Theo Gavrielides

The book forms part of the Peace Psychology Book Series by Spring, Series Ed.: Christie, Daniel J. ISSN: 2197-5779. ​ Despite the clear connections between psychology, restorative justice, and peace across national and institutional contexts, there has been little direct engagement between the field of peace psychology and the growing theory, implementation, and research of restorative justice. ​ This timely collection of chapters written by international experts bridges the gap between peace psychology and restorative justice. The Editors combined their respective fields of expertise to start a much-needed debate on the potential but also risks that are associated when implementing restorative justice in the peace psychology field. The volume highlights how psychological theory and research can inform and evaluate the potential of restorative practices in formal and informal educational settings as well as the criminal justice space. The chapters cover both negative and positive peace across levels while introducing the reader to various case studies from across the world. All in all, the book explores how restorative justice can promote positive peace through its connection fostering dialogue, empathy, forgiveness, and other key psychological elements of peace.

Public trust in governments and their institutions has been declining globally. This Introduction does not offer the ground to present the reasons for this decline, which have been observed and studied by many over the last few decades (e.g. Garland, 1996; Zedner, 2002). As part of the government machinery, criminal justice institutions are not exempted from public scrutiny. Courts, the police, probation, prosecution and all related justice services do not exist in a vacuum either. They are developed and function within the societies that they are meant to serve. If they are structured within disempowering governments and democracies, then their users’ experience will be one of disappointment. This decline in trust is also very much linked with users’ perceptions and experiences of equality (or inequality). And we do not need scientific evidence to conclude that the criminal justice system has flaws. We have been experiencing these flaws for many decades through its performance, overt or hidden biases, costs and the feeling of safety that is meant to generate for everyone independently of their background (Gavrielides, 2014). Although the majority of the public do not engage in readings about facts and figures on wealth distribution, their living reality is what drives their fear and anxiety about justice and its current system of delivery. This unavoidable truth gradually leads to disengagement and apathy. Concurrently with the decline in public trust and justice performance globally, there has been a rise of community voice and action (Gavrielides and Blake, 2013; Rosenblatt, 2015). In a globalised world where the internet, social media and borderless continents define how we send and receive information, the notion of community had to redefine itself. It is no longer a place – it is a sense of belonging. It is within this transitional global and political framework that I enthusiastically agreed to edit this international Handbook. I hope that it will become part of the aforementioned listening process.

The introduction aims to provide the context for the book’s topic of comparative restorative justice by meeting three objectives. First, it puts three common denominators between comparative criminal and restorative justice in a historical continuum. Without understanding the journey that has led us talking about comparative restorative justice today, we run the risk of seeing its emerging study only partially. Second, the chapter attempts to define comparative restorative justice using a consensual conceptual model. Subsequently, it presents six comparators within restorative justice. The chapter argues that they have been presented in the extant literature in the form of faultlines, when, in reality, they are merely comparative expressions of the diverse restorative justice norm and practice. These comparative axes have been missed in research and policy analysis. This misdirection can only be addressed and our understanding and implementation of restorative justice can only be improved, if the study of comparative restorative justice is further developed. The chapter claims that this volume takes the first collective step towards this direction, as its various contributions provide context for these comparative axes within the restorative justice field and study.

This edited collection introduces and defines the concept of “comparative restorative justice”, putting it in the context of power relations and inequality. It aims to compare the implementation and theoretical development of restorative justice internationally for research, policy and practice. In Part I, this volume compares practices in relation to the implementing environment - be that cultural, political, or societal. Part II looks at obstacles and enablers in relation to the criminal justice system, and considers whether inquisitorial versus adversarial jurisdictions have impact on how restorative justice is regulated and implemented. Finally, Part III compares the reasons that drive governments, regional bodies, and practitioners to implement restorative justice, and whether these impetuses impact on ultimate delivery. Featuring fifteen original chapters from diverse authors and practitioners, this will serve as a key resource for those working in social justice or those seeking to understand and implement the tenets of restorative justice comparatively.

