In this essay Peter Vermeersch, a social scientist and writer, describes his personal journey to the world of restorative justice. It starts with a group encounter between inmates and victims of non-related crimes in a Belgian prison. As one of the participants in this meeting the author discusses his experience as the victim of a robbery. He also gives an account of his experience as member of a jury trial for a murder case in Brussels, about which he published a book (2019). Vermeersch reflects on his role as juror, illuminates the short-comings of the justice system and its old-fashioned architecture, and most importantly, observes the complex human realities that hide behind the standard images of offenders, victims and other people involved in a crime. In this context, he asks what justice is, thinks about what the role of punishment and retribution can be, and, more broadly, discusses the potential of citizens’ participation and deliberation in issues of public interest. The essay includes several references to film, poetry and other literature that challenges stereotypical images of good and evil. It concludes with a discussion of the wider societal meaning and possible role of restorative justice.

#MeToo is a social movement that started on social media and spread from the US all over the world in 2017. The social movement behind #MeToo is characterised by publicly naming and shaming those who exhibit everyday misconduct in the workplace. This is done by spreading naming and shaming stories via Twitter messages. A question that arises here is whether naming and shaming is a suitable and successful tool for a political movement that aims to bring about social change with regard to sexual violence. Has #MeToo changed the social perspective on sexual violence and social norms of behaviour for sexual encounters? To answer these questions, first a historical sketch of the feminist movements against sexual violence will be provided. What is characteristic of these movements and what are possible parallels with the #MeToo movement? From a feminist perspective, are there any dilemmas that a judicial response to sexual violence entails? In order to provide background to these insights, the characteristics of the #MeToo movement, and the associated dilemmas surrounding naming and shaming, will be discussed next. Finally, it will be discussed if #MeToo has led to social changes.

This essay is a scientific reflection on Leuven Restorative City (LRC). The cities, which present themselves as ‘restorative cities’, aim to ensure that restoration continues to nestle in the capillaries of our society. The article argues that realizing the LRC-promise requires restorative thinking through the meso-level of local public life. This involves reference to a number of notions that can be traced back to Ancient Greek thought in Athens, in which the intellectual virtue of ­phronesis – practical wisdom in a social and political context – is central. Citizens are seen as allies in the solution of social issues. LRC contributes to this through its focus on ‘turning conflict into opportunities’. Restorative justice wisdom is more widely applicable in society. However, the LRC process can sometimes be erratic and unpredict­able. The article points to the possible alternation of good and bad periods, and puts forward the expectation that the development of restorative practices in Leuven can be understood as cascades. In these cascades, the course of the diffusion of restorative practices is presented in terms of successive waves of learning experi­ences and knowledge sharing.

In recent years, there has been a shift within animal ethics, in which animals are no longer seen purely as passive suffering subjects, but attention is also being paid to their role as agents. In this essay, we look at what that agency means and argue that in the Anthropocene animals are actually victimized in two ways: because their agency is literally curtailed by human actions and because at the knowledge level agency is taken away from them: we see them as victims even when they are not. In this text, we focus on zoo animals to illustrate how this works.

This article deals with restorative justice practices in Surinam. It is based mainly on anthropological literature and preliminary research findings of four indigenous villages in Surinam, and is part of a broader study of Indigenous and Marron communities. In these villages the age-old customary law approach to conflict remains a lively practice, especially in the rainforests where central authority has little influence. The author highlights a number of restorative aspects of indigenous (criminal) justice practices, such as the group conferencing model of the Krutu and the role of the community (rehabilitation). Other aspects are not at all restorative, such as cases of double punishment (ne bis in idem), corporal punishment and the lack of the possibility of appeal. Because the trend of opening the hinterland seems to be unstoppable, it is recommended to coordinate national law and customary law and improve cooperation between indigenous and central authority. The article gives some suggestions for reforming the Surinamese Penal Code.

The current study investigates the relationship between the Dark Triad personality traits (consisting of narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism) and three different forms of aggression: online aggression, overt aggression and relational aggression. The sample consisted of 1,051 adolescents between 12 and 16 years old. Results show that psychopathy and Machiavellianism are positive predictors of the three forms of aggression, while narcissism is a positive predictor of online aggression only.

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.

Since the beginning of 2020 mediation in penal cases (mediation in strafzaken) has officially become the preferred intervention for victim-offender mediation in the criminal procedure in the Netherlands. Although mediation in general has a sound theoretical framework, the methodological elaboration appears pluriform and somewhat limited. In practice mediators in penal cases operate conform their own personal and professional standards and preferences, apparently without tailor made methodology. This article describes the current methodological directions such as transformative or narrative mediation and seeks for useful references. As a part of restorative practice, mediation in penal cases seems to remain secluded from insights and methodology developed in the domain of restorative justice practices. Educational institutes providing trainings for mediators barely refer to this theoretical framework. Besides a methodological reconnaissance this article offers a fundamental comparison of mediation styles and interventions, but is above all an incentive to further methodological research and development.

This article critically examines the prospects of restorative justice in Brussels from the perspective of urban youth work. The insights issue from action research on the topic of ‘radicalisation’. The authors develop two arguments. The first tempers restorative optimism. It shows how restorative interventions are not necessarily the most adequate response to tensions and conflicts in urban settings. The second argument points out that resistance from urban youth workers regarding the implementation of restorative interventions should not be seen as a regrettable obstacle for academics who are eager to experiment with these interventions. Such a resistance can lead to new insights and fresh opportunities to radically rethink Restorative Justice. One of the ideas that the article brings to the surface comes down to this. In a city like Brussels, characterised by superdiversity, and clearly marked by social inequalities, academic researchers only gain credibility in initiating restorative interventions if they undeniably denounce these inequalities and fully express their engagement for social justice.

