Principles of
Restorative Justice
Wednesday, July 25, 2001
Presented by:
Gordon Bazemore, Ph.D., Project Director, Balanced and
Restorative Justice Project, Community Justice Institute,
Florida Atlantic University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL

t
en
m
op
el
ev
yD
nc
te
Accountability
pe
m
Co
n
tio
ec
ot
Pr
ity
un
m
m
Co

What is a “Balance?”

Balancing Stakeholder Needs
Victim and family/ support group
Offender and family/ support group
Community
Juvenile Justice System

Crime Is More Than Lawbreaking
It also damages relationships.

What’s NEW about Restorative
Justice?
NEW Values
NEW Stakeholders
New Decisionmaking Processes
NEW Performance Objectives
NEW Programs and Practices
NEW Staff Roles, Resource Allocation, and
Management Approaches

Three Principles of Restorative
Justice?

Paradigms of Justice –
OLD & NEW
Crime and Reaction
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
Crime is an act against
Crime is an act against
another person and the
the state, a violation of a
community.
law, or an abstract idea.
Punishment alone is not
Punishment is effective
effective in changing
a. The threat of punishment
behavior and is disruptive
deters crime
to community
b. Punishment changes relationships.
behavior
Crime control lies primarily
The criminal justice in the community.
system controls crime.
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)

Paradigms of Justice –
OLD & NEW
The Process
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
Focus on repair of social
One social injury
injury
replaced by another
Dialogue and negotiation
Adversarial relationship is
emphasized
primary
Focus on problem solving,
Focus on establishing
on liabilities/obligations,
blame or guilt on past
on future (what should
(did he/she do it?)
be done?)
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)

Paradigms of Justice –
OLD & NEW
Victims and Community
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
Victims are peripheral to Victims are central to the
the process. process.
Community on sideline, Community as facilitator
represented abstractly by in restorative process.
state.
Restitution as a means of
Imposition of pain to restoring both parties;
punish and deter/prevent. goal of
reconciliation/restoration.
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)

Paradigms of Justice –
OLD & NEW
The Offender
Retributive Justice Restorative Justice
Offender accountability Accountability defined as
defined as taking taking responsibility and
punishment. taking action to repair
harm.
The offender is defined
by deficits. The offender is defined by
the capacity to make
No encouragement for reparation.
repentance and
Possibilities for forgiveness.
forgiveness.
*Adapted from Zehr (1990)

Principle 1 - REPAIR
Justice requires that
w e w ork to heal
victims, communities,
and offenders w ho
have been injured by
crime
THREE RJ PRINCIPLES

Defining “REPAIR”
Four dimensions:
1. Fixing What Is Broken/Damaged – Compensating
Those Harmed
2. Stakeholder Satisfaction
3. Reintegration of Victim and Offender with
Community
4. Peace-Building and Relationship Building
- Conflict transformed and resolved by key stakeholders
- Connections made or strengthened between
victim/offender/community

“ Victims frequently want longer time for
offenders because we haven’t given
them anything else. Or because we don’t
ask, we don’t know what they want. So
[the system] gives them door Number
One or Two, when what they really want
is behind Door Number 3 or 4.”
~ Mary Achilles

Restorative Accountability

Accountability is NOT:

Restorative Accountability
“How Do We Know It When We See It?”
The sanctioning process produces
accountability w hen it ensures that:
Offenders take responsibility
for the crime and understand
the hurt caused to the victim.

Restorative Accountability
“How Do We Know It When We See It?”
Offenders take action to make
amends to the victim by restoring
the loss.
Victims and communities have an active
role in the sanctioning process by
recommending obligations and by
monitoring, mentoring, and
supporting compliance.

Restorative Accountability
“How Do We Know It When We See It?”
Communities support offenders who
earn it by taking responsibility for
completing obligations.
All stakeholders and the
system place emphasis on
the wrong done and the
obligation to make it right.