Similar to all relationships, power is a dominating factor for inflicting, but also preventing, violence and harm in the family unit. Domestic violence in particular is infused with strong power dynamics that cannot simply be eradicated through the law or formal structures of justice and therapy. This chapter examines the role of restorative justice in rebalancing power among family members experiencing domestic abuse putting an emphasis on gender-based violence. Through original research and normative analysis, this chapter argues for a consensual model of restorative justice, which provides complementary avenues for social justice. Restorative justice is not in opposition to the criminal and civil justice systems, but an alternative route based on the values of power sharing, dignity, equality and respect. When applied according to these principles and in conjunction with the law, the vicious circle of power, harm and abuse within the family can be addressed.

The purpose of this introductory chapter is threefold. First, it aims to transport our readers’ minds to the monasteries, beaches, myths and legends that the authors encountered during their personal journeys of writing their chapters. For a philosophical book, this transportation is important not only for understanding its methodological underpinnings, but also for enabling the grasping of some of the key concepts and norms that it aspires to challenge. Second, this chapter aims to lay the founding values and principles on which the book and the journey were based. These values were agreed with all authors from the outset of our journey, and consequently served as a framework for our philosophical and creative writing. They are also married to the two disciplines that we aim to challenge through our questioning; the strands of restorative justice and human rights. Third, it is paramount that we set the parameters of our work and acknowledge the caveats that any time-bound project with limited resources is expected to face. The overall ambition of the chapter is to open up the debate on new methods of writing on restorative justice. Creative and philosophical thinking that takes bold steps in moving outside of empirical evidence from the bottom up is still rare.

Through the writings for this volume and the extant literature, we observe a shift in the justice tectonic plates; a different Zeitgeist. It relates to how you and I view, pursue, achieve and indeed want to experience justice at the inter-personal, inter-community and inter-state levels. The role of restorative justice in praxis is being explored. This book deconstructed the restorative justice concept through normative analysis of current debates and phenomena. The Epilogue is an ambitious attempt to reconstruct restorative justice philosophy. It posits a model for this reconstruction and explains its implications for further research, implementation and theory.

Although community cohesion and human rights are currently two of the most discussed political discourses in the UK, their links for policy are underplayed. This article presents the findings of a nine-month research project that included interviews with a selected expert sample, and which aimed to explore whether human rights values and legislation can be used as tools for community cohesion. Available levers within human rights and the 1998 Human Rights Act are identified, and evidence-based policy recommendations are posited. The article aims to start a new and more inclusive dialogue on community cohesion policy.

This chapter claims that only rarely do critical youth studies and social policy include young people in a truly participatory way. The implications of and reasons for this failure are explored. Moreover, through evidence collected over a 3 year youth-led research programme, the chapter investigates how the tools found within the field of user-led, action research can be used for the construction of evidence-based youth policy and the development of new theoretical and methodological models for critical youth studies. A secondary aim is to identify best practices that encourage true participation of young people in decision-making and democratic structures.

Edited by two leading restorative justice scholars from the West and East, this unique e-book bridges a gap in the literature by bringing together new evidence on the application of restorative practices in educational settings. The book has two aims. First, it builds a bridge between the restorative justice world in the East with that of the West. The volume demonstrates how similar the theoretical and practical experiences are in the two sides of the world. It presents us with evidence of what works in policy, research and practice and allows us to make comparisons for the future. Secondly, the book challenges restorative justice which is often seen through the narrow lenses of the criminal justice system. ------ “It is arrogant indeed to think that schools in the west have all the answers and we are somehow more advanced in our thinking and practice. The scope of the chapters in this book travails many of the issues that face schools and systems everywhere. This book is highly recommended for anyone practicing, studying or legislating restorative justice in educational settings. Restorative practice is who we are, not what we do!”. Margaret Thorsborne, Restorative practitioner, trainer, facilitator and author.

Human rights and restorative justice are rarely brought under the same spotlight despite their normative similarities. In fact, this gap becomes even more apparent when put in the context of policy and practice internationally. Firstly, there is a developing gap between public perception and evidence-based depiction of crime. Secondly, scholarly debates are rarely reflected in criminal justice policy and legislation. This failure has an impact on recidivism, the spiralling costs of penal interventions, but most importantly on how we view our interpersonal and inter-communal relationships. This unique collection of papers brings together international leading experts in human rights and restorative justice to address a gap in the literature. From reconstructing and restorative human rights for restorative justice to addressing issues such as the standardisation of restorative justice, this edited volume is a must read for researchers, practitioners and campaigners.

