This article provides a good overview of developments in the field of mediation in criminal cases. Topics discussed include drillrap, the final case declaration, discrimination in the labor market and other developments in the period between June 1, 2021 and September 1, 2023. The share of mediations in criminal cases in the total number of settled criminal cases has so far remained very limited. This was partly due to the established financing ceiling, which meant that the number of referrals had to remain within budget. This ceiling has now been released. This will make it possible to reach new heights in terms of numbers with mediation in criminal cases in the coming years. But before this can be achieved, a lot of work still needs to be done, including within the judiciary.

In this article I respond to a number of contributions from issue 1 of this volume of the Journal of Restorative Justice. In it I show that in my view restoration is not the same as punishment, as long as in the latter concept the retribution of evil with evil has a place, concretely: the aim of harming the offender. The equating of punishment with retribution in the sense of the intentional addition of suffering – whether or not in disguised form – is, in my view, anything but a caricature or artificial given current theory and practice. That is why I disapprove of punishment for the time being and see restoration as something fundamentally different and better. Furthermore, I show that restoration is partly in line with both consequentialist and deontological thinking and that restoration is primarily about justice, not just decency. Also, in my view, a criminal law based on restorative justice can also be called humane, because it puts the human being first and serves to restore and preserve that human being through the retribution of evil with good. In the retribution of evil with good comes an awareness and attitude that are invariably aimed at repairing and preventing damage. Beyond all the boxes lies the core of what I think it should be about: ‘Thou shalt not harm another’, because: ‘Treat another as you would like to be treated yourself’. No matter what a reaction to injustice that underlies this core is called… The rose will be recognized by its scent.

The consequences of anti-LGBT hate crimes can be particularly significant for both the direct victims and the LGBT community. Additionally, it is evident that victims struggle to recover after experiencing such offenses. Based on findings of a qualitative and quantitative study conducted in six European countries, this article discusses the attitudes and knowledge among professionals and victims regarding the use of restorative justice for victims of anti-LGBT hate crimes. Victims and professionals indicate that more training is needed, both in the areas of LGBT-sensitivity and restorative practices, to facilitate the recovery of the harm caused to the victim.

This article reports on the 4th Narrative Criminology Conference held in Antwerp in July 2023. Questions like: ‘how to do justice to the lived reality of victims and offenders?’, ‘how to empathize with subjects’ sense of victimization when they have been convicted of abhorrant acts?’ and ‘how to put into words experiences that subjects cannot adequately describe?’ all relate to and are significant for restorative thinking. Keynotes, presentations and masterclasses showed the transformative power of storying experiences of crime and victimization. Even though restorative justice was not explicitly addressed, the importance of defining the self and the other in order to restore their relationship was well-represented during the conference. In this article, we report on a variety of presentations that were given during the conference, e.g., keynotes on narrative victimology, masterclasses in analysing the unsaid and conversations on visual criminology.

This paper presents and analyses the new Council of Europe Recommendation CM/Rec(2023)2 of the Committee of Ministers to member States ‘on rights, services and support for victims of crime’. The paper contextualizes the new Recommendation and clarifies its relation to the European Union Victims Directive 2012/29/EU. The main principles and definitions as adopted by the Recommendation are explained, including the definition of restorative justice. Then follows more into detail a discussion of the various chapters of the Recommendation with its 26 articles, showing how the victims’ rights and support are conceived. This is done with the help of the extensive Explanatory Memorandum as published by the Council of Europe, which also refers to the strong research base of many provisions. Most importantly, the link to restorative justice, present throughout the whole Recommendation, is highlighted.