Reconnecting…
Crime weakens Offender
relationships
Co
mm
ctim
Vi un
Victim
ity
Community Offender
Restorative justice
reconnects

“if you are dealing with people whose
relationships have been built on power and
abuse, you must actually show them, then give
them the experience of, relationships based on
respect…[so]…the healing process must involve
a healthy group of people, as opposed to single
therapists. A single therapist cannot, by
definition, do more than talk about healthy
relationships.”

Asking Different Questions
What is the harm?
What needs to be done to repair
the harm?
Who is responsible for this
repair?

Principle 2 - Involvement
Victims, communities
and offenders should
have opportunities for
active involvement in
the justice process as
early and as fully as
possible.
THREE RJ PRINCIPLES

Restorative Justice Conferencing
Models
I ncreasing Stakeholder
Decisionmaking I nputs:
Family Group Conferencing
Reparative or Accountability Boards
Sentencing and Peacemaking Circles
Victim Offender Dialogue (Mediation)
Community Conferencing
Merchant Accountability Boards

Mutually Exclusive Interests
Offender Victim
Interests Interests
Community
Interests

Finding Common Ground
Offender Victim
Community

Principle 3 – Changing Community/
System Roles & Relationships
We must re-think the relative
role and responsibilities of the
government and the
community. Government is
responsible for preserving
order. The community is
responsible for establishing
peace.
THREE RJ PRINCIPLES

“Crime (control and prevention) should never be the
sole, or even primary business of the State if real
differences are sought in the well being of individuals,
families and communities.
The structure, procedures, and evidentiary rules of the
formal criminal justice process coupled with most justice
officials’ lack of knowledge and connection to (the
parties) effected by crime, preclude the state from
acting alone to achieve transformative changes.”
~ Judge Barry Stuart

“Children grow up in communities, not programs.
Development is most strongly influence by those
with the most intensive, long-term contact with
children and youth – family, informal networks,
community organizations, churches, synagogues,
temple, mosques and schools. Development is
not achieved only through services, but also
through supports, networks and opportunities.

What IS “Community”?
Geographically defined units (cities, towns)
Families and extended families
Religious congregations
Schools and colleges
Workplace
Union locals
Clubs, lodges, hobby groups
Professional groups
Political groups or parties
Voluntary groups, e.g., youth service organizations
Neighborhoods From: John Gardner, On Leadership

Why IT Works
Grounded/Community Theory in the Case of
Neighborhood accountability boards
“We aren’t getting paid to do this.”
“We can exercise the authority that parents have lost.”
“We live in their community.”
“We give them input into the contract.”
“We are a group of adult neighbors who care about them.”
“They hear about the harm
from real human beings –
us and the victims.”
“We follow up.”

“Where subtle methods of social
regulation and control have been
transformed or forgotten, the state is
required to intervene with unsubtle
methods of arrest and incarceration. (The
State) may continue to promote collective
norms, but…ultimately lacks the emotional
resources to maintain – let alone
strengthen – the moral order.”
~ David Moore

(Formal justice system procedures)
“deprive people of opportunities to
practice skills of apology and
forgiveness, or reconciliation,
restitution, and reparation . . . The
modern state appears to have
deprived civil society of opportunities
to learn important political and social
skills.
~ David Moore

Restorative Justice: Redefining the
Government’s Role
Traditional Restorative
Justice System Justice System
(Justice Intervention)
(Justice Intervention)
Community
Offender
Offender Victim
Services
Surveillance Facilitation
Sanction Community Building

Community & The Justice System:
The Changing Relationship
Justice system operates separately from the community
Justice system provides more information to the community
about its activities.
Justice system provides information to the community about
its activities and asks for information from the community.
Justice system asks for guidance from the community,
recognizes a need for community help, and places more
activities in the community.
Justice system follows community leadership.

