ABSTRACT
As mentioned in the previous chapter, there is a plethora of publications on the subject of restorative justice. The majority, however, focus on initiatives that are established, controlled and funded by the state (see Johnstone 2002; Strang 2002; Bazemore and Umbreit 2003; Roche 2003; Johnstone and Van Ness 2007), as opposed to strictly community-based approaches. The same conclusions can be applied to efforts of justice reconstruction within transitional societies, be they restorative or not. 1 Restorative justice in transitional societies faces a number of additional difficulties to those traditionally associated with more stable jurisdictions. State-based initiatives may be regarded with some cynicism in communities where the justice system has been contorted during the conflict (as through emergency legislation) or where the police or state security forces have been guilty of human rights abuses (Roche 2002; Nowrojee 2005). Adherence to legal formalism, due process, proportionality and related benchmarks for ensuring good restorative justice practice in state-based programmes is not easily separated from such violent histories when government and politics have been so closely related (Chayes and Chayes 1998; Ruth-Heffelbower 2000). Indeed, as has been the case in Northern Ireland, restorative justice programmes led by police or other criminal justice agencies (O'Mahony et al. 2002; Campbell et al. 2005) struggle to develop partnerships with precisely those local communities most directly affected by the conflict, thus severely limiting the transformative potential of restorative justice in the areas where it is most needed.
