By Paul Redekop.  Waterloo, Ontario, and Scottdale, PA:  Herald Press, 2008.  291 pages.  ISBN 978-0-8361-9387-9   £13.25; US $ 18.95; €18.67.


For centuries liberal reformers have urged that punishment should be made humane, and philosophers have looked for justifications of it; here is a book which dares to argue that it is not justified.  Paul Redekop, a Canadian mediator who now teaches conflict resolution, looks at the arguments in favour, one by one.

• It demonstrates disapproval; but is pain the only way of doing so? 
  
• It is supposed to strengthen social cohesion; but it mainly serves class interests.  
  
• It allegedly restores the balance disturbed by the crime; but do two wrongs make a right? 
  
• Often it is carried out in the name of education, and ‘sending a message’; but it interferes with the development of self-discipline, and the message may be ‘It is acceptable to impose your will by force’. 
  

In a chapter on ‘the crime of punishment in the criminal justice system’ Redekop argues against taking Old Testament prescriptions for capital punishment literally, and contrasts the restorative measures in many Aboriginal societies with the gruesome ones in many ‘civilized’ countries, where community justice has been taken over by the state.  When it fails to deter, we simply punish more.  To hurt is not to respect: he dismisses claims that restorative justice can be combined with proportionate punishment, and argues for the removal of punishment from the criminal justice system (p. 81).

How would a restorative paradigm work without punishment?  It would contribute to the basic needs of everyone, especially victims, for meaning, connectedness, security, empowerment and respect.  He identifies three ‘big lies’:  that retaliation gives protection to victims, that fear instils respect, and that ‘we are all family’ – the presumption that the criminal justice system operates fairly for all. 

He rightly says that restorative justice can involve the community; but in his discussion of ‘community’ he gives a misleading description of the community projects in Northern Ireland, saying that those who did not take part were liable to punishment beatings and shootings.  That is a regrettable part of the picture; but many cases were resolved restoratively so that the number of punishment beatings went down considerably. 

Redekop follows the line of Lode Walgrave and Jolien Willemsens that the basic structure would look much like the present system; others would prefer to see many cases diverted out of the system, or not entering it in the first place, with the traditional machinery of justice only as a back-up.  He quotes the use of extra-judicial measures, as in the Canadian Youth Criminal Justice Act 2003, but these are limited to non-violent and young offenders. 

Redekop also says that restorative justice is compatible with suspended prison sentences, to be implemented if the offender did not comply with the restorative process.  This may be unavoidable, but it seems different only in degree from the threat of a punishment beating. 

When prison has to be used as a last resort, he says that it should focus on ‘habilitation’; he might have added John Blad’s (2006) concept of ‘restorative prisons’.  Further examples described are community conferencing, healing circles, and circles of support and accountability.  Redekop concludes that a punishment-free system can meet the needs of victims, offenders, community and society (p. 123).

Chapters 4 and 6 deal with punishment in the family and in education.  The author gives a lengthy case history showing the lasting damage that can be inflicted by physical punishment not usually classified as abuse, and then analyses the effects, from fear, depression, aggression and impaired cognitive development to anti-social behaviour and delinquency.  It impedes the development of conscience.  He punctures some ‘myths of punishment’:  that the punisher is in the right, that it’s the child’s fault, that parents must ‘win’, and that moderate punishment is acceptable and necessary;  and proposes some restorative alternatives. 

The United States and Canada still allow physical punishment in schools, and the UK in the family also.  In schools, he cites advocates of ‘positive’ discipline, based on natural consequences rather than deliberately imposed ones or even rewards, which are also manipulative.  He describes the ‘discipline that restores’ practised in a California elementary school by Roxane Claassen – one of the few theorists who put their theories into day-to-day practice. 

Sandwiched between these is Chapter 5, on punishment and religion.  Redekop, a Mennonite, takes issue with literal interpretations of the bible; references to punishment are far outnumbered by references to love in the Old Testament, and even more so in the New. 

The fundamental commandment of Christianity, he says, is to love; chapters 4 and 6 suggest how to show love to children, possibly the most important message for the future of society.  He digresses to draw a parallel with the training of dogs (punishment makes them afraid of you, not of misbehaving); he would be encouraged by Monty Roberts (2001), who has applied similar theories to both horses and people. 

Further chapters explore the truth-and-reconciliation approach, which is more likely to bring out the full story, and the reasons for punishing, including why punitive attitudes have increased in the United States and how they have influenced foreign policy, with disastrous results.  Finally, asking ‘Where do we go from here?’ Redekop optimistically proposes that we give up our addiction to punishment, and indeed the idea that you can control anyone by punishment and rewards. 

Cries for vengeance perpetuate the big lie that retaliation is protection.  Instead Redekop recommends the involvement of volunteers working together for mutual benefit and advocacy for change, with a quotation from the Supreme Court of Israel, declaring that the use of punishment that causes pain and degradation harms the child’s body, emotions, honour and proper development.  It distances us from our aspiration to be a society free of violence. 

This book should be read by anyone who is aware of the failures and unfairnesses of punishment in general and criminal justice in particular.  It makes a good introductory case for restorative justice, and counters some of the commonly raised objections to it.  It is written in a readable way, but has one major fault:  there is no index.

________________________________

REFERENCES
Blad, J (2006)  ‘The seductiveness of punishment and the case for restorative justice:  The Netherlands.’  In:  D J Cornwell, Criminal punishment and restorative justice:  past, present and future perspectives.  Winchester:  Waterside Press.

Roberts, M (2001)  Horse sense for people.  London:  HarperCollins. 

Martin Wright
July 2008