Justice Performed: The Normative, Transformative, and Proleptic Dimensions of the Restorative Justice Ritual

<p>As William Everett notes, “Symbols and rituals are indispensable for our efforts to contain, transform, and resolve conflicts.” For this reason, the performance of justice is highly ritualized. Two contemporary examples of this performance are the mainstream criminal trial and the restorative justice conference, each of which has a distinct ritual structure. This thesis explores these two ritual structures and how they fulfill, or fail to fulfill, the multifaceted human need for justice. By employing ritual theory in respect to these two justice performances, an analytical framework will be developed that describes how each ritual’s process affects its function. Theories of ritual are specifically concerned with the functions that rituals have in society. This thesis proffers three dominant ritual functions related to the performance of justice: the normative, the transformative, and the proleptic. Rituals have a normative function when they provide a sense of safety and security through establishing a set way of doing things and reaffirming communal values. Transformative rituals offer a means of attaining significant and sustainable change at personal and relational levels. Proleptic rituals are capable of envisioning and temporarily creating a different possible societal future by generating social and power relationships that can challenge the status quo. Not every ritual performance is oriented to achieving these various functions, yet it will be argued that the nature of justice demands attention to all three. This thesis applies this analytical framework of the various functions of rituals to two justice performances: the criminal trial and restorative justice. It proposes that while the criminal trial fulfills the normative function through upholding laws and associated values, it commonly falls short of creating the conditions for personal or relational transformation, nor does it anticipate a future where a greater measure of justice is achieved. By contrast, it is common for restorative justice conferences to result in transformative outcomes for participants and to provide a foretaste of a more just social order, inasmuch as they subvert hegemonic power arrangements. By advancing our understanding of the ritualistic features of justice, this thesis can help to answer three prominent questions that have beleaguered the restorative justice field. First, how is the personal and relational transformation apparent in the restorative justice process achieved? This will be addressed through an application of the theories of ritual put forth by Victor Turner and Émile Durkheim to the restorative justice process in order to better understand and describe its transformative function. Second, can restorative justice have a normative impact that satisfies the wider public, particularly in comparison to the criminal trial? This criticism will be considered in light of a normative ritual framework along with the alternative structures that have been suggested to remedy this issue. Finally, given its primary focus on making amends at an interpersonal level, does restorative justice routinely fail to address larger, structural injustices? By examining the expansion of restorative justice from a justice reform mechanism to a wider social movement, I will argue that the proleptic function of the restorative justice ritual has played a key role in this expansion by temporarily creating a “restorative society in miniature” that participants often emerge with a desire to experience again and extend to others, thereby enlarging the original scope of the restorative justice intervention.</p>

Justice Performed: The Normative, Transformative, and Proleptic Dimensions of the Restorative Justice Ritual

<p>As William Everett notes, “Symbols and rituals are indispensable for our efforts to contain, transform, and resolve conflicts.” For this reason, the performance of justice is highly ritualized. Two contemporary examples of this performance are the mainstream criminal trial and the restorative justice conference, each of which has a distinct ritual structure. This thesis explores these two ritual structures and how they fulfill, or fail to fulfill, the multifaceted human need for justice. By employing ritual theory in respect to these two justice performances, an analytical framework will be developed that describes how each ritual’s process affects its function. Theories of ritual are specifically concerned with the functions that rituals have in society. This thesis proffers three dominant ritual functions related to the performance of justice: the normative, the transformative, and the proleptic. Rituals have a normative function when they provide a sense of safety and security through establishing a set way of doing things and reaffirming communal values. Transformative rituals offer a means of attaining significant and sustainable change at personal and relational levels. Proleptic rituals are capable of envisioning and temporarily creating a different possible societal future by generating social and power relationships that can challenge the status quo. Not every ritual performance is oriented to achieving these various functions, yet it will be argued that the nature of justice demands attention to all three. This thesis applies this analytical framework of the various functions of rituals to two justice performances: the criminal trial and restorative justice. It proposes that while the criminal trial fulfills the normative function through upholding laws and associated values, it commonly falls short of creating the conditions for personal or relational transformation, nor does it anticipate a future where a greater measure of justice is achieved. By contrast, it is common for restorative justice conferences to result in transformative outcomes for participants and to provide a foretaste of a more just social order, inasmuch as they subvert hegemonic power arrangements. By advancing our understanding of the ritualistic features of justice, this thesis can help to answer three prominent questions that have beleaguered the restorative justice field. First, how is the personal and relational transformation apparent in the restorative justice process achieved? This will be addressed through an application of the theories of ritual put forth by Victor Turner and Émile Durkheim to the restorative justice process in order to better understand and describe its transformative function. Second, can restorative justice have a normative impact that satisfies the wider public, particularly in comparison to the criminal trial? This criticism will be considered in light of a normative ritual framework along with the alternative structures that have been suggested to remedy this issue. Finally, given its primary focus on making amends at an interpersonal level, does restorative justice routinely fail to address larger, structural injustices? By examining the expansion of restorative justice from a justice reform mechanism to a wider social movement, I will argue that the proleptic function of the restorative justice ritual has played a key role in this expansion by temporarily creating a “restorative society in miniature” that participants often emerge with a desire to experience again and extend to others, thereby enlarging the original scope of the restorative justice intervention.</p>

