Transformative Justice

The History

Ruth Morris, a Quaker in Canada, challenged restorative justice in the late 1990s because she believed that it did not sufficiently address issues of oppression, injustices, and social inequities within conflicts. According to Coker (2002), the terms "transformative" and "restorative" justice have often been mistakenly used interchangeably. Morris argued that while restorative justice challenges the traditional retributive justice system and promotes dialogue and reconciliation, it fails to fully recognize the complex socio-political and economic issues that are addressed by transformative justice.

For example, if a 14-year-old boy from a poor neighborhood who identifies as queer robbed a store when it was closed at 2:00 a.m., transformative justice would seek to understand not only the crime of burglary but also the underlying reasons for it. Did the boy face discrimination and rejection at home due to his sexual orientation? Did he lack basic necessities such as food, clothing, and shelter? Unlike restorative justice, which focuses on resolving the specific conflict between the victim and offender, transformative justice aims to use the conflict as an opportunity to address larger socio-political injustices.

Transformative Justice

In essence, transformative justice builds upon restorative justice by incorporating social justice principles and seeking to address and end systemic injustices. It involves creating organized processes that allow marginalized voices to be heard and for the dismantling of oppressive systems. Transformative justice draws upon various principles and movements, including anarchism, decolonizing, prison abolition, healing justice, Quakerism, liberation, revolutionary social justice resistance movements, and First Nations in Canada, in order to dismantle oppression, repression, suppression, and domination.

 

Transformative justice is dependent on community support and the availability of resources to effectively respond to harmful incidents and prevent future violations. To be considered transformative, a response to oppression, violence, or other misdeeds must embody certain values, including:

 

  1. Reducing or eliminating harm: The response should prioritize reducing the harm caused by the incident and preventing further harm from occurring.

  2. Fostering healing for all involved: The response should promote healing for all parties involved, including the victim, offender, and the community at large.

  3. Ensuring accountability: The response should hold the offender accountable for their actions and ensure that they take responsibility for repairing the harm caused.

  4. Producing resilience: The response should aim to build resilience in individuals and the community, enabling them to better cope with future challenges.

  5. Creating a safe environment where further infractions are unlikely to occur: The response should create a safe environment where future violations are less likely to occur by addressing the root causes of the incident and promoting a culture of respect and understanding.