Sexually transgressive behavior occurs in all sections of society, including sports. That includes behavior from making sexual comments to rape. A risk factor is the culture that can prevail in sports, also known as a disruptive culture. There is normalization of deviant behavior. The top sport culture is particularly vulnerable to unacceptable behavior. In this article we will consider the phenomenon of grooming by the coach – the conscious and movement that induce the minor to engage in sexual contact. Within top sport, the opportunity for (sexually) transgressive behavior will be the determining factor. While grooming in recreational or recreational sport is often by isolating (vulnerable) children from the group, grooming can occur in top sport because of the intensity of the relationship, which is in any case of a more closed nature and can be strengthened by the strong performance-oriented top sport culture. In both cases, an alert, open environment is necessary to create a safe sports climate.

Is the concept of ‘retribution’ compatible with restorative justice? Starting from the perspective that retribution is an imperative given and that restorative justice should be a preferent option in coping with crime, the concept of retribution needs to be redesigned. Rethinking retribution needs to take into account the hypersensitive nature and complexity of modern society. Apparently incompatible interests need to be reconciled, paying tribute to the citizenship of both the victim and the perpetrator. Notwithstanding censure to be in place, implying the infliction of ‘pain’, the aim must lie in a reconstruction of civil relationships affirming the victim and the perpetrator to be part of the community. Standards applied must reflect objectivity, implying proportionate punishment, with a preference towards restorative justice because it is the more subsidiary option. Thus, retribution notwithstanding the imperative and painful nature of retribution, the execution should pursue the reconstruction of (civil) relationships.

Why and how mediated contact between victims and offenders (and members from their networks) leads to positive outcomes, remains a difficult question to answer. Not surprisingly therefore, this topic has been the focus of attention of multiple articles in the past twenty years of this journal. In this contribution, the inspiring article of Borbala Fellegi (2008), titled ‘Explaining the impact of restorative justice. The “4-way interaction” of morality, neutralisation, shame and bonds’ is celebrated. Fellegi presents a theoretical framework in which the added value of restorative, mediated victim-offender meetings for the re-integration of offenders is outlined compared to other judicial responses to crime. Central to her argument is that the mediation process affects in particular the four criminogenic factors mentioned in the title. In this contribution two innovative, working mechanisms of the mediation process that she proposes, are highlighted. First, the preparation phase in which the neutral mediator initiates and facilitates discussion of the crime and its consequences for the victim(s) with the offender. Fellegi proposes that this mechanism can (start to) lift the criminogenic factor moral reasoning of the offender. Second, the restorative focus of the encounter itself between the victim and offender, in which both parties can express how they were affected, express their emotions (such as shame feelings of the offender) and discuss jointly how restoration and reparation might be achieved. This should reduce the criminogenic factor neutralisation, increase moral reasoning, and might contribute to integrative social bonds between the parties and their networks. Thus, Fellegi’s work has made innovative suggestions about the working mechanisms of victim-offender mediation – these suggestions offer useful hypotheses that can be tested empirically.

This article presents findings from a longitudinal study of 81 young recidivists examined over fifteen years. By the age of 25, 50 percent had desisted for at least three years. 60 percent had had no new police contacts during the last two years. Four stages could be distinguished in the desistance process. Apart from a small number of explicit persisters, all of the young adults did consciously consider whether the benefits of their criminal activities outweighed the disadvantages. With just a few exceptions, the decision to quit was not motivated by an altruistic goal, nor by extreme fear, but mainly motivated by the feeling of being too old for criminal life and by striving for a pleasant self-esteem. It is concluded that when young adult recidivists give up crime, this must be seen as an extreme and extremely late form of maturation.

As an approach to law and justice, restorative justice focuses squarely on addressing human needs; it acknowledges the equal dignity of all parties, irrespective of their role in the harmful act; it accepts responsibilities for addressing the disadvantages or inequities that crime has bequeathed to victims and that often have contributed to offending on the part of the perpetrator; and it derives its creative potential from the shared vulnerability and reciprocal exchange of concern that occurs through respectful face-to-face encounter. Therefore restorative justice constitutes a relational justice of care.

This paper examines moral injury, in relation to recovery from this kind of psychic damage and to restorative justice. In recent research the concept is developed in distinction from the psychiatric diagnosis PTSD. Whereas PTSD is rooted in anxiety, as it occurs during or after life-threatening situations, people suffering from moral injury are disruptively affected by guilt and shame, in the slipstream of which they may be tormented by remorse, self-loathing, anger and self-disgust – with symptoms similar to PTSD. Unlike PTSD, however, the risk of moral injury is part of ordinary life. It may happen to anyone. Therefore, this paper takes an ‘existential’ perspective by relating moral injury to the fundamental human condition of relationality. Moral injury is interpreted as the disturbance of the responsibility, the confidence and the security that fundamentally sustain the human relationships to the world, to each other, and to oneself. One way of recovering from moral injury is through empathy, primarily performed by caregivers or chaplains who guide the morally injured, and consequently accomplished by the injured themselves, in a narrative way.