Suchergebnisse

The second edition of this renowned text explores the implications of developments in the restorative justice campaign to provide a feasible and desirable alternative to mainstream thinking on matters of crime and justice. It includes a new chapter identifying and analyzing fundamental shifts and developments in restorative justice thinking over the last decade.

"Restorative Justice is one of the most talked about developments in the field of crime and justice. Its advocates and practitioners argue that state punishment, society's customary response to crime, neither meets the needs of crime victims nor prevents reoffending. In its place, they suggest, should be restorative justice, in which families and communities of offenders encourage them to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions, express repentance and repair the harm they have done. First published in 2002, Restorative Justice: Ideas, Values, Debates is renowned worldwide as an accessible, balanced and invaluable analysis of the argument that restorative justice can provide an attractive alternative to traditional responses to crime. The second edition includes a new chapter identifying and analysing fundamental shifts and developments in restorative justice thinking over the last decade. It suggests that the campaign for restorative justice has not only grown rapidly in the last decade, but has also changed in its focus and character. What started as a campaign to revolutionise criminal justice has evolved into a social movement that aspires to implant restorative values into the fabric of everyday life. This new edition explores the implications of this development for restorative justice's claim to provide a feasible and desirable alternative to mainstream thinking on matters of crime and justice"--

AbstractA profound change has occurred, during the last half century, in patterns and strategies for handling crime in modern societies. During the same period, the campaign for restorative justice has increasingly influenced penal policy and practice. In stories about correctional change, these developments are often linked by suggestions that the success of the campaign for restorative justice puts in question notions that we are experiencing relentless penal regression. This article argues for a different narrative, in which the rise of restorative justice is located within a broader disenchantment with large‐scale, institutionalised ways of handling crime.

Recently, a new approach to penal policy making has emerged in the UK and elsewhere. An elitist model is giving way to a more populist model, in which governments consult ordinary people, especially those living in areas undermined by crime and disorder, before formulating and implementing policies to tackle crime. This trend has been accompanied by a continuing drift towards less tolerant and harsher policies. This article proposes a critical response to this phenomenon. There is little point, it suggests, in yearning for a return to the elitist model. Rather, what is required is a move in the opposite direction, i.e. towards a more participatory style of policy making. A participatory crime policy would not necessarily be intolerant and repressive. To the contrary, participation is likely to develop and foster the very qualities people need to imagine, formulate and implement more rational responses to escalating rates of crime, violence and disorder. Some principles and ideas which could inform the development of a more participatory crime policy are outlined.

This paper introduces a special issue of Social & Legal Studies devoted to the topic of 'Repairing Historical Wrongs'. In recent decades, both scholars and activists have given increasing consideration to various legal and ethical obligations which can arise as a consequence of serious acts of injustice committed by previous generations and/or political regimes. Many of these efforts to repair historical wrongs pose a challenge to established models of legal responsibility and corrective justice. To help make sense of the core issues at stake, we have divided the paper into four sections, starting with an analysis of the limitations of existing avenues for legal redress, and the types of arguments that have emerged in response to these limitations. From here, we go on to consider the ethics and mechanics of institutional and individual inheritance, paying particular attention to a widespread tendency to treat assets and accomplishments as collective goods, while reducing wrongdoing to individual acts. This is followed by a snapshot of potential remedies, in which we identity three key modes of reparation: financial restitution, apologies and holistic approaches. Finally, we consider the political dynamics surrounding the representation of specific cases as 'historical wrongs', and the potential consequences associated with this approach to the past.