Normative Function of Constitutional Decisions

Introduction. This work analyses the normative function of constitutional judgments, their cha- racteristics and their limits. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The theoretical bases start from the work of Hans Kelsen in relation to the condition of “negative legislator” of the constitutional court, which already implies a dero- gatory capacity on the legal order and, therefore, a normative function, completed with the differ- entiation of Vezio Crisafulli between “disposition and norm” that allows opening the constitution- al jurisdiction to a consideration as “positive legislator”. Likewise, theoretical contributions from other works by the author of the research are incorporated. The method that has been used to prepare the work is based on the analysis of the current legal reality of the constitutional jurisdic- tion taking into account the legal context in which it develops its functions. Results. It is concluded that the normative function of constitutional judgments is a structural fea- ture inherent to constitutional jurisdiction, which presents a series of specific characteristics. This normative function is characterized by being a complex reality, due to the diversity of procedures in which it occurs and the different legal material with which the constitutional jurisdiction works. It is also a complementary normative function, which lacks the plenitude of the legal production of law. Lastly, it is a fragmentary normative function, which operates on specific dispositions or provisions of the normative chains, without having the capacity to configure complete normative chains that correspond only to the legislator in the exercise of his legislative function. Discussion and Conclusion. Constitutional decisions clearly develop a normative function, as they incorporate more into the legal system than just the interpretation of the provisions of the law or the Constitution. These decisions derive from legal or constitutional provisions norms that complement the constitutional and legislative levels of the legal system. Thus, they contribute, albeit with the limitations noted in this paper, to the development of the legal system, resolve conflicts and establish norms that can help prevent new disputes. Thus, they perform the peace- keeping function that is inherent in any justice.

Worm Food: Towards a Typology of Worm and Lice Disease-Descriptions in Graeco-Roman Narratives

Two disease-descriptions featured in ancient literature (skolekosis and phthiriasis) have long been interpreted as evidence of medical illness, but this paper argues that they should be understood as strictly literary phenomena; they do not describe any diseases that occurred in the ancient Mediterranean world. The lack of correspondence between narrative literature and ancient medical writings controverts the dominant scholarly assumption that these diseases had some basis in history/medicine. Instead, this paper argues that four relatively distinct conceptions of skolekosis and phthiriasis were at play in ancient literature, despite their shared use of worms and lice. With a clearer understanding of this typology, we are better positioned to understand the normative function of narratives depicting skolekosis and phthiriasis.

NOMINATION OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS OF RUSSIAN LAWS: TRANSLATION ASPECT

В статье предпринимается попытка установить англоязычные переводные эквиваленты номинативным единицам, маркирующим структуру документов российского законодательства. На материале переводов Конституции РФ, кодексов и федеральных законов автором выстраивается иерархия переводных эквивалентов в английском языке. Делается вывод о допустимости разных переводческих решений в связи с выполнением переводом функции информирования, а не нормативного регулирования. The paper considers the issue of translating legislative texts from Russian into English. Special attention is paid to the structural elements of laws. By analyzing the translations of the Russian Constitution, some Russian codes and federal laws the author presents a hierarchy of English translation equivalents. The translation equivalents may differ since the translation itself performs informative rather than normative function.

Are There Mathematical Hinges?

In this paper I argue that, contrary to what several prominent scholars of On Certainty have claimed, Wittgenstein did not maintain that simple mathematical propositions like “2 × 2 = 4” or “12 × 12 = 144,” much like G. E. Moore’s truisms, could be examples of hinge propositions. In particular, given his overall conception of mathematics, it was impossible for him to single out these simpler mathematical propositions from the rest of mathematical statements, to reserve only to them a normative function. I then maintain that these mathematical examples were introduced merely as objects of comparison to bring out some peculiar features of the only hinges he countenanced in On Certainty, which were all outside the realm of mathematics. I then close by gesturing at how the distinction between mathematical hinges and non-hinges could be exemplified and by exploring its consequences with respect to (Wittgenstein’s) philosophy of mathematics.

Mapping, Explaining, and Constructing the Effectiveness of the Pan-European Principles of Good Administration

This chapter is dedicated to transversal analysis of the effectiveness of the pan-European general principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). First, it gives an overview of the differences and particularities of the national administrative law that come forth when looking at the effectiveness of these principles on the national level. It explains why they have different effects and work in different ways in different legal orders. Second, these different modes of operation of the principles are explained: to be effective on the national level they must be transposed, implemented and enforced. Thirdly, the chapter looks at the normative function of these principles on the level of the CoE. They concretize the ‘founding values’ of the CoE (Article 3 of its Statute) with regard to the administration of its Member States. The chapter finishes with an outlook on further desiderata of research.