Restorative Justice Practices and Their Role in Post-Conflict Criminal Justice Systems

Abstract

The paper will discuss how Restorative Justice (RJ) practices are incorporated into post-conflict criminal justice systems as one of the critical alternatives to the traditional retributive models. The formal judicial infrastructures in the aftermath of mass violence or systemic conflict are usually catastrophically backlogged and confronted with a crisis of legitimacy. When retributive justice is concerned with the breaking of state laws and imposing punishment, restorative justice is concerned with the healing of social damage by the joint discussion between the victims, the criminals and the community. The research employs the multi-dimensional analysis, which examines the change in theoretical focus from the idea of prosecution to the concept of reconciliation led by stakeholders. The focal point of this argument is the Gacaca court system in Rwanda, as a major case study to apply community-based restorative processes in solving close to two million cases after the 1994 genocide. The empirical evidence provided in the paper indicates that recidivism could be reduced significantly with RJ interventions, with some meta-analyses of between 14-27% showing a reduction in recidivism, and at the same time, 80% of victims were satisfied. Nonetheless, the shift to restorative models is not without difficulties, with the risks of power imbalances, re-traumatisation, and the risk of political co-option being among them. This study presents the thesis that in order to attain sustainable peace in post-conflict societies, criminal justice systems should be transformed beyond mere incarceration to a transformative framework that offers solutions to the causes of the conflict and rebuilds the social fabric. Restorative justice can provide a utilitarian way out of the current issues by reconciling legal responsibility with emotional and material compensation, a means to create a new, more robust and united social fabric.