Justice System and Communities: An
Evolving Relationship
Justice System Operates Separately From,
Independent of, the Community
Specifics:
Expert model, “We (justice system) have the
answers.”
Community contact a nuisance, gets in the way
of real work
Professional system defines and solves the problem
Source: Kay Pranis, Minnesota Department of Corrections

Justice System and Communities: An
Evolving Relationship
Justice System Follows Community Leadership While
Monitoring Community Process
Specifics:
Expert systems as support systems
Justice system operates in support of community in
achieving community goals while protecting rights of
individuals and ensuring fairness
Community defines and solves problems with help
from justice system

“…communities should not measure the
success of any…community based
initiative upon what happens to the
offender…
(Rather, they should measure)…the
impact of community based initiatives on
victims, strengthening families, building
connections within the community, on
enforcing community values, on
mobilizing community action to make the
community safer…”
~ Judge Barry Stuart

“So we make mistakes – can you say – you (the current
system) don’t make mistakes…if you don’t think you do,
walk through our community, every family will have
something to teach you…By getting involved, by all of us
taking responsibility, it is not that we won’t make
mistakes…
But we would be doing it together, as a community
instead of having it done for us. We need to find peace
within our lives…in our communities. We need to make
real differences in the way people act and the way we
treat others…Only if we empower them and support
them can they break out of this trap…”
~ Rose Couch, Community Justice Coordinator

What’s NEW about Restorative
Justice?
NEW Values
NEW Stakeholders
New Decisionmaking Processes
NEW Performance Objectives
NEW Programs and Practices
NEW Staff Roles, Resource Allocation, and
Management Approaches

Objective – Conflict Resolution,
Prevention, & Peacemaking
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
• Community mediation
• Alternative dispute
resolution
LOCATION
• School and
•
neighborhood Schools
conferencing
• Neighborhoods
• Victim awareness
• Churches
education
• Civic groups
• Youth development

Objective – Victim/Community Input to
Court/Formal Decisionmaking
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
• Written/ oral impact
LOCATION
statement to court or
•
other entity Court
• Probation
• Residential facility

Objective –to formalDecisionmaking
Provide Court Process
Alternative
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
• Family group
conferencing
LOCATION
• Victim offender
•
dialogue Police/community
diversion
• Peacemaking and
•
sentencing circles Court diversion
• •
Reparative board, etc. Dispositional/sentencing
alternative, etc.

Objective –toProvide or Harmful Behavior in
Reparative Sanctions
Response Crime
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
• Restitution
• Community service
LOCATION
• Service to
• Diversion
victims/surrogate
victims
• Court sanction
• Payment to victim
• Probation condition
• Residential program
• Post incarceration

Objective – Offender Treatment/
Rehabilitation/Education
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
LOCATION
• Victim impact panels
• Probation
• Victim awareness
•
education Residential facilities
• •
Community service Diversion program
learning projects
• Jails
• Strengthening
relationships with law-
abiding citizens

Objectiveand Support
– Victim
Services
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
• Counseling
LOCATION
• Volunteer support
• Multiple settings
group
• Faith community
outreach

Objective – Community Building
RESTORATIVE PRACTICE
• Neighborhood
LOCATION
discussion groups
• Neighborhood and
community

Restorative Justice Theories-in-
use
Equity/Exchange Theory
Accepting responsibility
Making things right
Repair…fixing what’s broken
Restoring Balance
Earned Redemption

Restorative Justice Theories-in-
use
Interpersonal Dialogue
Empowering and giving “voice” to
victims and other Stakeholders
Gaining information and reassurance
Apology and acknowledgement of
harm and wrongdoing
Human connection
Expression of feeling/emotions –
process over outcome

Restorative Justice Theories-in-
use
Reintegrating Shaming
1. Individual Level
- Denounce the behavior, not the offender
- Strong disapproved of act and norm affirmation, with expression of
support for offenders and victim by family and others who matter to
them
- Avoid stigmatizing “shaming”…voice of victim is sufficient to induce
feelings of shame in offender
- Community members committed to reintegration of offender and victim
2. Community/ Collective Level
- Low crime communities are those where people don’t mind their
own business
- Community members set limits on behavior and provide informal
social control without exclusion

Restorative Justice Theories-in-
use
Community Healing/Capacity Building
Collective responsibility for crime and repair/healing
Inclusion and connection important in their own right
The resolution and healing lies in the group
Sanctioning, rehabilitation, community safety
interventions seamless and integrated – blurred
distinctions between quality of life, community
needs, criminal justice and social justice
Emphasis on private and parochial control and
mutual support vs. professionals and justice system
– “community as driver”

