RESOURCE HIGHLIGHT: New Restorative Justice Webpage

The Death Penalty Information Center has cre­at­ed a web­page ded­i­cat­ed to restora­tive jus­tice, a sen­tenc­ing alter­na­tive in crim­i­nal cas­es, includ­ing lim­it­ed use in death penal­ty cas­es. This resource high­lights the foun­da­tions of restora­tive jus­tice, com­mon approach­es, recent stud­ies relat­ed to the prac­tice, and exam­ples of its use. 

As dis­cus­sions sur­round­ing the death penal­ty have shift­ed away from moral argu­ments, the com­par­i­son of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment to its viable alter­na­tives has con­verse­ly grown. The most com­mon alter­na­tive to the death penal­ty in the U.S. is a sen­tence of life with­out parole (LWOP). Many states have begun to look beyond incar­cer­a­tion as a means to pun­ish­ment and have insti­tut­ed alter­na­tive prac­tices aimed at reduc­ing vio­lent and non-vio­lent crime in non-tra­di­tion­al man­ners. Among these alter­na­tives, restora­tive jus­tice has been imple­ment­ed with greater hope of address­ing the root caus­es of crim­i­nal­i­ty and preventing recidivism.

Restorative jus­tice is a set of prac­tices and beliefs that approach­es crim­i­nal behav­ior with the inten­tions of resti­tu­tion and res­o­lu­tion, rather than ret­ri­bu­tion. Unlike the tra­di­tion­al legal sys­tem, restora­tive jus­tice views crim­i­nal behav­ior as ​“a vio­la­tion of com­mu­ni­ty and inter­per­son­al rela­tion­ships. Restorative jus­tice prac­tices intend to look at the impact of each crime and deter­mine what is nec­es­sary to mit­i­gate harm caused, while still hold­ing the per­son account­able for his actions.” Under these prac­tices, suc­cess is mea­sured by the repa­ra­tion of the harms caused, instead of the pun­ish­ment hand­ed down. Restorative jus­tice tends to involve more peo­ple in its process­es than the cur­rent legal sys­tem does, as ​“vic­tims, defen­dants, com­mu­ni­ty mem­bers, and jus­tice pro­fes­sion­als come togeth­er to dis­cuss the harms brought about by crim­i­nal behav­ior.” Effectively, restora­tive jus­tice works to address the dehu­man­iza­tion that many vic­tims and defen­dants both feel in the tra­di­tion­al crim­i­nal legal system.

While restora­tive jus­tice offers a safe and open space for rel­e­vant par­ties to resolve harm, some defense attor­neys believe the prac­tice may present more prob­lems for their clients. These indi­vid­u­als raise con­cerns about a defendant’s Constitutional right against self-incrim­i­na­tion, as ​“restora­tive jus­tice is found­ed on the prin­ci­ple of account­abil­i­ty [and] it is almost inevitable that a defen­dant will make an admis­sion of his own guilt dur­ing the restora­tive jus­tice process.” If an indi­vid­ual has not been for­mal­ly sen­tenced or is fac­ing sep­a­rate crim­i­nal charges, there is cur­rent­ly no for­mal process to exclude any incrim­i­nat­ing state­ments from being used against him in the future. These con­cerns are promi­nent among attor­neys for indi­vid­u­als fac­ing the death penal­ty, as the restora­tive jus­tice process may fur­ther com­pli­cate the already lengthy appeals process asso­ci­at­ed with cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. Despite these con­cerns, those work­ing in the restora­tive jus­tice realm believe that the prac­tice, with prop­er train­ing, can be used to address any crime.