A Shifting
Paradigm
Modern Restorative Justice Principles Have Their Roots in Ancient Cultures
Reginald A. Wilkinson, Director
Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction
Corrections Today, Editorial, December 1997
Corrections Today
Official Publication of the
American Correctional Association
The roots of the modern restorative justice movement can be
traced to Kitchener, Ontario. In 1974, a Mennonite probation officer and a volunteer
service director organized a discussion group to develop a more humane and efficient
criminal justice system. The concept of restorative justice and its basic principles have
evolved continuously since those initial discussions in Canada 23 years ago.
But a case can be made that restorative approaches to crime actually date back thousands
of years. The Babylonian Code of Hammurabi (c. 1700 B.C.) prescribed restitution as a
sanction for property offenses, and the Sumerian Code of Ur-Nammi (c. 2060 B.C.) required
restitution for offenses of violence. Convicted thieves were ordered to pay double the
value of stolen goods as dictated by the Roman Law of the Twelve Tables (449 B.C.).
Germanic tribal laws promulgated by King Clovis (496 A.D.) called for restitutional
sanctions for both violent and nonviolent offenses. The Laws of Ethelbert (c. 600 A.D.)
included detailed restitution schedules. The Hebrew culture promoted the concept of peace
as much as any ancient people.
A shift in paradigm took place with the Norman invasion of Britain, however. By the end of
the 11th century, crime was no longer perceived as injurious to persons, but rather was
seen as an offense against the state. William the Conqueror developed a legal system for
centralizing power. William’s son, Henry I, issued laws detailing offenses against
the “king’s peace.” Infractions that violated this peace were considered to
be an offense against the king; the actual victim was denied any significant role in the
justice system.
Kings William and Henry I developed a justice system that has lasted for centuries. Is it
possible that in the next millennium, we will reverse the trend of crimes being violations
against the “king’s peace” and revert to the philosophy that crimes are
injurious to individual people? Maybe.
Today, the concept of restorative justice is drawing considerable attention, and
rightfully so; there are many examples of successful and positive restorative programs. I
generally prefer the term “community justice” rather than “restorative
justice” because most people have some concept of what community means as it relates
to the justice process —community corrections, community policing, community
prosecution and community courts.
The definition of restorative justice that I like best was written by Mark Carey, director
of community corrections in Dakota County, Minn.: “Restorative justice is a
philosophical framework for responding to crime and the actions needed to mend this harm.
It focuses on crime as an act against another individual or community rather than the
state. It is a future-focused model that emphasizes problematic problem-solving instead of
‘just desserts.’”
Carey further says that restorative justice:
* Holds the offender directly accountable to the individual victim and the specific
community affected by the criminal act;
* Requires the offender to take direct responsibility to ‘make things whole
again,’ to the degree that it is possible;
* Provides victims with purposeful access to the court and corrections processes which
allow them to shape offender
obligations; and
* Encourages the community to become directly involved in supporting victims, holding
offenders accountable and
providing opportunities for offenders to reintegrate into the community.
I am inspired by the number of justice professionals who are embracing the principles of
restorative justice. Despite the fact that many restorative programs are fully functional,
restorative justice still exists in a conceptual framework. Many more programs are in the
stages of exploration, planning and implementation. I feel it’s important to mention
that restorative justice is neither a liberal nor a conservative approach to the justice
process; it is, in sum, an attempt to bring much-needed balance to the methods by which we
deal with victims, offenders and the community.