1. Tolbert, D and Solomon, A ‘United Nations reform and supporting the rule of law in post conflict societies’ (2006) 19 Harv Hum Rts J 29 Google Scholar; Marshall, D and Inglis, S ‘The disempowerment of human rights based justice in the United Nations’ (2003) 16 Harv Hum Rts J 95.Google Scholar

2. See generally Oomen, B ‘Transitional justice and its legitimacy: the case for a local perspective’ (2007) 25 NQHR 141.Google Scholar

3. See Bayley, D Changing The Guard: Developing Democratic Police Abroad (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Hinton, M The State on the Streets: Police and Politics in Argentina And Brazil (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publications, 2006)Google Scholar; Messitte, P ‘Expanding the rule of law: judicial reform in Central Europe and Latin America’ (2005) Wash U Global Stud Rev 617.Google Scholar

4. See generally Mulcahy, A Policing Northern Ireland (Cullompton: Willan, 2006).Google Scholar

5. McEvoy, K and Mika, H ‘Restorative justice and the critique of informalism in Northern Ireland’ (2002) 42(3) Br J Crim 534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. Criminal Justice Review Group Review of the Criminal Justice System (London: HMSO, 2000) p 7.Google ScholarPubMed

7. Ibid, p 30.

8. Ibid, p 205.

9. See further Cohen, S Visions of Social Control (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1985)Google Scholar. Cohen warns of a trend whereby centralised institutional surveillance is being gradually replaced by a ‘carceral archipelago’ of ‘community based’ initiatives (p 42).

10. Campbell, C et.al Evaluation of the Northern Ireland Youth Conferencing Service (Belfast: Northern Ireland Office, 2006).Google Scholar

11. These interviews included a range of stakeholders including the police, Public Prosecution Service, Northern Ireland Office, Probation Board and representatives operating community based restorative programmes in both loyalist and republican areas of Greater Belfast.

12. See generally Ruane, J and Todd, T The Dynamics of Conflict in Northern Ireland: Power, Conflict and Emancipation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Fallon, R ‘Legitimacy and the constitution’ (2005) 118 Harv L Rev 1787.Google Scholar

14. Political theorists have largely adopted such an approach in searching for indicators of legitimacy, and have been reticent to speak about ‘legitimacy’ in circumstances where the rulers, policies, or constitutions are considered morally unacceptable. See further Barker, R Political Legitimacy and the State (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15. Thus, unlike moral or political legitimacy, legal legitimacy does not depend on any external normative values. However, one major limitation of a purely legal approach is that law can provide a veneer of technical legality to practices that might otherwise be regarded as illegitimate: O'Rawe, M ‘Human rights, transitional societies and police training: legitimating strategies and delegitimating legacies’ (2007) 22 S John's J Legal Comment 199 at 207Google Scholar. This mirrors the generic distinction between moral and legal authority proposed by Raz, J The Authority of Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979), see esp ch 2.Google Scholar

16. Tyler, T Why People Obey the Law (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990) p 25.Google Scholar

17. Ibid. Of course, acknowledging the right of an authority to create rules does not necessarily imply agreement with the substance of those rules.

18. Ibid, p 175.

19. See further Sunshine, J and Tyler, T ‘The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing’ (2003) 37 L & Soc Rev 513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20. For an overview of the literature, see generally Tyler, T et.al ‘Legitimacy and criminal justice: international perspectives’ in Tyler, T (ed) Legitimacy and Criminal Justice (New York: Russell Sage, 2007)Google Scholar; see also MaCoun, R ‘Voice, control and belonging: the double edged sword of procedural fairness’ (2005) 1 Ann Rev Law & Soc Sci 171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21. Walker, N and Telford, M Designing Criminal Justice: The System in Comparative Perspective, Report 14, Review of the Criminal Justice System in Northern Ireland (London: HMSO, 2000) pp 53–55.Google Scholar

22. See generally McGarry, J and O'Leary, B Explaining Northern Ireland (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995)Google Scholar; Ruane and Todd, above n 12, esp pp 56–70; see also O'Rawe, above n 15.

23. Walker and Telford, above n 21, p 54.

24. Schaar, JH Legitimacy in the Modern State (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1981)Google Scholar; see generally Barker, R Legitimating Identities: The Self Presentations of Rulers and Subjects (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25. Beetham, D The Legitimation of Power (London: MacMillan, 1991) p 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26. See, eg, R O'Kane ‘Against legitimacy’ (1993) 41 Pol Studies 471.

