What is it about?
Laws do not exist in a vacuum. They are born and contextualised within the given society that they are meant to regulate. In November 2015, the Victims’ Directive came into force to strengthen the position of the victim in criminal proceedings. Within this regional law, restorative justice is regulated so that it is provided safely, consistently and according to standards. Here, the author identifies a paradox.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
One of the key reasons that restorative justice resurfaced was to empower all those involved in harm to face what happened and collectively find a way forward. Restorative practices have so far been dominated by Christie's understanding of the ‘ideal victim’ versus the big bad offender. This paper attempts to challenge this approach by arguing that as equal parties in conflict and harm, the labels of ‘victim’ and ‘offender’ must be reconsidered if the benefits of restorative justice are to be fully enjoyed. Abolitionism, however, is not the way forward.
Perspectives
As the restorative justice movement leaves the era of innovation and enters the new reality of integration, the author proposes a new restorative justice paradigm of co-existence with existing criminal justice priorities.
Dr Theo Gavrielides
Restorative Justice for All International Institute
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Collapsing the labels ‘victim’ and ‘offender’ in the Victims’ Directive and the paradox of restorative justice, Restorative Justice, September 2017, Taylor & Francis,
DOI: 10.1080/20504721.2017.1390998.
You can read the full text:
Resources
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
