To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Chapter 9 evaluates the legal precedents and practices surrounding student discipline. It begins with an analysis of the key Supreme Court cases dealing with student due process rights: Goss and T.L.O. Both establish deference to educators as the cornerstone of student discipline. Coupled with a reaction to numerous violent incidents in schools, this has resulted in an overreliance on exclusionary discipline. The balance of the chapter examines the tension between exclusionary discipline and the stated aspirations of policymakers. When scrutinized, it becomes clear that despite lofty rhetoric, exclusionary discipline is tacitly accepted. This tendency was confirmed in the recommendations of the Federal Commission on School Safety convened by President Trump. The chapter concludes by investigating the rise of the school-to-prison pipeline, and links the troubling racial disparities that have arisen in student discipline with many of the themes discussed earlier in the book. Finally, it proposes a combination of trauma-informed pedagogy and restorative justice as a more effective, constructive, and inclusive approach that will properly educate a democratic citizenry.
The concept of restorative justice emerged from efforts to find an alternative to the traditional punitive, retributive reaction to crime. The belief that face-to-face meetings are able to address the diverse needs of all involved parties has eventuated in the proposal of an informal process to discuss the aftermath of crime. One local district court in Korea was very keen to test this process and conducted a project to examine the applicability of restorative justice in Korean criminal trials. Investigating the processes and outcomes of this project, this study identifies challenges in officially adopting such a programme in Korea. In particular, this study raises questions regarding what form of justice Korean citizens truly desire.
In restorative justice theory, the concept of “community” looms large, since it is the locus of the very restoration to which this form of justice aspires. The questions that then raise themselves are: what is this “community” and how is this community rebuilt through the more relational and dialogical process of restorative justice? In investigating one restorative justice panel program in the United States, it becomes clear that “community” means different things to different individuals. Questioning the possibility of a locally-sanctioned version of justice, this study suggests that the starting point of including “community” in restorative justice should be re-thought.
The central argument of this article is that within the discourse around the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC), many scholars have insufficiently applied the concept of an indigenous African worldview in their analysis of the TRC’s work, leading them at times to describe the process as coerced, contradictory, and politically manipulated. Using the different stages of my research as well as the different texts that “lit up” every phase, I argue that through a focus on language and translation, the pervasiveness of a particular worldview of interconnectedness can be traced that enabled the commission to execute its mandate creatively and without incidences of revenge. The acknowledgement of an indigenous interconnectedness has wide implications for the concept of transitional justice as it rejuvenates the main concepts of healing, amnesty, and reconciliation. As a journalist who reported on the daily activities of the commission, I move in this piece between the different epistemic communities of journalism, writing, and academia in order to understand the way in which language and its underlying epistemology provides an important access route to understanding the workings of the TRC and the testimonies provided by witnesses.
In this article, we examine how regulators, prosecutors, and courts might support and encourage the efforts of organizations to not only reintegrate after misconduct but also to improve their conduct in a way that reduces their likelihood of re-offense (rehabilitation). We explore a novel experiment in creative sentencing in Alberta Canada that aimed to try to change the behaviour of an industry by publicly airing the root causes of a failure of one the industry’s leaders. Drawing on this case and prior work, we articulate a model for a responsive and restorative approach to organizational misconduct that balances the punitive role of regulators and courts with new roles in supporting and overseeing rehabilitation.
In this article we set the context for this special issue focusing on individual and organizational reintegration in the aftermath of transgressions that violate ethical and legal boundaries. Following a brief introduction to the topic we provide an overview of each of the four articles selected for this special issue. We then present a number of potentially fruitful empirical, theoretical, and normative directions management and ethics scholars might pursue in order to further advance this evolving literature.
Workplace transgressions elicit a variety of opinions about their meaning and what is required to address them. This diversity in views makes it difficult for managers to identify a mutually satisfactory response and to enable repair of the relationships between the affected parties. We develop a conceptual model for understanding how to bridge these diverging perspectives and foster relationship repair. Specifically, we argue that effective relationship repair is dependent on the parties’ reciprocal concern for others’ viewpoints and collective engagement in the justice repair process. This approach enhances our understanding of the interdependency between justice and reconciliation/reintegration, while also providing theoretical insight into the processes underlying restorative conferencing, innovations that promise to help managers heal damaged organizational bonds.
