PROPOSING RESTORATIVE JUSTICE MODELS AS ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO ADDRESSING CRIMINAL MATTERS: A CASE STUDY OF JUDICIAL SYSTEMS IN CIVIL AND COMMON LAW COUNTRIES
1. Introduction. – 2. Methods and Materials. – 3. Discussion. – 3.1. Critical theories and principles influencing the legal foundations of restorative justice. – 3.2. Essential legal instruments for establishing a restorative justice framework. – 3.3. Proposing restorative justice models for unestablished judicial systems. – 3.3.1. Victim-offender mediation. – 3.3.2. Community reparative boards model. – 3.3.3. Family group conferencing model. – 3.3.4. Circle sentencing model. – 4. Conclusions.
Abstract
Background: In recent years, restorative justice has emerged as a mechanism to enhance the
involvement of victims in criminal proceedings. Its primary objective is to repair the damage
caused by the offence, acknowledging it as a genuine injury in need of healing. While criminal
proceedings might vary across jurisdictions based on fundamental principles of human rights,
the broader aim is to offer a more comprehensive response to crime, aiming not only to punish
but also to reform offenders and reduce future criminal behaviour.
Methods: This qualitative study employed a descriptive, analytical method, utilising case
studies and comparative analysis to explore restorative justice models in established judicial
systems and their applicability to unestablished framework countries. By analysing and
synchronising secondary materials, the research aimed to provide in-depth insights into
successful practices and potential adaptations.
Results and conclusions: The results reveal that several restorative justice models have been
developed all over the world to align with the legal, socio-political, and cultural contexts of
different regions and jurisdictions, such as Canada, New Zealand, and Norway. Despite the
variety of restorative justice models, this exploratory study scrutinised four non-adversarial
decision-making models: victim-offender mediation, community reparative boards, family
group conferencing, and circle sentencing. These four models illustrate an alternative approach
to community involvement in crime response, emphasising the diversity and shared themes of
community engagement in sanctioning processes. The results offer resourceful guidelines for
unestablished judicial systems like Vietnam to choose models best suited to specific needs.
About Authors
Oanh Thi Cao
Ph.D. (Law), Associate Professor, Faculty of Criminal Law, Hanoi Law University, Hanoi,
Vietnam
oanhhs@hlu.edu.vn
Corresponding author, responsible for conceptualization, methodology, resources,
investigation and writing – original draft.
Tuan Van Vu
Ph.D. (Foreign Languages), Lecturer, Faculty of Legal Foreign Languages, Hanoi Law
University, Hanoi, Vietnam
tuanvv@hlu.edu.vn
Co-author, responsible for writing – review & editing.
Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Disclaimer: The authors declare that their opinion and views expressed in this manuscript
are free of any impact of any organizations.
References
1. Barnes GC and others, ‘Are Restorative Justice Conferences More Fair than Criminal
Courts? Comparing Levels of Observed Procedural Justice in the Reintegrative Shaming
Experiments (RISE)’ (2015) 26(2) Criminal Justice Policy Review 103,
doi:10.1177/0887403413512671.
2. Bazemore G and Schiff M, Juvenile Justice Reform and Restorative Justice (Routledge 2013).
3. Bennett S, Hine L and Mazerolle L, ‘Procedural Justice’ in Oxford Bibliographies (OUP
2018) doi:10.1093/OBO/9780195396607-0241.
4. Bolitho J, ‘Putting Justice Needs First: A Case Study of Best Practice in Restorative
Justice’ (2015) 3(2) Restorative Justice 256, doi:10.1080/20504721.2015.1069531.
5. Bolitho J and Bruce J, ‘Science, Art and Alchemy: Best Practice in Facilitating
Restorative Justice’ (2017) 20(3) Contemporary Justice Review 336,
doi:10.1080/10282580.2017.1348896.
6. Bolívar D, Restoring Harm: A Psychosocial Approach to Victims and Restorative Justice
(Routledge 2019).
7. Borton IM and Paul GD, ‘Problematizing the Healing Metaphor of Restorative Justice’
(2015) 18(3) Contemporary Justice Review 257, doi:10.1080/10282580.2015.1057704.
8. Braithwaite J, Crime, Shame and Reintegration (CUP 1989) doi:10.1017/
CBO9780511804618.
9. Burford G and Pennell J, ‘Family Group Decision Making and Family Violence’ in
Burford G and Hudson J (eds), Family Group Conferencing: New Directions in
Community-Centered Child and Family Practice (Aldine de Gruyter 2000) 171,
doi:10.4324/9780203792186-20.
10. Burnett N, Burnett N and Thorsborne M, Restorative Practice and Special Needs: A Practical
Guide to Working Restoratively with Young People (Jessica Kingsley Publ 2015).