27. See, eg, Mulcahy, above n 4; Walker, N Policing in a Changing Constitutional Order (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2001)Google Scholar; Ellison, G ‘A blueprint for democratic policing anywhere in the world? Police reform, political transition, and conflict resolution in Northern Ireland’ (2007) 10 Police Quarterly 243 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; O'Rawe, M ‘Transitional policing arrangements in Northern Ireland: the can't and won't of the change dialectic’ (2003) 26 Fordham Int'l LJ 1015 Google Scholar; McEvoy, K ‘The agreement, prisoner release and the political character of the conflict’ (2000) 27 JLS 542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28. O'Rawe, above n 15, at 202.

29. Teitel, R Transitional Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000) p 217.Google Scholar

30. See further Christie, N ‘Conflicts as property’ (1977) 17 Br J Crimin 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

31. Zehr, H Changing Lenses (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1990).Google Scholar

32. Sullivan, D and Tifft, L Restorative Justice: Healing the Foundations of Our Everyday Lives (Wonsey, NY: Willow Tree Press, 2005).Google Scholar

33. Bazemore, G and Schiff, M ‘Understanding restorative community justice: what and why now?’ in Bazemore, G and Schiff, M (eds) Restorative Community Justice (Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Co, 2001)Google Scholar. See also Olson, S and Dzur, A ‘Revisiting informal justice: restorative justice and democratic professionalism’ (2004) 38 Law and Soc Rev 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. K Clamp The Receptiveness of Countries in Transition to Restorative Justice: A Comparative Analysis of the Role of Restorative Justice in Transitional Processes and Criminal Justice Reform Unpublished PhD Thesis (University of Leeds, 2010) p 29.

35. See further Findlay, M ‘Decolonising restoration and justice: restoration in transitional cultures’ (2000) 39 Howard J 398 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aldana Pindell, R ‘An emerging universality of justiciable victims' rights in the criminal process to curtail impunity for state sponsored crimes’ (2004) 26 HRQ 605 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. While the use of restorative justice initiatives (usually in the form of truth commissions) is fairly widespread, it can be noted that – in contrast to Northern Ireland – restorative justice has not permeated the formal criminal justice system of many of these societies. Programmes that have evolved, most notably in South Africa, tend to be of a localised nature and are community led. See further Skelton, A ‘Africa’ in Johnstone, G and Van Ness, D (eds) Handbook of Restorative Justice (Cullompton: Willan, 2007)Google Scholar; Roche, D ‘Restorative justice and the regulatory state in South African townships’ (2002) 42 Br J Crimin 514 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For the most part, they receive little or no support from the state and remain on the periphery of the criminal justice system.

36. C Cunneen ‘Reviving restorative justice traditions?’ in Johnstone and Van Ness, ibid. Cunneen cites the example of the Queensland Murri Court, where indigenous elders sit on the bench alongside magistrates and have an input into the sentencing process. Some offenders will thus receive customary punishments or work within the community as alternatives to a prison sentence. See also Cunneen, C ‘Restorative justice and the politics of decolonization’ in Weitekamp, GE and Kerner, H J (eds) Restorative Justice: Theoretical Foundations (Cullompton: Willan, 2001).Google Scholar

37. See Bazemore, G and Schiff, M Juvenile Justice Reform and Restorative Justice: Building Theory and Policy from Practice (Cullomton: Willan, 2004) ch 7.Google Scholar

38. Alfieri, A ‘Community prosecutors’ (2002) 90 Cal L Rev 1465 CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Braithwaite, J and Parker, C ‘Restorative justice is Republican justice’ in Bazemore, G and Walgrave, L (eds) Restorative Juvenile Justice (Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press, 1999)Google Scholar; J Braithwaite ‘Building legitimacy through restorative justice’ in Tyler, above n 20.

39. See, eg, Latimer, J, Dowden, C and Muise, D The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Practices: A Meta Analysis (Ottawa: Department of Justice, 2001)Google Scholar; Luke, G and Lind, B Reducing Juvenile Crime: Conferencing versus Court (Sydney: Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2002)Google Scholar; Poulson, B ‘A third voice: a review of empirical research on the psychological outcomes of restorative justice’ (2003) 1 Utah L Rev 167 Google Scholar; Maxwell, G et.al Achieving Effective Outcomes: Youth Justice in New Zealand (Wellington: Ministry of Social Development, 2004)Google Scholar; Sherman, L et.al ‘Effects of face to face restorative justice on victims of crime in four randomized controlled trials’ (2005) 1 Journal of Experimental Criminology 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40. New Zealand Ministry of Justice Court Referred Restorative Justice Pilot: Evaluation (Ministry of Justice, 2005).