The author considers that the Penal Sciences face a wide range of human pathogenic issues, ranging from terrorism and human trafficking to corruption and the use of substances and are, thus, the ideal discipline for investigating the various scientific issues and the implementation of the scientific findings arising from such investigations. He also believes that the Penal Sciences, being inextricably linked to human values and constitutional rights, are, by their nature, beneficial towards the promotion and consolidation of values, such as freedom, solidarity and, especially, Social Justice. The latter concept is perceived by the author not only as a form of justice, which provides everyone with their due of proportion to their value, according to the famous saying of Ulpian “suum cuique tribuere”, but rather as a form of restitution from social injustices and as a treatment for social needs, particularly for our fellow human beings who are marginalized by society in conditions of poverty and degradation. It is interesting, at this point, to emphasize that the United Nations, in an important report from 2006 entitled “Social Justice in an Open World. The Role of the United Nations”, defines Social Justice as the fair and compassionate distribution of the fruits of economic growth (“Social Justice in an Open World. The Role of the United Nations”, edited by the International Forum for Social Development, New York: United Nations, 2006, p. 7, available online). The vision, therefore, of a society focused on goals such as combating socio-economic disparities and providing effective assistance for the weaker members of society signifies, especially in this period of Crisis, is a primary objective worthy, according to the author, of captivating us. Perhaps, indeed, the new target for Criminal Policy, following that of Restorative Justice, should now be that of Social Justice and, in fact, with a double project and aim: first for a fairer distribution of social goods and, also, for greater solidarity towards the weaker members of society. Indeed, it is a known fact to those involved with the Penal Sciences, that a dominant contemporaneous trend is that of Restorative Justice, in the sense that Criminal Law and Criminology finally have to address the needs of the victim of a criminal act and to advocate for relevant methods for extrajudicial settlements and for the conciliation of the offender and the victim. Restorative Justice is, hence, based on the triptych of the perpetrator assuming responsibilities for their actions, of restoring, as far as possible, the effects of the injurious actions against the victim and, also, of actively expressing the desire for conciliation with the victim. Certainly it would be greatly desirable if these ideas were to be consolidated within Greek legislation, albeit within the, always progressive, Greek Law for Minors there is a provision for the reformatory conciliation measure, pursuant to article 122 case e of the Greek Penal Code. However, the author believes that in this period of time, a time of profound crisis at all levels, there is need for more than simple offender-victim conciliation. There is a need for this spirit of reconciliation and solidarity to be extended to benefit all those who are experiencing hard times and may, therefore, in their deprivation and frustration, are led to committing crime. The author, at this point, refers to all the socially weak and often marginalized groups of people, who are scientifically characterized as "weak" or "vulnerable" and who try, with great courage, to survive without breaching the threshold of breaking the law. It is apparent here, according to the author, that if Criminal Policy actually aims to provide solutions to the problems of crime, it should not solely be limited to repairing the damage and conciliating the victim and perpetrator, but it should strike against the causative factors of crime and the primarily socio-economic inequalities and other forms of injustice which cause, according to Aristotle in his "Politics" (V. 1301b27, 1301a32 et seq., 1266b40), social reactions, attitudes and – Ι would add - a sequence of serious criminal acts. In other words, another kind of Justice is required in addition to Restorative, so that it may become the mission of our Criminal Policy to eliminate the injustices and inequalities that lead to crime. In view of this direction certain introductory thoughts are developed in this article.

