Comparative Restorative Justice

What is it about?

This edited collection will take the first step in presenting evidence of restorative justice theory and practice comparatively. The book’s aim is to compare the implementation and theoretical development of restorative justice using three different criteria that will also reflect the volume’s structure. First, it compares restorative practices in relation to their implementing environment let that be cultural, political or societal. Second, it looks at obstacles and enablers in relation to the criminal justice system and whether inquisitorial versus adversarial jurisdictions impact on how restorative justice is regulated and implemented. Finally, Part III compares the reasons that drive governments, regional bodies and practitioners to implement restorative justice and whether these impetuses impact on ultimate delivery.

Featured Image

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

Why is it important?

Restorative justice was reborn in the 1970s as a reaction to the current criminal justice system’s failures. It has now taken considerable dimensions in research, policy and practice internationally. While some countries adopt restorative justice through the legal system and legislation, others have found it difficult to pull its practices out of the shadows. Restorative practices have also been criticised for being inconsistent, unevaluated and over-rated. The reasons behind the inconsistent application of restorative justice as well as what makes it a successful option for conflict resolution remain largely unexplored. This question is now becoming a serious obstacle for international policy makers such as the European Commission, the UN and the Council of Europe, as they promote regional laws and policies to roll out restorative justice in their member states. Furthermore, a number of countries have been trying to “reinvent the wheel” when implementing restorative justice. Very little cross learning has taken place especially in the form of comparative restorative justice policy and practice.