Probabilite des Decisions Rendues a la Pluralite des Voix, Paris, 1785) may be untenable for general cases where jurors of diverse dispositions and abilities serve together; and that the role of juror ability in determining the accuracy of legal decisions could be more significant than that of attitudes and values because, unlike attitudes and values, ability could affect juror’s legal decisions regardless of the type of the case.     

The Brooklyn mediation field test

This paper describes an experiment in which 465 felony arrest cases in Kings County, NY, USA, were, randomly, either filed in court and prosecuted or sent to a dispute resolution center for adjudication. The cases all involved persons who were acquainted, and nearly half were either intimate partners or in other immediate family relationships. The results indicated that the mediation process was perceived more positively by complainants than was prosecution and that going through mediation enhances complainants’ perceptions of their relationships with defendants to a greater degree than going through the court process. However, there was no evidence that mediation was no more effective than prosecution in preventing recidivism. Not surprisingly, in cases involving intimate partners or immediate family members, the offenders were most likely to experience continuing problems whether they were sent to mediation or were prosecuted. One of the values of this study is that, in the late 1970s, when this research was conducted, mediation was considered by many to be a legitimate alternative to prosecution in family violence cases, including cases arising from intimate partner violence. The data that we collected would be difficult to replicate in today’s political climate. While our study did not find that mediation reduced the odds of recidivism in these cases, neither did we find that mediation made victims less safe. Thus, it partially supports the sentiments of researchers such as Braithwaite and Strang (Restorative justice and family violence. In Strang H, Braithwaite J (eds) Restorative justices and family violence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 1−22; 2002), who argue that—given the evidence for success of restorative justice in reducing re-offending in cases other than family violence—it is worth testing whether similar beneficial effects could be found in applying restorative justice approaches to family violence cases.

Between pedagogy and practice: developing and delivering international justice coursework in North America

While the need for new and innovative international coursework in North America has been recognized, developments in North American Universities have been few. Building on Mathias Reimann’s (Penn State International Law Review 22:397–415 [23]) useful justification for a new basic course in international law, this paper provides a discussion of a new approach to international justice coursework. Based on the nascent ICC and the jurisprudential developments of past international tribunals, a discrete international legal order has emerged. This may provide an opportunity for a broader examination of international criminal justice drawn from disciplines such as history, sociology, psychology, and criminology. By offering practical classroom techniques to assist in the delivery of international justice coursework, this paper attempts to provoke debate and discussion about how international coursework ought to be designed and delivered to a wider audience of undergraduate students.     

Toward “Safer” and “Better” Communities?: Canada’s Youth Criminal Justice Act,Aboriginal Youth and the Processes of Exclusion

After a decade of high incarceration rates, the Canadian Department of Justice has revised its approach to juvenile justice. Enshrined in the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA), the renewed youth justice system stresses the importance and responsibility of community for crime control. While on the surface the state’s appeals to such programmes as restorative justice seem laudable, caution should be exercised in fully endorsing this approach. While community initiatives have been criticized for “widening the net of social control” and intruding state control deeper into social life, their exclusionary potential is perhaps more troubling. Following Derrida’s metaphysics of presence, I suggest that ‘community’ perpetually finds meaning in opposition to the other. In this environment, Aboriginal youth, who are among the most marginalized in Canadian society, will likely be the most unfavourably effected. This paper does not, however, entirely reject the Act’s appeal to community. Nevertheless, I argue that for meaningful challenges to contemporary constructions of community and youth justice to occur the discursive limits forced upon ‘community’ must be fractured and fashioned in ways that renounce homogeneity. We strongly believe the solution to youth crime is in the community. Give the community the ability to deal with it and they will (Canada 1997).     