This up-to-date resource on restorative justice theory and practice is the literature’s most comprehensive and authoritative review of original research in new and contested areas. Bringing together contributors from across a range of jurisdictions, disciplines and legal traditions, this edited collection provides a concise, but critical review of existing theory and practice in restorative justice. Authors identify key developments, theoretical arguments and new empirical evidence, evaluating their merits and demerits, before turning the reader’s attention to further concerns informing and improving the future of restorative justice. Divided into four parts, the Handbook includes papers written by leading scholars on new theory, empirical evidence of implementation, critiques and the future of restorative justice. This companion is essential reading for scholars of restorative justice, criminology, social theory, psychology, law, human rights and criminal justice, as well as researchers, policymakers, practitioners and campaigners from around the world. Now, in its second generation, restorative justice is not a wild dream: it is a reality, and I for one am energized by the new and younger voices that are emerging. It is important to open space for these new voices and emerging themes. As a first-generation developer and practitioner, now at the end of my career, it seems appropriate that this may be the last book forward I write for the field. It is time to make room for others of this new generation. Much appreciation to Theo Gavrielides, himself a representative of this new generation, for leading the way through this Handbook" Professor Howard Zehr (Distinguished Professor of Restorative Justice, Co-Director, Zehr Institute for Restorative Justice, Center for Justice & Peacebuilding, Eastern Mennonite University, USA). ​ "This book is perhaps the most comprehensive and certainly the most up-to-date collection on restorative justice. It goes to some topics rarely addressed in earlier volumes … and embraces a wider range of critiques of restorative justice than most volumes on the subject … Furthermore, in its geographical coverage, this international Handbook is much broader than older collections … We are grateful to Theo Gavrielides for bringing so many voices into the conversation. Many inspiring restorative justice leaders in the past have mobilized convening power toward projects of listening, but none more widely nor in more diverse ways than Theo Gavrielides in recent years." Professor John Braithwaite (Distinguished Professor and Founder of RegNet (the Regulatory Institutions Network) at the Australian National University, Australia).

The purpose of this article is to continue the discussion on Europe’s converging criminal justice systems. In particular, I test a hypothesis that has recently appeared in the literature, which sees the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights as one of the most significant factors that encourage a harmonization process between the adversarial and inquisitorial criminal justice systems of Europe. This claim is supported by examining the Court’s jurisprudence to identify decisions that led to legislative and policy amendments in the domestic legal orders of the 46 member states of the Council of Europe. This account shows how an interplay currently taking place between judicial, policy, and statutory powers is marking the end of the adversarial-inquisitorial era. Finally, the conclusion identifies the three most important impediments that are likely to hamper this harmonization process.

At a critical time when divisive and extremist narratives are feeding new wars, inter-community and inter-personal conflicts, Gavrielides' new monograph challenges the current model for preventing and controlling violent radicalisation and extremism while it opens new possibilities through a positive, scientific approach. Gavrielides taps into the combined strengths of restorative justice, positive criminology and positive psychology to articulate and pilot a new model for prevention and control of the acts and behaviours that lead to violence and suffering. The book combines philosophy, normative analysis and primary data collected through six pilot projects that were carried out in several countries from 2017. It presents the results of these pilots and normative thinking through critical analysis leading to practical tools for preventing and controlling harm particularly violent radicalised acts and extremist behaviours and worldviews. This book speaks to researchers, policymakers, practitioners, and human rights campaigners from around the world looking for a new approach that can better serve harmed parties, their families, and communities. “Addressing Violent Radicalisation and Extremism: A Restorative Justice, Psychosocial Approach offers a refreshing and holistic perspective on one of the most pressing global issues today—violent extremism. By integrating restorative justice principles with a psychosocial approach, the book moves beyond punitive measures and focuses on healing, rehabilitation, and the reintegration of individuals into society. Theo Gavrielides explores the complex roots of radicalization, paying close attention to factors that contribute to extremist ideologies. This approach is particularly valuable in its ability to connect theory to practice, offering practical information for students and professionals working in the fields of justice, counter-terrorism, and community building. The discussions, case studies, and examples help ground the theory in real-world applications, making it a useful resource for both academics and practitioners. Overall, this book is a thought-provoking and important contribution to the discourse on counter-extremism, proposing a path that emphasizes empathy, accountability, and long-term peace-building over retribution.” ​ Professor Clarence Augustus Martin, J.D., Ph.D. (Chair Department of Criminal Justice Administration, California State University, USA).

