This article is an analysis of about 350 decisions of Dutch criminal courts since mediation was introduced as an instrument in criminal law (art. 51h of the Dutch criminal code). It appears that mediation not only benefits the offender in terms of reduction of punishment, but also has significant effects on other aspects of the domain of criminal justice. For example on complaints about the decision of the Public Prosecutor not to prosecute a suspect, the eligibility of the Public Prosecutor in a criminal procedure, claims for compensation of the victim, compensation for damage of the offender being in preventive custody, and costs of the offender for a lawyer to defend him in a criminal procedure. Although much progress can be made in applying mediation in criminal procedures, it is concluded that mediation is now an important form of restorative justice in the Dutch criminal justice system.

This article analyses political discourses in the light of the vocabulary and suggestions contained in the parliamentary resolutions proposed in 2019 dealing with the restitution. It appears that the discourses are committed but the developed suggestions are mild. This apparent contradiction can be explained through Hanna Pitkin’s work on political representation. Using this analysis, two reflections are proposed in the conclusion: one on the Belgian case with regards to the European context and the other on the current expectations of society.

This article adopts German philosopher Hans Vaihinger’s Philosophy of “as if” as a vehicle to sketch the main features of the emerging research domain of narrative victimology, as well as address some of its limitations. Vaihinger emphasizes the importance of useful untruths, i.e. things we know to be untrue, but nevertheless behave as if they are not, if that strengthens their use as instruments for us to find our way more easily in the world. This applies to our daily lives, but also to our societal institutions and the models and metaphors that underlie our approaches to (social) science. The paper argues that the narrative metaphor of the historical event is often more apt to enhance our understanding of victimological phenomena than that of the mechanism, which is the default metaphor of (social) science. The paper subsequently describes four areas of inquiry of narrative victimology: victimisation’s impact on (life) stories; narratives in the aftermath of victimization; narratives of victim’s experiences with justice processes and the coincidence and juxtaposition of the victims’ narrative with narratives of other significant parties. For all its merits however, the narrative metaphor is also a “useful untruth”, equipped with its own limitations, for instance the difficulty of language in describing first hand experiences of victims and the possibility that narrative structures will be imposed upon victim experiences.

This contribution examines shareholder capitalism and shareholder idealism. It is also argued that excessive rewards – often a result of shareholder capitalism – fuel fraud. Supervisory directors and shareholders should therefore act as a counterforce and fulfil a corrective role.

In the current study it was investigated to what extent the presence or absence of victim compensation influences public judgments about punishment by the general public. Results show that whether or not the victim is awarded compensation, both in the case of physical assault and burglary, did not influence the extent to which the general public agrees with the punishment imposed by the judge. Participants do consider it important that a victim has the opportunity to apply for compensation for non-material damage suffered.

There is no clear answer to the question if corruption makes victims. Currently an (international) discussion is taking place about this matter. On the one hand it can be discussed that corruption in general does not know any direct victims and that corruption can even take place without any damage. On the other hand it is known that corruption can cause tremendous public and financial damage, with society as a whole as the victim of this crime, whether or not in primary gradation. In the underlying article these two perspectives will be discussed and applied on two cases. Special attention will also be paid to the impact and relevance of pointing out the victims.

Based on a retrospective analysis of six large scale and fatal fires in the Netherlands, an improvement in terms of meeting the needs of victims can be seen. A comparison of the legal settlement of these fires shows mayor differences in the fulfilling of different aspects of social justice that are identified in social psychology. Two victim needs commonly associated with retributive justice – financial compensation and a thorough, neutral investigation into the causes of the disaster – were fulfilled to a higher degree after the most recent fires than after those that occurred decades ago. The legal settlement after the New Year’s fire in Volendam (2001) appears – at least on paper – to have been more just from the victim’s point of view than the ones after the other incidents. Empirical research into the experienced social justice after the New Year’s fire can be valuable to assess the factors that can lead to a just settlement after disasters.

The authors discuss reparations, with particular attention to programs launched to do justice to the victims of the Holocaust. While focusing on the compensation scheme of the Dutch Railways to the victims of the transports during the Second World War, they examine in which respects the suffering and victimization of some victim groups are not or insufficiently recognized. They compare the establishment of the compensation scheme and the procedure for repayment with findings from victimological research into the recognition of victimization and reparation, including the symbolic value of compensation, recognition of suffering, inclusion and exclusion of stakeholders, and victim participation. The analysis concludes with a few considerations about how secondary victimization could have been prevented.

This article discusses the willingness of the victim to judge the offender more mildly after the latter apologized for his wrongdoing and shows that he is involved in behavioral change. A large group of victims wants to help (young) perpetrators and offer them a second chance, even victims who have been treated violently. It is argued that these forms of compassion express a caring attitude, the wish that the offender will be rehabilitated and that a change in behaviour is more important than compensation. This attitude can also be referred to as ‘forbearance’, in terms that a less severe sanction is sufficient. This goodwill factor may well be the most important aspect of ‘doing justice’ in restorative meetings.

Newark Penn Station is the most frequented train station in New Jersey, United States. Two distinct groups occupy this public space. First are the commuters who travel by the trains to reach destinations for work or pleasure. Second are the transient who do not use the trains but instead remain in and around the station for various reasons, otherwise known as the ‘other.’ The latter population is closely monitored and controlled by law enforcement through a variety of written and unwritten laws and codes of conduct, which are based on broken windows theory and crime prevention through environment design (CPTED). The primary focus is how the ‘other’ seemingly navigates and occupies public space. Through ethnographic research, this paper reflects and reveals the ways in which the station is a living social organism that simultaneously marginalizes and incorporates those defined as the ‘other’ into this space. This complex and contradictory dynamic illustrates the interactions between public spaces and its occupiers and regulators.

