Possibilities for Restorative Justice in Serbia (From Repositioning Restorative Justice, P 239-254, 2003, Lode Walgrave, ed., -- See NCJ-204284)

• NCJ Number: 204294
• Author(s): Vesna Nikolic-Ristanovic
• Date Published: 2003
• Length: 16 pages
• Sale Source: Willan Publishing
• Publication Format: Book (Softbound)
• Publication Type: Case Study
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Drawing on research concerning war violence in Serbia, this chapter explores the possibilities of applying restorative justice practices in Serbia following Milosevic’s rule and offers recommendations for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Abstract

The large-scale victimization brought about by the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia led to public discussion of the possibility of applying a restorative justice approach as one response to the violence in this region. One reason the restorative model may be well suited to the situation in Serbia is because the of the offenders’ denial of the violent crimes committed against members of other ethnic groups. One of the goals of the restorative process is to get offenders to recognize and take responsibility for the harm they caused to the victim. In the process of resolving questions and establishing long-term peace, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established in Serbia. Experiences of restorative justice in societies characterized by a collective victimization and history of violence are reviewed with an emphasis on how these models might be applied in Serbia. Existing models of restorative justice are difficult to apply in Serbia not only because of the denial of atrocities committed against members of other ethnic groups in the region, but also because of a lack of international recognition of the crimes committed against Serbs from Serbia and Serbs from other parts of Yugoslavia. The history of the region and the large-scale cover-up of the crimes and human rights violations committed during Milosevic’s rule present additional challenges to the application of existing models of restorative justice. The socio-historical context of the former Yugoslavia and Serbia is reviewed, followed by an analysis of the ideology and complexity of victimization. Finally, the author offers an appropriate model of truth and reconciliation that rests on 11 key points, which are enumerated and include a focus on victims and gender-based crimes. Notes, references