Canada Doesn't Need To Fix Its Justice System. It Needs A New One


Restorative Practices 

Most Restorative Justice processes engage with the community of key people affected by an incident which has caused harm. Wrongdoers, victims and their respective supporters participate in a range of processes which involve dialogue between parties that agree to come together for this purpose. The focus of this dialogue is to understand the harm, to find ways to  repair harm, to seek solutions,  and to re-establish and heal relationships. 

It aims to repair wrongs, and seeks to restore both wrongdoers and victims and their respective communities. It gives all parties a voice so that they can be heard and understood. It aims to build stronger, safer, more inclusive, caring communities by empowering all stakeholders in finding solutions to difficulties and problems.

To find out more about the range of restorative processes/models and their effectiveness (including current evaluations and research), follow these links:


A video explaining Restorative Justice


Building Restorative Justice Nation Wide - Ivo Aertsen

Elements of successful implementation of restorative justice (RJ) at a national level. This in itself is a key question, not only for a pioneer country such as Canada, but for all our nations. RJ has come to be accepted on the world stage as an innovative approach to cnme and injustice. It is promoted by international and regional institutions such as the United Nations and the Council of Europe. Many countries have adopted legislation on RJ, and various countries do provide organisational frameworks and funding.

Despite this political endorsement and institutionalisation, Restorative Justice is far from mainstream in these countries. Whilst both legislation and evidence convincingly testify to the promise of RJ, it remains on the margins. This creates a paradox. Even in countries where there is a sound legal basis and an adequate infrastructure for RJ programmes, the number of cases dealt with remains very low compared to the number of cases that, according to legal provisions, could be referred. Why is RJ so frequently neglected as a tool for addressing injustice?

How should this paradox be addressed?


Restorative Justice (RJ) is not a program, but a way of looking at crime. It can be

defined as a response to crime that focuses on restoring the losses suffered by victims,

holding offenders accountable for the harm they have caused, and building peace within