Retribution, restoration and the public dimension of serious wrongs

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Restorative justice has been criticised for not adequately giving serious consideration to the ‘public’ character of crimes. By bringing the ownership of the conflict involved in crime back to the victim and thus ‘privatising’ the conflict, restorative justice would overlook the need for crimes to be treated as public matters that concern all citizens, because crimes violate public values, i.e. values that are the foundation of a political community. Against this I argue that serious wrongs, like murder or rape, are violations of agent-neutral values that are fundamental to our humanity. By criminalising such serious wrongs we show that we take such violations seriously and that we stand in solidarity with victims, not in their capacity as compatriots but as fellow human beings. Such solidarity is better expressed by organising restorative procedures that serve the victim’s interest than by insisting on the kind of public condemnation and penal hardship that retributivists deem necessary ‘because the public has been wronged’. The public nature of crimes depends not on the alleged public character of the violated values but on the fact that crimes are serious wrongs that provoke a (necessarily reticent) response from government officials such as police, judges and official mediators.
Original languageEnglish
Article number5.1
Pages (from-to)18
Number of pages36
JournalThe International Journal of Restorative Justice
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2022

Keywords

  • Public wrongs
  • R.A. Duff
  • agent-relative values
  • criminalisation
  • punishment

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Retribution, restoration and the public dimension of serious wrongs'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this