ABSTRACT This essay contends that restorative justice and criminal justice are not entirely incompatible, and that their compatibility at various stages of criminal justice in the Anglo-American legal system hinges upon the extent to which either the rights of the accused or the public interest are compromised at each stage. We argue that these paradigms are incompatible at the trial stage, compatible in the post-trial phase, and conditionally compatible in the pre-trial stage. This essay is divided into three sections. First, we describe the divergence between restorative and criminal justice, highlighting the incompatibility of restorative justice during the trial stage, as it contravenes the principle of defendant protection. Second, we analyse the pre-trial stage, arguing that restorative justice measures should be applied conditionally to balance the rights of the accused with those of the victim. Finally, we posit that restorative justice can be compatible with criminal justice, but cannot wholly replace criminal justice sanctions in the post-trial phase, in order to safeguard the public interest.
Read full abstract