Forgiveness and restorative justice: is it necessary? Is it helpful?

The article draws on the results of two empirical studies to develop new theoretical views on apology and forgiveness in relation to crime: research on mitigation and sentencing in the criminal courts; and an evaluation of three English restorative justice schemes undertaking conferencing and mediation primarily in relation to serious offences and adult offenders. Though forgiveness does not require apology (nor even knowing who the offender is), the important interactive and communicative aspects of restorative justice link it firmly to apology. Yet apology is complicated, being in the case of crime to both the victim and the state. When considering forgiveness, the immediate pairing is the possibility of forgiveness by victims to offenders, but it is also conceivable to consider forgiveness by offenders to themselves and forgiveness of the offender by supporters/families and the local community (though not, it seems, the state). The article moves beyond current depictions of apology to consider the interaction between apology and acceptance, and victims’ (and supporters’) reactions. Empirically, these victim reactions include achieving closure (for both offenders and victims), supporting offenders’ efforts to change their lives, and appreciating offenders’ apologies and courage in answering questions and communicating. Healing and reconciliation are less mentioned (or relevant). The word ‘forgive’ is only rarely mentioned. The questions then are whether these reactions can be considered to amount to or link to forgiveness, and whether ‘forgiveness’ is directed to the offender or the act