NCJ Number
204285
Date Published
2003
Length
19 pages
Annotation
This chapter discusses the issue of whether a punishment component has a place in a restorative justice model.
Abstract
If restorative justice is to become something more than just one program on the periphery of the justice system, its proponents need to decide what role punishment plays in a restorative justice model. Some argue that punishment does have a place within restorative justice while others state that punishment has no place in a restorative justice approach. This article considers this debate while putting forth the argument that the restorative justice model should be fully integrated into the current justice system in a way that changes the basic values on which the justice system operates. The key value of a justice system based on a restorative model is the restoration of harm. The author maintains that much of the debate surrounding punishment has been caused by poor definitions of the term “punishment.” The remainder of the chapter presents both sides of the debate surrounding whether punishment has a place in a restorative justice model and offers an extensive definition of punishment that places the intentions of the punisher at the center of the definition. The article presents the two main arguments claiming that punishment does not belong in restorative justice. One argument claims that punishment is an act of coercion and any act of coercion necessarily shifts the restorative justice model to a retribution model of justice. However, some researchers do not consider all coercions to be punishments and do see a place for coercive sanctions in restorative justice. This stance places the punisher’s intentions at the center of the definition of punishment: if the punisher imposes a sanction to bring about restoration and not to cause suffering, the sanction is not considered punishment, but instead is a coercive sanction that fits squarely within the restorative justice model. The two main arguments that contend punishment has a place within restorative justice approaches are next deciphered. One argument claims that punishment within a restorative justice model is appropriate, but should be limited in order to allow the punished to maintain as much “dominion” as possible. The other argument proclaims that retributive punishment can be an integral part of restorative justice, and in fact, restoration after a crime requires punishment. Notes, references