Since Islam stands for a total way of life, it also includes a vision on crime and punishment. According to several (Muslim)scholars the Sharia contains not so much a message of revenge and retribution but rather one of compassion, forgiveness and mercy. Much depends on which sections of the holy sources of Islam are read and subsequently how these sections are interpreted. However, fact is that – in the context of quite a number of criminal offences – Islamic criminal law gives room for restorative practices. These practices prove to be more beneficial with regard to the realization of remorse, forgiveness and reconciliation than the regular criminal process. Since restorative practices form an intrinsic part of (pre-modern) Islamic criminal law and since more and more initiatives are being developed nowadays to incorporate such practices in (modern) Western criminal law, it is of fundamental importance to take note of Islamic criminal law. Before focusing in this contribution on the role of restorative practices, remorse and forgiveness in Islamic criminal law, first the position of victims in criminal law under influence of Islam and Christianity will be discussed on the basis of the ideas of the Dutch victimologist Jan van Dijk. Furthermore, attention will be paid to the decline of mysticism in Islam and to the possible consequences and risks thereof – also for the role of restorative practices, remorse and forgiveness in Islamic criminal law.

Since 1994, public prosecutors in Belgium can propose ‘penal mediation’ to criminal suspects. The supervision and follow-up of this procedure are provided by ‘justice assistants’ (comparable to probation officers), who systematically record crucial information and register it in the national database SIPAR. An exploration of this database reveals interesting insights regarding the actual practice of penal mediation. On the basis of the available data we also examined whether or not we could find relevant correlations between characteristics of (offenders in) cases and the extent to which cases have resulted in an agreement and proper compliance with that agreement. Finally, for a better comprehension of the actual practice of penal mediation in Belgium twelve interviews with justice assistants have been conducted.

Victims of crime entertain various wishes regarding the criminal justice system. This paper present the results of a study that made use of vignettes. Victim wishes regarding the goals of punishment were examined, and the relation with degree offender intent (intent, negligence) has been established. The results show that when the perpetrator acted intentionally, victims have a greater wish for retribution and the other punishment goals, but they have a smaller need for restoration. Victims wish to be compensated and to receive apologies from the offender, but generally are reluctant to meet with the perpetrator in person.

The Austrian social historian Christa Pelikan wrote in 2009 an article with the following title: On the efficacy of Victim-Offender-Mediation in cases of partnership violence in Austria, or: Men don’t get better, but women get stronger: Is it still true?
It contains outcomes of an empirical study which reads in short: The efficacy of VOM in cases partnership violence is to a large part due to the empowerment of the women victims, but partly, albeit to a smaller percentage, also due to an inner change, to insight and following from that a change of behaviour on the side of the male perpetrators. These achievements should be understood as part of a comprehensive societal change – a change of expectations regarding the use of violence in intimate partnerships. The research presented is to be perceived against the background of another study carried out 10 years before; its title was: ‘The efficacy of criminal law interventions in cases of partnership violence: Comparing The Criminal Trial and Victim-Offender Mediation (out of court offence compensation – ATA)’. Quantitaive and qualitative research is used, as well as a description of cases. In our journal a Dutch translation of this relevant (2009) article on RJ and domestic violence has been published.

This article develops a victimological perspective on international criminal justice, based on a review of the main victimological characteristics of international crimes. These include the complicity or active involvement of government agencies, the large numbers of victims and the peculiar position of international crime victims who, at the time the crimes are committed, are usually not viewed as victims by the perpetrators, but placed outside the moral sphere or even depicted as perpetrators rather than victims.Key elements of this perspective concern the external coherence of the criminal justice reaction - the interlinking of criminal justice with other reparative efforts - as well as its internal coherence - the extent to which the procedures of international criminal justice are aligned with what it realistically can and should achieve. With internal coherence in mind, the article examines the victimological findings relating to the main rights of victims in the criminal procedure (recognition/acknowledgement, information/participation and compensation/reparation) and subsequently analyzes how the specifics of international crimes moderate them.

This article departs from a crime prevention perspective following the definition of crime prevention as adopted by the European Union Crime Prevention Network (EUCPN). This approach handles a broad notion of community involvement in crime prevention, including non-judicial measures and models of intervention. Through its participatory approaches, restorative justice has the potential of mobilising and reinforcing social capital and, therefore, of contributing to effective crime prevention and control. The community oriented approach is illustrated by the model of crime prevention and its possible connection to restorative justice as being developed in Hungary and promoted through various actions of the EUCPN.

Discussions in the movement of restorative justice about the fundamental question, whether its interventions are alternatives to punishment or alternative punishments, have become repetitive and seem to be in a dead end. The author reviews the arguments against the background of the ‘last resort’ principle in Husak’s work. Husak distinguishes between last resort in terms of sentencing and last resort in terms of criminalization. Since the restorative justice movement does not fundamentally reject the primary criminalisations, but accepts the definitions of certain forms of conduct as crime, it merely strives to offer alternatives to punishments that would otherwise be imposed. If protagonists of restorative justice want to avoid this, they should consider an abolitionist option to strive for decriminalization.