The chapter revisits the relationship between restorative justice and punishment through the eyes of Classical Greek philosophy and tragedy, the School of Collectivists, and contemporary thinkers. The extant literature sees restorative justice either as alternative punishment or an alternative to punishment. This chapter puts forward the notion of restorative punishment by deconstructing the concept of pain, and by reconstructing a new vision through the notion of catharsis. The chapter then takes a bold step in proposing a philosophical framework to justify the normative thinking underpinning its proposed concept of restorative punishment and pain.

This chapter makes the argument that the origins of restorative justice are to be found in the Aristotelian notion of “επανορθωτικόν δίκαιον” (corrective or rectificatory justice). A linear historical approach to the Aristotelian theory of justice was avoided. Instead, we argue that certain aspects of this school of thought are reflected in contemporary restorative justice discourse. The concepts of ‘fairness’, justice’, ‘equity’, ‘restoration’, ‘punishment’, ‘responsibility’ and ‘polis’ are the common places (κοινοί τόποι) where Aristotle and restorative justice theories meet. These ‘τόποι’ help us reflect on the roots of restorative justice, (re)define its values and help us (re)position RJ within the worlds of theory, research and practice.

‘Justice’ is spoken of in two ways: the lawful and the fair. The law is a human construct that is devoted to the advantage of all, or to the advantage of the best, or to the advantage of those in power or to the advantage of those representing it – let it be the politician, the media, the TV presenter, the filmmaker. Thus, the law serves the production or the preservation of happiness within politics and business. The law commands us to act according to the mean. A well-written law follows the mean well and a poorly written law does not. On the other hand, fairness is a principle sometimes materialised through the law and the given justice system. Fairness is the ultimate value pursued by both the common law and civil law traditions. However, its distribution through the law and the representation of this delivery varies. Does this mean that a different kind of justice is distributed? Through the teachings of Aristotle, this essay aims to deconstruct the notion of justice, by breaking down its two ingredients, the lawful and the fair, and by analysing the effect of their representation in modern European society. The relativity attached to the notion of justice is not a modern phenomenon, but a philosophical matter that can be analysed and indeed explained through the teachings of Aristotle and its contemporary students. The analysis will be developed in the context of convergent Europe, focusing on the role of the media and courts especially in relation to criminal justice.

social psychology, legal theory, neuroscience, affect-script psychology, sociology, forensic mental health, political sciences, psychology and positive psychology to articulate for the first time a psychological concept of restorative justice. To this end, the book studies the power structures of the restorative justice movement, the very psychology, motivations and emotions of the practitioners who implement it as well as the drivers of its theoreticians and researchers. Furthermore, it examines the strengths and weakness of our own societies and the communities that are called to participate as parties in restorative justice. Their own biases, hunger for power and control, fears and hopes are investigated. The psychology and dynamics between those it aims to reach as well as those who are funding it, including policy makers and politicians, are looked into. All these questions lead to creating an understanding of the psychology of restorative justice. The book is essential reading for academics, researchers, policymakers, practitioners and campaigners.

Restorative justice (RJ) in the secure estate is widespread internationally, although piecemeal and inconsistent in its application. It exists in the form of many practices such as mediation, conferencing, circles, and panels. As the interest in RJ continues to grow, this research takes a step back to ask how reconcilable RJ is with incapacitation. Through a combination of normative thinking, literature review, and primary research that applied qualitative methodologies over a 3-year period, the article examines where the two notions meet in their intentions and expected outcomes. A new classification of restorative practices in prisons is proposed, placed in the context of case studies of existing programs from around the world.

Although the fast-growing literature on restorative justice is extensive, and in some regards repetitive, there is still no consensus as to the nature and extent of applicability of the restorative notion. This article claims that the restorative movement is experiencing a tension between normative abolitionist and pragmatic visions of restorative justice. It proceeds to identify six conceptual fault-lines that characterize this tension. These do not only refer to various definitional positions, but also disagreements that negatively affect both the theoretical and practical development of restorative justice. These tensions also encourage a power-interest battle between different stakeholders within the restorative movement including practitioners, theoreticians, researchers and policy makers. To approach these controversies, there needs to be an acknowledgment of the multidimensional nature of the conceptual problem of restorative justice and the impact it has on its application. The article attempts to get to grips with this problem, and provide a common ground for the future development of restorative justice.