The Continuing Relevance of Ars Poetica to Legal Scholarship and the Modern Lawyer

In this late modern era within which the basic values of life have been reordered (driven by globalisation, the corporate agenda and mass communication technologies), the individual has effectively been reduced to a mere abstraction. It might be argued that the rational, moral and humanistic concept of freedom has, to a great extent, been compromised by a consequent crisis within the intelligentsia. These groups, in particular the gatekeepers of a classical liberal approach to legal scholarship, are caught between the twin evils of increased unreflective populism and pragmatism evident within many law schools and modern legal institutions. Although a contested term, defenders of the ‘socio-legal’ tradition, who place the humanities at the heart of legal research and education, are obliged to restate with increased determination the utility of the liberal arts and literature to the law profession and wider legal community. In a normative environment, law and narrative are inextricably linked and narrative poetry is not only invaluable to explaining the origins and location of the legal tradition, but also elicits a mode of understanding which transcends the boundaries of narrowlydefined legal hermeneutics—which often only addresses issues of an operational nature. French novelist Flaubert claimed “chaque notaire porte en soi les débris d’un poète” (Flaubert in Madame bovary (trans: Wall, G.), Penguin Classics, London, 1960: 269), paraphrased by American civil rights lawyer, Clarence Darrow, as “inside every lawyer is the wreck of a poet” (Lukas in Big trouble: a murder in a small western town sets off a struggle for the soul of America, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1997: 323). In an age of disenchantment, this paper explores the poetic form as an important medium within which to understand the nature and function of law in a society of differentiated individuals.     

Attributions of Blame and Responsibility in Sexual Harassment: Reexamining a Psychological Model

Kelley’s (Nebr Symp Motiv 15:192–238, 1967) attribution theory can inform sexual harassment research by identifying how observers use consensus, consistency, and distinctiveness information in determining whether a target or perpetrator is responsible for a sexual harassment situation. In this study, Kelley’s theory is applied to a scenario in which a male perpetrator sexually harasses a female target in a university setting. Results from 314 predominantly female college students indicate that consistency and consensus information significantly affect participants’ judgments of blame and responsibility for the situation. The authors discuss the importance of the reference groups used to derive consensus and distinctiveness information, and reintroduce Kelley’s attribution theory as a means of understanding observers’ perceptions of sexual harassment.     

The Process Matters: Fairness in Repository Siting For Nuclear Waste

Siting contested infrastructure such as repositories for nuclear waste very often faces strong local resistance. One major reason for this opposition may arise because siting processes do not appropriately consider fairness issues such as transparency, the availability of options, or the sufficient involvement of concerned and affected people. The aim of this study was to analyze people’s concerns related to justice in siting nuclear waste. Besides procedural aspects, both distributive justice and outcome valence are considered important and therefore the “total fairness model” by T?rnblom and Vermunt (Soc Justice Res 12:39–64, 1999) was used as a framework. In three quasi-experimental studies (N ₁ = 53; N ₂ = 56; N ₃ = 83) applying conjoint analysis, respondents ranked 11 vignettes with the three attributes procedural justice, distributional justice, and outcome valence. Each vignette represents a realistic scenario of a site selection process for the disposal of nuclear waste in Switzerland. All the three studies yield a consistent result: vignettes representing a situation with a fair process are top-ranked by respondents; situations with negative outcome valence are ranked lowest; distributive issues turned out to be of minor importance. We conclude that procedural fairness should be given more attention in any kind of contested infrastructure siting and that real-world examples like the one discussed here can inform justice research.     

Interventions for Intimate Partner Violence: A Historical Review

Intimate partner violence (IPV), also known as domestic abuse or relationship violence, has generated a large research literature for the last half-century, particularly in the areas of criminal justice, psychology, and the social sciences. Interventions for victims and perpetrators of IPV have largely been sequestered to separately evolving efforts of law enforcement and the psychotherapeutic community (Chang et al. Women’s Health Issues, 15(1), 21–30, 2005; Dalton Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 15(1), 59–75, 2007; Dobash and Dobash 2000; Feder et al. 2008; Gerbert et al. Journal of Family Practice, 49(10), 889–895, 2000; Wathen and MacMillan. Journal of the American Medical Association, 289(5), 589–600, 2003). This article presents a brief overview of the historical evolution and development of these discrete perspectives and identifies and assesses current collaborative interventions rooted in these historical precedents. In conclusion, the authors provide a summative discussion of the most current findings of research into IPV interventions, with a particular focus on the changing roles of race and gender in both the criminal prosecution of IPV and services provided to IPV perpetrators and victims.     

