Restorative solutions for anti-LGBT victimisation experiences: potential pathways for victims’ wellbeing and key challenges and needs

Abstract

The victims of anti-LGBT hate crimes may have particularly negative experiences which affect their mental health and wellbeing. These incidents affect the victims’ self-esteem, dignity and identity, and they also affect indirect victims in similar ways. As opposed to retributive justice, restorative justice may offer a more satisfactory justice experience for those affected, by addressing the harm caused to them. This is due to the fact that restorative processes require flexibility, adequacy and tailor-made design. Drawing on findings from a multi-site qualitative study conducted in six European countries, this article discusses the perceptions and experiences of key professionals regarding the potential of restorative justice to provide for victims of anti-LGBT hate crimes, particularly in relation to repairing the individual and collective harm caused by such crimes.

Keywords:

• Restorative justice
• penal justice
• hate crimes
• victimisation

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 These characteristics depend on the country and its legal framework but include for example gender, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, 'race', nationality, language, social status, belief or religion.

2 Throughout this article, we use the term ‘victim’ as the professionals we interviewed used the term, and ‘victimhood’ to refer to the people they provided support to. We recognise that these descriptions and understandings of victimisation processes do not necessarily reflect current debates concerning ‘victimhood’ language (see Chakraborti 2018; Rothe and Kauzlarich 2018). We use the term ‘direct victim’ to signal those persons directly affected by the crime, and ‘indirect victims’ to refer to the wider collective of LGBT persons who may be impacted by hate crime.

3 This depended on the context in each country, as not all the countries included in the research have public restorative justice services.

4 There were few major differences between countries in relation to professionals’ perceptions and experiences of restorative justice applied on anti-LGBT hate crimes. Differences were found however between different categories of professionals, and these are focused on here. Nevertheless, where significant differences between countries existed, or a country is a clear exception, reference to this is made in the discussion.

5 For policymakers, there were too few respondents to draw any general conclusions. However, in general as for the other groups, those with more knowledge of, and familiarity with, restorative justice processes tended to have a more positive attitude towards their application in the case of anti-LGBT hate crimes.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the European Union’s Justice Programme (2014-2022)