The politics of restorative justice

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1 Convened by Ivo Aertsen and Brunilda Pali on 15–17 October 2014 as an Exploratory Workshop funded by the European Science Foundation.

2 It must however be noted that Hulsman first discovered and came to criticise the ‘stand-still’ in the development of the concept of punishment, which was still the classical concept of retributive affliction of intended pain (Hulsman, 1968).

3 This theme is also nowadays present in the work of John Braithwaite (2002: 90–91), who speaks of crime as a ‘multidimensional’, for example pluri-causal, phenomenon, in need of polycentric problem-solving. This is a better expression of what Hulsman envisaged.

4 In fact, one might say that as soon as Hulsman proclaimed his abolitionism he became ‘defined out’ and lost most of the real influence on policies he had when he was still prepared to struggle with the system.

5 He compared these with ‘prisoners of war’, in which case the detention was not depriving the prisoner of his fundamental dignity, as opposed to imprisonment for crime.

6 With all or most RJ organisations around the world as members.

7 This society was discontinued in the 1930s and followed up by the still existing Union Internationale de Droit Pénale/Association of Penal Law. My reference to the IKV does not mean that I greatly appreciate all of its principles and results. I only want to draw attention to the fact that the IKV—by its organisational form—was very influential, despite all the disputes that went on amongst its members.

8 This is the phenomenological image of man which was at the heart of the sociology of deviance and is now expressed in the work of Shadd Maruna and other desistance theorists.