11. Calhoun A and Pelech W, ‘Responding to Young People Responsible for Harm: A
Comparative Study of Restorative and Conventional Approaches’ (2010) 13(3)
Contemporary Justice Review 287, doi:10.1080/10282580.2010.498238.
12. Cao TO, ‘International Standards and Experience of Some Countries on Restorative
Justice’ (2019) 7 Jurisprudence Journal Hanoi Law University 68.
13. Caulfield SL, ‘Peacemaking Criminology: Introduction and Implications for the
Intersection of Race, Class, and Gender’ in Milovanovic D and Schwartz MD (eds),
Race, Gender, and Class in Criminology: The Intersections (Routledge 1997) 91,
doi:10.4324/9781315864259.
14. Chapman T, Laxminarayan M and Vanspauwen K (eds), Manual on Restorative Justice
Values and Standards for Practice (EFRJ 2021).
15. Dandurand Y, Vogt and Lee JA(J), Handbook on Restorative Justice Programmes
(Criminal Justice Handbook Series, 2nd edn, UNODC 2020) 4.
16. Decker MR and others, ‘Defining Justice: Restorative and Retributive Justice Goals
Among Intimate Partner Violence Survivors’ (2022) 37(5-6) Journal of Interpersonal
Violence 2844, doi:10.1177/0886260520943728.
17. Do HY, ‘Restorative Justice in Dealing with Juveniles Committed the Crime’ (2008)
20(136) Vietnamese Journal of Legislative Research 23.
18. Donner C and others, ‘Policing and Procedural Justice: A State-of-the-art review’ (2015)
38(1), Policing: An International Journal 153, doi:10.1108/PIJPSM-12-2014-0129.
19. Hallam M, Victim Initiated Restorative Justice: Restoring the Balance: Final Report of
the UK Pilot Project (Restorative Justice at the Post Sentencing Level Supporting and
Protecting Victims, Thames Valley Probation; Victim Support June 2015).
20. Jeffries S, Wood WR and Russell T, ‘Adult Restorative Justice and Gendered Violence:
Practitioner and Service Provider Viewpoints from Queensland, Australia’ (2021) 10(1)
Laws 13, doi:10.3390/laws10010013.
21. Johnstone G, ‘Towards a “Justice Agenda” for Restorative Justice’ (2014) 2(2)
Restorative Justice 115, doi:10.5235/20504721.2.2.115.
22. Kimbrell CS, Wilson DB and Olaghere A, ‘Restorative Justice Programs and Practices
in Juvenile Justice: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis for Effectiveness’
(2023) 22(1) Criminology & Public Policy 161, doi:10.1111/1745-9133.12613.
23. Klenowski PM, ‘Peacemaking Criminology: Etiology of Crime or Philosophy of Life?’
(2009) 12(2) Contemporary Justice Review 207, doi:10.1080/10282580902879344.
24. Lanterman JL, ‘Models Versus Mechanisms: The Need to Crack the Black Box of
Restorative Justice’ (2021) 17(1) British Journal of Community Justice 60.
25. Long-Sutehall T, Sque M and Addington-Hall J, ‘Secondary Analysis of Qualitative
Data: A Valuable Method for Exploring Sensitive Issues with an Elusive Population?’
(2010) 16(4) Journal of Research in Nursing 335, doi:10.1177/1744987110381553.
26. Maglione G, ‘Restorative Justice and the State. Untimely Objections Against the
Institutionalization of Restorative Justice’ (2021) 17(1) British Journal of Community
Justice 4.
27. Moloney J, ‘Peacemaking Criminology’ (2009) 5 Undergraduate Review 78.
28. Nagin DS and Telep CW, ‘Procedural Justice and Legal Compliance’ (2017) 13 Annual
Review of Law and Social Science 5, doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113310.
29. Nascimento AM, Andrade J and Castro Rodrigues A, ‘The Psychological Impact of
Restorative Justice Practices on Victims of Crimes-a Systematic Review’ (2023) 24(3)
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 1929, doi:10.1177/15248380221082085.
30. Paul GD, ‘The Influence of Belief in Offender Redeemability and Decision-Making
Competence on Receptivity to Restorative Justice’ (2021) 14(1) Negotiation and
Conflict Management Research 1, doi:10.1111/ncmr.12176.
31. Paul GD and Swan EC, ‘Receptivity to Restorative Justice: A Survey of Goal Importance,
Process Effectiveness, and Support for Victim-Offender Conferencing’ (2018) 36(2)
Conflict Resolution Quarterly 145, doi:10.1002/crq.21238.
32. Pepinsky H, ‘Peacemaking Criminology’ (2013) 21 Critical Criminology 319,
doi:10.1007/s10612-013-9193-4.
