Revisiting the Relationship Between Retributive and Restorative Justice

• NCJ Number: 183517
• Author(s): Kathleen Daly
• Date Published: 1999
• Length: 34 pages
• Sale Source: Griffith University
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
• Language: English
• Country: Australia
• Note: Revised paper presented at the Restorative Justice and Civil Society Conference, 1999, Australian National University, Canberra. To appear in Restorative Justice: From Philosophy to Practice, (forthcoming, 2000), edited by Heather Strang and John Braithwaite. Aldershot: Dartmouth

Annotation

This essay addresses the role of punishment in restorative justice and identifies key differences between retributive and restorative justice.

Abstract

Punishment is the main activity of the state's response to crime, and restorative justice should be viewed as an alternative punishment rather than as an alternative to punishment. The author believes that the retributive-restorative justice oppositional contrast is wrong to a certain extent and that philosophical arguments and empirical evidence suggest a complex meshing of censure, symbolic reparation, restorative processes, and justice. She also identifies ethical problems in the practice of restorative justice and lists differences between retributive and restorative justice. In retributive justice, victims are peripheral to the process, the focus is on punishing or treating an offender, the community is represented by the state, and the process is characterized by adversarial relationships among the parties. In restorative justice, victims are central to the process, the focus is on repairing the harm between an offender and a victim, community members and organizations take a more active role, and the process is characterized by dialogue and negotiation among the parties. 44 references, 26 notes, and 2 tables