Description
Abstract
Purpose
It is assumed that Restorative Justice is supposed to replace Retributive justice. Such an argument, however, is not sustainable, as the two systems are instead mutually supportive or interdependent in many ways. The paper thus aims to present the relationship between traditional and restorative justice from a different point of view from the usual interpretation, focusing on similarities instead of differences.
Approach
Individual sections define the terminology used and the essence of researched values, systematize them and lastly compare them.
Findings
When taken into its natural conclusion Restorative justice represents a supplement to the traditional criminal law which includes Retributive justice. The idea that Restorative justice replaces the status quo cannot be supported because both are two parallel systems that are part of a greater whole.
Research limitations
Because the definition of both Restorative and Retributive justice is on some level contradictory, the resulting text could not encompass all existing interpretations of these phenomena.
Practical implications
Restorative justice relies on the values of traditional criminal law. Without it, RJ cannot properly function.
Originality/ value
This paper focuses on the fact, that Restorative justice is not opposed to Retributive justice but on the contrary, is parallel to it because retribution is just a small part of a more complex system that does not exclude restoration.
Article classification
Research paper
Keywords: Restorative justice, retributive justice, values, traditional justice