33. Pepinsky HE and Quinney R, Criminology as Peacemaking (Indiana UP 1991).
34. Piggott E and Wood W, ‘Does Restorative Justice Reduce Recidivism? Assessing
Evidence and Claims about Restorative Justice and Reoffending’ in Gavrielides T (ed),
Routledge International Handbook of Restorative Justice (Routledge 2019) 359.
35. Saulnier A and Sivasubramaniam D, ‘Restorative Justice: Underlying Mechanisms and
Future Directions’ (2015) 18(4) New Criminal Law Review 510, doi:10.1525/
nclr.2015.18.4.510.
36. Scheuerman HL and Keith S, ‘Experiencing Shame: How Does Gender Affect the
Interpersonal Dynamics of Restorative Justice?’ (2022) 17(1) Feminist Criminology 116,
doi:10.1177/ 15570851211034556.
37. Sherman LW and others, ‘Are Restorative Justice Conferences Effective in Reducing
Repeat Offending? Findings from a Campbell Systematic Review’ (2015) 31 Journal of
Quantitative Criminology 1, doi:10.1007/s10940-014-9222-9.
38. Suzuki M, ‘From ‘What Works’ to ‘How It Works’ in Research on Restorative Justice
Conferencing: The Concept of Readiness’ (2020) 3(3) The International Journal of
Restorative Justice 356, doi:10.5553/ijrj.000049.
39. Suzuki M and Yuan X, ‘How Does Restorative Justice Work? A Qualitative
Metasynthesis’ (2021) 48(10) Criminal Justice and Behavior 1347, doi:10.1177/
0093854821994622.
40. Tiarks E, ‘Restorative Justice, Consistency and Proportionality: Examining the Trade-
off’ (2019) 38(2) Criminal Justice Ethics 103, doi:10.1080/0731129X.2019.1638597.
41. Tran TM, ‘Restorative Justice and Some Restorative Justice Programs Around the
World’ (2023) 23 Vietnam trade and industry review https://tapchicongthuong.vn/tu-
phap-phuc-hoi-va-mot-so-chuong-trinh-tu-phap-phuc-hoi-tren-the-gioi-115433.htm
accessed 10 June 2024.
42. Tyler T, ‘Procedural Justice and Policing: A Rush to Judgment?’ (2017) 13 Annual
Review of Law and Social Science 29, doi:10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-110316-113318.
43. Van Camp T and Wemmers JA, ‘Victims’ Reflections on the Protective and Proactive
Approaches to the Offer of Restorative Justice: The Importance of Information’ (2016)
58(3) Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 415, doi:10.3138/
cjccj.2015.E03.
44. Van Ness DW and others, Restoring Justice: An Introduction to Restorative Justice (6th
edn, Routledge 2022) doi:10.4324/9781003159773.
45. Walgrave L and others, ‘Why Restorative Justice Matters for Criminology’ (2013) 1(2)
Restorative Justice 159, doi:10.5235/20504721.1.2.159.
46. Wallis P, Understanding Restorative Justice: How Empathy Can Close the Gap Created
by Crime (Bristol UP 2014) doi:10.2307/j.ctt1t89gbn.
47. Wood WR and Suzuki M, ‘Getting to Accountability in Restorative Justice’ [2024]
Victims & Offenders doi:10.1080/15564886.2024.2333304.
48. Wood WR, Suzuki M and Hayes H, ‘Restorative Justice in Youth and Adult Criminal
Justice’ in Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology (OUP 2022) doi:10.1093/
acrefore/9780190264079.013.658.
49. Wozniak JF, ‘C Wright Mills and Higher Immorality: Implications for Corporate
Crime, Ethics, and Peacemaking Criminology’ (2009) 51(1) Crime, Law and Social
Change 189, doi:10.1007/s10611-008-9151-3.
50. Zinsstag E and Vanfraechem I (eds), Conferencing and Restorative Justice: International
Practices and Perspectives (OUP 2012).
Reviews for article
Add a Review
Publication history
-
Date of submission: 20 Jul 2024
Date of acceptance: 26 Aug 2024
Date of Online First publication: 21 Sep 2024
Date of publication: 15 Nov 2024
Whether the manuscript was fast tracked? - No
Number of reviewer report submitted in first round: 2 reports
Number of revision rounds: 2 rounds, revised version submitted 14 Aug 2024
How to cite it?
-
Thi Cao O and Van Vu T, ‘Proposing Restorative Justice Models as Alternative Approaches to Addressing Criminal Matters: a Case Study of Judicial Systems in Civil and Common Law Countries’ (2024) 7(4) Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 93-119 <https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-7.4-a000108>
