(Im)possibilities of restorative justice in a time of war(s)

• In Event: RJ beyond the mainstream

Abstract

Any armed conflict creates and amplifies the need for extreme militarisation and securitisation, accompanied by war rhetoric and propaganda. For restorative justice scholars and practitioners, the time of war puts to test the applicability of restorative justice values and practices, as it favours and maintains bipolar interpretation of events, conflicts and human suffering. However, the relevance of a restorative approach should stem from the values it promotes and the possibility it offers to deal with strong emotions of injustice, which are very present in any war. This presentation will outline the preliminary argument about the impossibilities and possibilities of restorative justice in a time of war(s). The limitations of restorative justice are argued as intrinsic and necessary from a legal perspective to qualify the harmful acts, which is a prerequisite for criminal responsibility and an important step on the road to justice. Indeed, restorative justice begins where guilt is not in question. The potential of restorative justice is then seen in a double way: first, as the vast range of bottom up, micro-level restorative practices (e.g. to deal with the refugee crisis). Second, as an opportunity to think differently about the war in the light of the restorative value of truth, in particular of the concept of “parrhesia” as courageous and honest speech that can activate people’s ethical capacities. Then, far from a rhetoric of the “peacemaking” potential of restorative justice, the concept of “parrhesia” can be a thread to distinguish between individual, collective and media truths in order to reclaim a story.

Authors

• Katerina Soulou, European Forum for Restorative Justice

• Anna Matczak, The Hague University of Applied Science