This book takes bold steps in forming much-needed philosophical foundations for restorative justice through deconstructing and reconstructing various models of thinking. It challenges current debates through the consideration and integration of various disciplines such as law, criminology, philosophy and human rights into restorative justice theory, resulting in the development of new and stimulating arguments. Topics covered include the close relationship and convergence of restorative justice and human rights, some of the challenges of engagement with human rights, the need for the recognition of the teachings of restorative justice at both the theoretical and the applied level, the Aristotelian theory on restorative justice, the role of restorative justice in schools and in police practice and a discussion of the humanistic African philosophy of Ubuntu. With international contributions from various disciplines and through the use of value based research methods, the book deconstructs existing concepts and suggests a new conceptual model for restorative justice. This unique book will be of interest to academics, researchers, policy-makers and practitioners. Reviews: “Gavrielides and Artinopoulou propose a reconstructed philosophy of restorative justice that is much more expansive and inclusive, much less either/or, than the usual approach. For the restorative justice movement to progress, they argue, we first must reconcile the internal tensions identified by the authors in this volume: conceptual, philosophical, political, personal. Their proposed reconstructed philosophy helps point a direct but in addition, they also suggest some rules for moving in this direct, asking those of us working in and advocating for restorative justice to redirect some of our energies. The methodology the editors adopted for this volume is also significant. Instead of limiting contributions to empirical analysis, they encouraged authors to write freely from a variety of sources and perspectives. As the library recall notice says, this book is long overdue”. Howard Zehr, Ph.D. Distinguished Professor of Restorative Justice Center for Justice & Peacebuilding Eastern Mennonite University, Virginia, USA “No one will be able to read this book without wishing they were there for the journey that gave it birth. Rich outcomes are enabled by richness of process. This book succeeds in drawing us into the journey of its travelers and is a grand exercise in critical retrieval, revival, renewal of those teachings, ancient and recent. There is a great, enduring core of restorative justice teachings that has an increasingly global quality about it. This fine collection helps us renew and reconstruct the core of restorative justice teachings at their holistic philosophical foundations while also helping us to look at them with wider historical and cultural lenses. John Braithwaite, PhD, Professor Australian National University, Australia

Unquestionably, Restorative Justice (hereafter RJ) has finally gathered some real momentum. It has become a sine qua non topic in many national and international policy and statutory agendas. However, as the restorative practice expands to deal with crimes, ages and situations it has never addressed before (at least in its contemporary version), and as its application starts to make sense not only to national but also to regional and international bodies and fora, new theoretical problems are posed. In the fast-growing literature many theories and Schools have been evoked to support RJ's claims. This paper will take the discussion a step back by looking at questions of meta-theoretical character. In particular, the paper will ask: Does RJ have a place in the “world of theories,” and if it does, then what kind of theory is it, and on what level should it be placed? Second, does RJ theory need a philosophy, and why? Finally, how can restorative practices be morally justified?

We are living in a world where power abuse has become the new norm, as well as the biggest, silent driver of persistent inequalities, racism and human rights violations. As humanity is getting to grips with socio-economic consequences that can only be compared with those that followed World War II, this timely book challenges current thinking, while creating a much needed normative and practical framework for revealing and challenging the power structures that feed our subconscious feelings of despair and defeatism. Structured around the four concepts of power - race - justice - restorative justice, the book uses empirical new data and normative analysis to reconstruct the way we prevent power abuse and harm at the inter-personal, inter-community and international levels. This book offers new lenses, which allow us to view power, race and justice in a modern reality where communities have been silenced, but through restorative justice are gaining voice. The book is enriched with twenty-five case studies written by survivors, practitioners and those with direct experiences of power abuse and inequality. Through robust research methodologies, Gavrielides' new monograph reveals new forms of slavery, while creating a new, philosophical framework for restorative punishment through the acknowledgement of pain and the use of catharsis for internal transformation and individual empowerment. This is a powerful book that generates much needed hope. Through a multi-disciplinary dialogue that uses social sciences, criminology, law, psychology and human rights, the book opens new avenues for practitioners, researchers and policy makers internationally.