In this article, the authors revisit the old debate among legal anthropologists about the role of ‘the community’ in restorative justice. The central question is how conflict resolution as it takes place in small-scale, non-Western societies may offer inspiration for the implementation of restorative justice in contemporary, postmodern network societies. An important insight from this cultural comparison is that collective ways of conflict resolution in non-Western societies contributed greatly to the formation of communities, which have always had a more open character than is generally assumed. Interestingly, however, this resembles the open character of contemporary network societies more than is routinely recognized by those who consider comparison unwise or even impossible. Van Meijl & Mutsears argue that probation services could play a central role in the organisation of the formative function of restorative justice in contemporary societies, but only if it becomes more autonomous from the criminal justice system and its punitive practices. Finally, they emphasize the importance of repairing the moral damage in social relations after criminal acts have taken place, especially for the sake of restoring trust among all participants and parties in society.

This article was published earlier in the International Journal of Restorative Justice (2020, nr. 3) and is translated into Dutch for this issue. While many empirical studies on restorative justice conferencing have been conducted in the context of ‘what works’, research on ‘how it works’ is scarce. Little is known about how, in what conditions and for whom restorative justice conferencing ‘works’. In this article, Suzuki aims to fill this gap in the literature by developing a concept of readiness. It refers to participants’ attitudes and emotional dispositions towards, and knowledge about, restorative justice conferencing and the other parties prior to the face-to-face dialogue process. Suzuki suggests that the concept of readiness may be a key independent variable to understand how restorative justice conferencing works because it reminds us that a restorative journey may begin before a face-to-face dialogue between participants take places. This article concludes by offering how it can be used in research on restorative justice conferencing.

In this article the author explains how complex mediation in criminal cases functions in the existing Dutch justice system and explores the ways in which it could advance the application of restorative justice therein. Mediation in criminal cases is applied in a setting with offender and victim and can become complex by the number of people involved. There is a difference between parties to a mediation and participants. Application of mediation in newly formulated criminal proceedings could give meditations more the character of restorative justice conferences when more participants will be involved. It is interesting to explore whether mediations in criminal cases can contribute to expanding the application of restorative justice by extending it to include the ‘community’ dimension as a party. After all, the community as such has so far not been a party in a mediation, although sometimes the community will have a direct and sometimes indirect interest in the outcome of a mediation. When the (immediate) environment also becomes part of the restorative justice intervention it can be seen as the last form of recovery. In the long run restorative (justice) conferences and sentencing circles can also be explored in line with ideas of Claessen. However, Pinkster currently warns that caution is needed to protect the principles of a fair trial, as long as criminal trials are not fully replaced by restorative justice.

This research describes the experiences, views and attitudes of participants of mediation dialogue groups involving non-related traffic accidents regarding their participation and related topics such as responsibility, rehabilitation, and restoration. They collected the data through individual semi-structured in-depth interviews with participants of two mediation dialogue groups. The data were analyzed through a reflexive thematic analysis. The authors identified three categories: (a) the importance of shared stories, (b) blurred boundaries, and (c) opportunities and obstacles for repair. Overall, the analysis suggests that mediation involving similar but non-­related incidents may provide the participants with valuable knowledge and insights about the lives and thoughts of one another, as well as lead to mutual understanding and support. For some, it may even involve a transformative experience. Importantly, the analysis reveals that the presence of a ‘shared story’ is pivotal to achieving a sense of connection and resonance that allows for such mutual understanding and support. Feeling safe and respected are also key to establishing a constructive group dynamic.

This article explains experiences with a project that was recently launched by the authors in the Netherlands. One of them is a victim of rape and she was able to explain what she missed in her recovery process. The project contains a recovery-oriented and survivor-centred approach through circles of support for victims and their loved ones after sexual violence. Sexual violence has a far-reaching impact on victims and their friends and family. Care programs targeting support systems are lacking, while in recent years the need for a ‘survivor-centred’ approach in survivor-­related topics including counselling for recovery from sexual violence has been recognised. This approach argues that victims themselves are best placed to indicate their needs and ideas, and that all decisions made about them are not made without them. In the extensive literature search done, no Circles of Support were found specifically for loved ones of victims of sexual violence.
While support seems vital for recovery, yet social interaction is often disrupted. Respondents were invited for an interview through a call on an online community for sexual assault victims. They furthermore were asked to indicate if they would like to remain involved in this project and other victim-centered work. Sixteen interviews were conducted among victims of sexual violence. Ten respondents indicated that if offered, they would have participated in a support circle. The usefulness of sharing and social support were endorsed, but fear, shame and guilt were cited as barriers. All interviewees were interested in continued participation. There seems to be a great need for involving relatives in the recovery of sexual violence and victims in the implementation of projects that affect them. The value of the involvement of those affected and loved ones has proved indispensable. For further development of help offerings for social support and materials, formalisation of that involvement is necessary, for example in the form of a Survivor Board.