FIGURE 3:
Percentage of Counties with Restorative Conferencing/Dialogue
Programs by State for Nine Leading States as of October 2000
100
80
Percentage
60
40
20
0
VT AK DE MA CA HI MN OR NY
States

Restoration of human dignity
Restoration of property loss
Restoration of injury to the person or health
Restoration of damaged human relationships
Restoration of communities
Restoration of environment
Emotional restoration
Restoration of freedom
Restoration of compassion or caring
Restoration of peace
Restoration of empowerment, self-determination
Restoration of a sense of duty as a citizen

Four Justice Policy Lenses

Crime Control
Minimize Community Risk:
Justice and Due Process is Secondary
Deterrence and Incapacitation
Minimal Interference and efficiency
Professional Focus and Distrust of
Community: “We are the Experts”

Just Desserts
Emphasis on Punishment as Just
Response
Proportionality: Punishment Must Fit
the Crime
Emphasis on Uniformity and Distrust
of Informality and Community
Decisionmaking
Determinancy and Guidelines for
Sentencing Based on Severity of
Offense vs. Offender Need and Risk

Libertarian
Minimize Government Involvement
Intervention May Do More Harm Than
Good
Emphasis on Due Process Rights
Many Crimes will be resolved without
Formal Intervention
Justice is Secondary

Social Welfare
Belief in Rehabilitation Through Offender
Treatment
Intervention and Early Intervention is a Benefit
Professional Focus and Distrust of Community:
“We Are The Experts”
Focus on Individual Needs of Offender
Many Crimes will be Resolved
without Formal Intervention
Justice is Secondary

A Communitarian Model:
Restorative Community
Justice

“if you are dealing with people whose
relationship have been built on power
and abuse, you must actually show
them, then give them the experience
of, relationships based on
respect…[so]…the healing process
must involve a health group of people,
as opposed to sing therapists. A single
therapist cannot, by definition, do more
than talk about healthy relationships”
(Papert Ross).

Mutually Exclusive Interests
Offender Victim
Interests Interests
Community
Interests

“In Hollow Water, ex-offenders are not
shunned forever, but seen as important
resources for getting under the skin of
other offenders and disturbing the webs
of lies that have sustained them. Better
than anyone, they understand the
patterns, the pressures and the ways to
hide. As they tell their personal stories
in the circle, they talk about the lies that
once protected them and how it felt to
face the truth about the pain they
caused” (Ross 1996).

“Community Justice”…
All variants of crime prevention and justice activities that
explicitly include the community in their processes and set the
enhancement of community quality of like as an explicit goal.
Community justice is rooted in the actions that citizens,
community organizations, and the criminal justice system can
take to control crime and social disorder. Its central focus is
community-level outcomes, shifting the emphasis from individual
incidents to systemic patterns, from individual conscience to
social mores, and from individual goods to the common good.
Typically, community justice is conceived of as a partnership
between the formal criminal justice system and the community
[ but often] communities autonomously engage in activities that
directly or indirectly address crime.
~ Todd Clear and David Karp

FAU Community
Justice Institute
Balanced and Center for
Vermont
Restorative Justice- Advanced Criminal
Juvenile
Justice Project related Justice Studies
Programs
(BARJ-OJJDP) Curriculum (w/BSO)
Evaluation
Development
Research
Criminal
Justice
Technical National Robert Wood
Executive
Assistance Institute of Johnson
Leadership
& Training Justice Foundation
Program
Conferencing Conferencing
JAIBG Evaluation Evaluation
Restorative Seminars,
Justice Workshops
Other research
Academy
and training
Research
projects
Publications
Clearinghouse
Examples Cohort
Degree
JAIBG Fort Lauderdale Gun Crime Research
Programs
Restorative BSO Sex Crimes Evaluation
Justice BSO Boot Camp Evaluations
Trainer’s
Clearinghouse