International Journal on Criminology Volume 3, Number 1, Spring 2015 | Página 3

International Journal on Criminology - Spring 2015, Volume 3, Number 1
Restorative Justice in the Penal Reform in France:
New Rights for the Victims and Perpetrators of
Criminal Offenses 1
Benjamin Sayous A & Robert Cario B
Reinvented in the mid-1970s in the Anglophone countries (Zehr 1990, 2012),
restorative justice progressively developed on the old continent from the
following decade, in a more or less pronounced manner. Despite scientifically
proven promises (Cario 2010), it strangely took time to become established in France,
in the severe times of crisis that the country’s penal justice system was (whatever
some may say) experiencing. Eagerly awaited by professionals in the sector (Cario
2007; Inavem 2014), law no. 2014-896 of August 15, 2014, on the individualization
of sentences and on increasing the effectiveness of penal sanctions, which developed
based on the work by the consensus conference on the prevention of recidivism
(Tulkens 2013; Cario 2013a, 2013b), provided new rights for the victims and
perpetrators of penal offenses (Cario 2013a, 2013b). Thanks to the new article
10-1 of France’s Code of Criminal Procedure (Code de procédure pénale, hereafter
referenced as C.pr.pén), participation in a restorative measure can be proposed to the
victims and perpetrators of crimes, “in any criminal procedure and at all stages of the
procedure.” This creation is symbolically strong, due to the insertion of this article
under subtitle II, “Restorative Justice,” within the preliminary title of Book 1 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure.
Restorative justice directly addresses the victims and perpetrators of offenses
and their significant others. It aims to give them an active role in reducing the personal,
family, cultural, and wider social repercussions of the crime. Over the course of more
than 40 years, the restorative justice measures have become increasingly diverse (Cario
and Mbanzoulou 2010). They meet strict protocols that are designed and validated by
methodically rigorous evaluations (Shapland, Robinson, and Sorsby 2011; Latimer,
Dowden, and Muise 2011; Cario 2013a, 2013b; Strang et al. 2013). In this way, they
guarantee respect and safety for all the participants. 2 Implemented as part of a
dynamic process, they require the voluntary commitment of all those who believe
themselves to be affected by the criminal conflict. The aim is to negotiate the best
solutions for each party concerned, together, via active participation, in the presence
A
Director of the IFJR: Institut Français pour la Justice Restaurative: French Institute for Restorative
Justice (IFJR: www.justicerestaurative.org).
B
Professor of Criminology, President of IFJR
1
This article was first published in AJpénal 10 (2014): 461–466.
2
IFJR, Code de déontologie de l’IFJR pour la mise en œuvre de mesures de Justice restaurative en
matière pénale, July 2014 (IFJR deontological code). justicerestaurative.org/actualites_2014-07-22.html.
2