What is Restorative Justice?
Despite the fact that it appears to have just sprung into the public consciousness, restorative justice/restorative practices as an idea is not new. It has been practiced in Indigenous cultures around the world, particularly by the Maori people of New Zealand and by Indigenous folks in North America. It’s important to acknowledge that restorative justice has a history that massively predates its adoption and implementation in the mainstream. It has been adapted by various organisations, especially educational institutions, as a response to behavioral/discipline issues.
What is it?
Folks may have heard this term tossed around, but it can be challenging to find clarity on what exactly restorative justice means and what it can look like in a practical way. Restorative justice is a way to respond to incidents in which harm is caused. As a loosely defined word, harm can mean anything from an offensive verbal comment to theft to physical/sexual assault. The restorative justice approach focuses on accountability, not punitive measures; on active participation, not passive observation; and on direct communication.
In order to understand restorative justice, it is important to know the three questions the practice is focused on:
· Who has been harmed and how?
· Who is responsible for causing the harm?
· What can be done to repair the harm? How can the person who caused harm be accountable for their actions?
Restorative justice aims to answer these questions without resorting to a criminal justice system involving charges, lawyers, judges, and sentencing. In a restorative process, the focus is not on discovering whether or not a crime was committed or whether or not an incident happened; instead, the focus is on the harm caused and what can be done to repair that harm.
How does it work?
Restorative justice is a process that only works when all parties involved are actively engaged in the process and have chosen to be present. Restorative justice should not be forced upon someone – it requires a level of openness and vulnerability that necessitates an active decision to be present. Folks may be more open to restorative justice because it usually does not create a criminal record, allows for greater participation and contributions to determining outcomes, and can provide greater healing and closure for the harmed party.
Restorative justice is predicated on the fact that the person who caused harm acknowledges that they have caused harm. It is important to note that “causing harm” is not the same as “broke the law” “violated the policy” or anything else like that. It simply means the person acknowledge that their actions caused harm to someone else. If the responsible party disputes the fact that harm was caused or that they did those actions, restorative justice is no longer an option.
If all parties in a situation want to move forward with a restorative practice, there are several options that can have different kinds of outcomes and procedures:
· Circle process – A circle process is one in which there is a structured way of the parties communicating about the harm that has been caused. There will be 1-2 facilitators and parties can bring in other folks to support them. Circle process can also involve other members of the community who have been impacted by the incident (for instance, family members of the main parties involved or other community members). In a circle process, each participant has an opportunity to share how the incident impacted them, what they feel would repair the harm, and what decisions led to the incident.
Circle processes are more ceremonial in nature, utilizing opening and closing ceremonies, as well as a talking piece of significance to the parties involved. As suggested by its name, when questions are asked in a circle process, the talking piece will be passed around and each participant will have an opportunity to answer; the emphasis is on listening to each other and circle process is less discussion-based.
· Shuttling – in a shuttling process, the parties have decided to communicate only indirectly through a facilitator. Both parties meet separately with a facilitator who “shuttles” the information between them. Shuttling is often used in cases of extreme harm, such as a sexual assault, in which parties do not feel comfortable or safe to talk to each other in person and/or directly. In a shuttling process, participants may also feel more willing to be more open and honest, since they are only talking with the facilitator. Through the facilitator, the parties will come to an agreement as to what outcomes will be implemented to reduce or repair the harm caused.
· Conferencing – A restorative conference is similar to a circle process. Conferencing does not involve opening/closing ceremonies or a talking piece and may be more discussion based in nature. This allows for conversations to flow and happen organically, though a conference does still have a specific structure to it. A facilitator will take participants through the steps, with the goal of assessing the best way of repairing the harm that is caused.
Why does it work?
Restorative justice is a helpful tool because it emphasizes working with people. As can be seen in the above, called the Social Discipline Window, restorative justice has both high control and high support for participants. The process is structured, but empowering. Participants feel that they have a say in sharing their perspectives, as well as a much greater say in the outcome. Collectively deciding on outcomes is something that can be empowering and lead to greater accountability for the responsible party and greater healing/closure for the harmed party.
Restorative justice is a participatory process that encourages growth and development in all parties. Restorative justice encourages healing, accountability, processing, and support, which can often be lacking in the criminal justice system. Restorative justice seeks to embrace the humanity in all people, understand the context out of which harmful behavior occurs, and seek redress in a way specific to the incident at hand. Restorative practices allow responsible parties to take accountability and participate in their own personal growth; in more punitive systems, the responsible party has much less agency and simply receives outcomes determined by others.
Research on restorative justice has indicated its’ effectiveness. Reduced recidivism has been seen, as well as greater empowerment and healing for the harmed party. Both parties also have an increase in the perception of the process being fair and just, compared to a criminal process. It should be noted, however, that research into the effectiveness of restorative practices is still very much in early stages and extensive research is ongoing.
When should it be used?
One thing I find amazing about restorative justice is that the practices/ideas can be used in almost any situation. When thinking about an organisation, any kind of discipline or reprimand process can be done in a restorative way, or with some restorative elements. Interpersonal and team conflicts can be mediated and mitigated using restorative practices. Restorative options can be offered as a dispute resolution mechanism when formal complaints are made (though never required—as noted above, all participants need to be willing and engage voluntarily).
Capacity for restorative practices will vary based on institution and the practices should not be attempted prior to receiving specific training on facilitating conferences, shuttling, or circles. However, it is possible to be creative about inserting aspects of restorative practices into current dispute resolution mechanisms. For instance, reporting parties can be asked what kinds of outcomes they would want to see from their report. Additionally, responding parties could be asked what kinds of outcomes they think are relevant for the case as well. It is also possible to adapt dispute structures to include the responding party more deliberately. They can be invited in to discussions about responsibility and accountability, instead of having a committee make decisions about them behind closed doors, with no input from them.
Restorative practices can also be used in our personal lives! We can use the ideas and the 3 questions noted at the beginning of the post to think through our own conflicts, especially situations in which we feel that we have been harmed in some way. It can be a way to invite accountability, vulnerability and openness into our relationships with others. Restorative practices are particularly useful in situations in which we have experienced harm but also want to maintain a relationship with the person who harmed us.
Getting Started
There is a lot to learn and understand when it comes to restorative justice and restorative practices. The first thing to do is to read, read, read! There is an abundance of great resources online, including many great books, to start self-educating on this topic.
When considering implementing restorative justice in an organisation, training sessions and workshops are necessary. It is important to gain experience and knowledge from those who have practiced the concepts before, and hear directly how it can work in practice. Trainers can also help to adapt the practice to specific organisations and structures.
If you want to learn more, please reach out to andrew@tridenttraining.co! I have been trained in restorative practices facilitation and training and am able to both provide trainings on restorative practices as well as facilitate them