On restorative justice practiced in China

The victim-offender reconciliation (VOR), practiced by the basic public security, procuratorates and courts since the advent of 21^st century, is a new mode different from the mediation or conciliation in the procedure of civil litigation or of that accessory to the public prosecution in criminal proceeding. This mode connects the criminal justice with the mediation or private reconciliation by themselves. Thus, non-official settlement can influence the criminal justice and the decisions of authoritative agencies. It is beneficial to restore the victim’s interests, urge the offender to repent for his wrongdoings, compensate for the victim’s loss and restore the damaged social relationship. The VOR in China is the same in essence as the Western restorative justice, so it could be regarded as a Chinese mode of global restorative justice movement. Though the VOR mechanism works well, it still brings some matter in further consideration: (a) the legitimacy of VOR; (b) the conflict against the basic concept of crime; (c) the effect to the social reality.     

On Justice

This paper returns to the question of how to think of justice through Teubner’s recent definition of what he calls juridical justice. Juridical justice is defined as distinct from political, moral, social and theological conceptions of justice. Teubner attempts to think of an imaginary space for a juridical justice ‘beyond the sites of natural and positive law’ and searches for a conception of justice as the ‘law’s self-subversive principle’. This article reviews Teubner’s conception of juridical justice and further proposes a distinction between juridical and non-juridical understandings of justice.     

Female Defendants and Criminal Courts in Taiwan: An Observation Study

It has long been contended that the criminal justice system extends the influence of patriarchy in society. Feminist and critical criminologists have produced countless examples of the male domination in the criminal justice system. Critics of law and criminal justice point out that the system treats women the same way as does the mainstream society (MacKinnon 1989, 1991; Smart 1989). Therefore, criminal justice cannot be expected to remedy injustices legally before they are recognized as injustices socially. Sociological studies in crime and delinquency have also neglected gender issues. By employing the qualititaive research approach of field observation, this study focuses on how practitioners in three criminal courts in Southern Taiwan interact with female defendants. The findings point out that the court system was unbending in treating the observed defendants in a condescending manner, and expedited the trial process to pronounce the defendants’ guilt. The study aims to offer explicit and nuanced empirical evidence of how gender complicates courtroom interaction. Evidence from this study also forms the basis for policy recommendations and future reform in the criminal justice system.     

Restoration and Retribution: How Including Retributive Components Affects the Acceptability of Restorative Justice Procedures

Two studies investigated people’s perceptions of the acceptability of restorative justice procedures for handling crimes that differ in severity. Results from Study 1 supported our hypothesis that as crimes increase in seriousness, people require a restorative justice procedure that also has a possible retributive component (i.e. a prison sentence). Study 1 also demonstrated that individuals assigned lower prison sentences for offenders who successfully completed a restorative procedure as compared to a traditional court procedure. The results from Study 2 replicated those from Study 1, as well as demonstrating that offenders who failed to successfully complete the restorative procedure received no reduction in prison sentence. These findings suggest that in order for citizens to view a restorative justice procedure as an acceptable alternative to the traditional court system for serious crimes, the procedure must allow for the option of some retributive measures.

Are Just-World Beliefs Compatible with Justifying Inequality? Collective Political Efficacy as a Moderator

Previous research demonstrates that the belief in a just world is often accompanied by the justification of social inequality and by low socio-political participation (e.g., Jost and Hunyady, Curr Direct Psychol Sci 14:260–265, 2005). However, studies provide evidence that the relations may be moderated by individual differences such as a person’s self-efficacy expectations to promote justice and equality (Mohiyeddini and Montada, Responses to victimization and belief in a just world, 1998). At the societal level, collective political efficacy has consistently been found to foster political participation (cf. Lee, Int J Public Opin Res 22:392–411, 2010). In our study, we tested whether collective political efficacy may attenuate the negative social impact of the belief in a just world: It is predicted that when collective political efficacy is low, a strong belief in a just world would increase the motivation to justify inequality. By contrast, when collective political efficacy is high, the belief in a just world would not increase, but potentially decrease the motivation to justify inequality. In turn, justification of inequality is expected to negatively affect socio-political participation. Data from 150 university students were analyzed using moderated structural equation modeling. In our study, the expected moderating effect of collective political efficacy on the relation between belief in a just world and justification of inequality was established empirically. When collective political efficacy was high, justification of inequality did not inevitably increase with the belief in a just world. In addition, the impact of belief in a just world on justice-promoting behavior was mediated by justification of inequality. Implications for theory and future research are discussed.