After a transgression has occurred within an organization, a primary concern is the reintegration of the affected parties (namely offenders and victims) back into the organizational community. However, beyond offenders and victims, reintegration depends on the views of organizational peers and their desire to interact with these parties. In two studies, we demonstrated that offender amends and victim forgiveness interact to predict peer reintegrative outcomes. We found evidence of backlash against unforgiving victims: Peers wanted to work the least with victims who rejected appropriate amends, thus penalizing them for their failure to contribute to the restoration process. This backlash effect was due to decreased liking of the victim and the perceived failure to repair the offender-victim relationship. These findings demonstrate that peers expect both offenders and victims to do their part to achieve reconciliation following transgression, and both may suffer the consequences of failing to meet peer expectations. Implications for reintegration within organizations are discussed.
In a short, provocative essay in First Things, political scientist Daniel Philpott argued that there is a new international theology. He called that theology “the liberal peace.” The liberal peace is an approach to international peacebuilding and transitional justice that emphasizes criminal trials alongside the rapid establishment of a market economy and a liberal democracy, especially in the form of elections. According to Philpott, this “theology” has its own cathedral in The Hague, its own pope (Luis Ocampo, the first Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court), magisterium (speeches by UN secretary generals, beginning with Boutros Boutros-Ghali's 1992 document An Agenda for Peace), saints (Woodrow Wilson), and doctrinal tradition. The doctrinal tradition is composed primarily of the writings of liberal philosophers (Immanuel Kant, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, John Rawls, etc.) who highlight individual rationality as the ground of human rights and the protection of individual rights as the solution to the dangers of living in the state of nature.
Racial segregation has been a persistent feature of the American social landscape and a longstanding contributor to racial inequality, particularly between Blacks and Whites. Affirmative action policies have been used to address the systemic discrimination and attendant socioeconomic consequences to which African Americans have been subjected. Yet affirmative action has not been widely used in all domains in which segregation and systemic discrimination occurred. Although such policies have been adopted in the domains of employment and postsecondary education, few federal affirmative action programs have been used in housing. This is surprising given high levels of segregation across the metropolitan United States, as well as the stated integrative objectives of the U.S. Congress when it passed the Fair Housing Act of1968. To understand this puzzle, we use the Gautreaux Assisted Housing Program, a housing mobility effort of the Federal government and the Chicago Housing Authority that used explicit racial criteria, as a surrogate for affirmative action in housing more broadly. We conduct a comparative analysis of Gautreaux and affirmative action in college admissions using insights from applied political philosophy and sociology. By confronting Gautreaux with a more traditional affirmative action program, we are able to identify and compare the judicial, moral, and instrumental justifications for each, enabling us to draw conclusions about whether and how affirmative action can justifiably be used on a large scale to reduce neighborhood segregation, the possible forms it could take, and the difficulties it would face. We close with a discussion of the recent shift toward integration taken by the Department of Housing and Urban Development under the Obama administration, its relationship to affirmative action, and its implications for declines in residential segregation in the United States.
Introduced initially in relation to drug policy, ‘zero tolerance’ has become a catchphrase to describe attitudes and policies relating to drug use, violence and a range of antisocial behaviours. It has been used particularly within schools in the United States as a disciplinary policy since the 1980s. While broadly ascribed, zero tolerance is designed to send a message that targeted behaviours are not tolerated and will be punished. Zero tolerance assumes that swift and uncompromising action aimed at punishing the offender will result in ‘sending a strong message’ to other would-be offenders and deter others from similar antisocial behaviours. However, thirty years of research has shown zero tolerance policies to have failed the individual and the community, resulting instead in increased rates of misbehaviour and early referral to the juvenile and criminal justice systems. This has the potential to negatively impact on the person's mental health and future outcomes.
This article considers the impact on and therapeutic responses to families where there has been intra-familial sexual assault (IFSA) by an adolescent member of the family against another younger member of the family. In doing so, the article will specifically highlight the nexus between systemic family therapy ideas and an applied restorative justice response in the form of Youth Justice Conferencing (YJC), as experienced through working as a family therapist in the area of adolescent sexual offending.
This article illustrates how the ECCC is struggling to combine successfully two distinct institutional responses to crimes, by being both a criminal tribunal, with its formal rules of procedure and focus on retributive justice, and a quasi-truth and reconciliation commission, with its more flexible approach to participatory rights for victims and focus on reconciliation. The article highlights the advantages and challenges of adopting a ‘two for the price of one’ model within the Cambodian context and uses the experiences of the ECCC to underscore important lessons for future ad hoc and hybrid courts.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.