Restorative Justice has become a plausible alternative to criminal law. The main purpose of criminal law is to punish the perpetrator of a crime. The victim only has the role of witness. Restorative Justice on the other hand involves a dialogue between victim and perpetrator about the damage caused by a crime and how to repair it. Restorative Justice therefore aims to allow those involved to decide for themselves what should happen after a crime or conflict. The purpose of this process is not only to repair the suffering and damage caused as much as possible, but also to ensure that it does not happen again and that the future can be faced with as little emotional baggage as possible.

In Restorative Justice, someone who has committed a violation is seen as a thinking fellow human being, which leads to questions such as: why did that person do that? What can we do now to ensure that this person doesn’t have to do that any more? And, most importantly, who has been harmed in this process and how can that pain be addressed? How can we heal the community?

In Restorative Justice the attitude is: Why do you do what you do? Don’t you know that we need you to be one of the good people in this community? What would your mother think? Get back into the community. While with criminal law the attitude is the opposite, instead of come back it is: go away. And it’s not so much about why.

Restorative Justice has been used in several schools in California to better deal with student violations. It was found that suspensions were reduced by 60-80% after schools implemented Restorative Justice. Moreover, it is a lot cheaper to organize training in Restorative Justice so that the school can apply it, instead of paying the costs of incarcerating young offenders. For those for whom it was already ‘too late’, who did end up in prison, some Restorative Justice circles have also been set up and after prisoners had gone through such a process, only 2% committed another crime, while the average in the US is around 74% (see The Third Harmony, by Michael Nagler).

South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission

In May 1995, after years of negotiations between the African National Congress (ANC) and the National Party (NP), the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established. Prosecution of all perpetrators was impossible, but amnesty for everyone was also considered undesirable. The core idea of the commission can therefore be summarized as amnesty in exchange for truth. The objectives of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee (TRC) were:
1. to paint as complete a picture as possible of gross human rights violations committed under apartheid.
2. granting personal amnesty to criminals, both from the circles of the apartheid regime and on the side of the freedom fighters.
3. restore the dignity of the victims.

The latter was done by giving the victims the opportunity to tell their experiences and by proposing compensation to compensate for the events of the past and present. To achieve these objectives, three subcommittees were established: the Human Rights Violations Committee (HRVC) — this is where apartheid victims could tell their stories. The Amnesty Committee could grant amnesty — under predetermined conditions. And the Committee on Reparation and Rehabilitation, which had to make recommendations to the government on compensation for apartheid victims.

The HRVC received around 22,000 applications from victims — around 2,000 were eventually allowed to tell their stories publicly. The HRVC completed its work in July 1997. On October 19, 1998, the first part of the impressive TRC report was published under the leadership of chairman Desmond Tutu. The report condemns apartheid as a crime against humanity. In March 2003, the second part of the TRC Report (the final report) was handed over to President Mbeki. This final report of the TRC contains an enormous amount of information about the apartheid past. The final report is intended as a factual history and as a monument to the victims of the apartheid regime. The Amnesty Committee ended its investigations in May 2001.

Commission for National Unity and Reconciliation Rwanda

In 1999, Rwanda launched its National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation (NURC) to work towards reconciliation of the conflicting parties involved in the Rwandan Civil War and the Ruwanda genocide, with the ultimate goal of reuniting the country’s citizens. The Commission became a permanent body in 2002 and continues its function to this day.

A common misconception is the association of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) with the National Commission for Unity and Reconciliation. However, the ICTR and its prosecutions are initiatives of the United Nations Security Council and are not related to the Commission or its objectives.

The best known of the committee’s activities is the Gacaca process, in which local judges are elected by the community to preside over legal proceedings. The Gacaca courts were established by law in 2001, began operating on a trial basis in 2002, and eventually began legal proceedings nationwide in early 2007.

The goals of the Gacaca courts are to “enable truth-telling, promote reconciliation, eradicate the culture of impunity, accelerate the trial of genocide suspects and demonstrate Rwanda’s own problem-solving”. These courts “encourage offenders to confess, issue public apologies and offer reparations, thereby facilitating offenders’ reintegration into Rwandan society.”

The Gacaca courts were proposed as a method of transitional justice and are therefore not the same as restorative justice, but the objectives are partly similar.

Rwandans are deeply divided over the benefits of Gacaca. Supporters of the Rwandan government (both foreign academics and local Rwandans) claim that it has shed light on what happened in their local communities during the 100 days of genocide in 1994. Many Rwandans who do not support the government say that it has become a way to spread ‘lies’. The majority of praise for Gacaca comes from the Rwandan government and Rwandan citizens who have direct experience with the system. This is of course a biased source, but it is important to note that it is those most affected by the genocide in Rwanda who express praise and experience a sense of closure, acceptance and forgiveness after the Gacaca trials. The Gacaca Trials also served to promote reconciliation by providing victims with a means to learn the truth about the deaths of their relatives and gave perpetrators the opportunity to confess their crimes, express remorse and ask for forgiveness in in the presence of their community.

The image with Desmond Tutu was made by Elke Wetzig (Elya) and comes from this Wikipedia page, where it is offered with a CC BY-SA 3.0 license. The image has been edited (cropped) by the peace museum and the quote (text) has been added.