41. Mathiesen, T Prison on Trial: A Critical Assessment (London: Sage, 1990).Google Scholar

42. Cordella, P ‘Sanctuary as a refuge from state justice’ in Sullivan, D and Tifft, L (eds) Handbook of Restorative Justice: A Global Perspective (London: Routledge, 2006).Google Scholar

43. See Duff, A ‘Restoration and retribution’ in von Hirsch, A et.al (eds) Restorative Justice and Criminal Justice: Competing or Reconcilable Paradigms (Oxford: Hart, 2003).Google Scholar

44. See Campbell et.al, above n 10.

45. See Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, Part I; Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, Part III.

46. See further J Dignan ‘Juvenile justice, criminal courts and restorative justice’ in Johnstone and Van Ness, above n 35.

47. Such persons should be dealt with by the police, either by way of warning and advice or a formal caution.

48. Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002, s 59.

49. Such ‘contracts’ are not enforceable as civil matters but as part of the sentencing procedure, thus a breach may result in the further criminal proceedings.

50. The potential range of possible elements in a conference plan is broad, but restricted by the provision that it must be completed within one year of the conference. A conference plan may even include a recommendation that the court exercise its powers by imposing a custodial sentence on the young person.

51. H Mika and K McEvoy ‘Restorative justice in conflict: paramilitarism, community, and the construction of legitimacy in Northern Ireland’ (2001) 4 Contemp Just Rev 291.

52. Criminal Justice Review Group, above n 6, p 190.

53. Article 3A of the Criminal Justice (Children) (Northern Ireland) Order 1998, SI 1998/1504, as inserted by s 57 of the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002.

54. Campbell et.al, above n 10, pp 69–71.

55. This compares favourably with other restorative programmes internationally. Cf Maxwell, G. and Morris, A. ‘Restorative justice and reconviction’ (2002) 5 Contemporary Justice Review 133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Crawford, A and Newburn, T Youth Offending and Restorative Justice: Implementing Reform in Youth Justice (Cullompton: Willan, 2003)Google Scholar; O'Mahony, D and Doak, J ‘Restorative justice: is more better?’ (2004) 43 Howard J 484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

56. Campbell et.al, above n 10, pp 51–53.

57. Most victim representatives attended conferences relating to offences of theft (39%) or criminal damage (30%), while the majority of personal victims (47%) were victims of assault. So called ‘victimless’ crimes, such as drug related offences, disorderly behaviour or driving offences made up a further 13% of the cases where a victim representative attended a conference.

58. There is some evidence from the RISE initiative in Canberra that using surrogate victims was perceived by young offenders as being less effective than using actual victims in terms of the impact of their presence in the conference. See further LW Sherman, H Strang and D Woods ‘Captains of restorative justice: experience, legitimacy and recidivism by type of offence’ in Weitekamp and Kerner, above n 36.

59. Of 125 victims in total.

60. See, eg, Doak, J and O'Mahony, D ‘The vengeful victim? Assessing the attitudes of victims participating in restorative youth conferencing (2006) 13 International Review of Victimology 157 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hoyle, C, Young, R and Hill, R Proceed with Caution: An Evaluation of the Thames Valley Police Initiative in Restorative Cautioning (York: Rowntree Foundation, 2002)Google Scholar; Crawford and Newburn, above n 55. Similarly, Strang found little evidence in the RISE project that victims sought punishment or more severe punishments in restorative encounters: Repair or Revenge: Victims and Restorative Justice (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002).

61. Follow up research also assessed the impact of the scheme on recidivism rates: D Lyness ‘Northern Ireland youth re offending: results from the 2005 cohort’ (2008) 7 Research and Statistics Bulletin. These findings are encouraging and compare reconviction rates for young offenders given differing disposals, including custodial and community orders. The findings show those given restorative conferences had a lower one year reconviction rate (of 38%) than those given a custodial disposal (73%) or those given a community disposal (47%).

62. See generally Zehr, above n 31.

63. Sherman, L et.al Experiments in Restorative Policing: A Progress Report on the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 1998).Google Scholar

64. In addition to social policy debates about the meaning of community, the term has come to take on a much more specific meaning among some proponents of restorative justice. The concept of ‘micro communities’ has emerged (or communities of care), and refers to a range of stakeholders that have emerged from the circumstances surrounding the offence and have developed in order to encourage, help and support those directly involved. See further O'Mahony and Doak, above n 55.

65. Pavlich, G Governing Paradoxes of Restorative Justice (London: Glasshouse Press, 2005) p 87.Google Scholar

66. J Braithwaite Crime, Shame and Reintegration (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) p 85.

67. In relation to Northern Ireland, it was highlighted by O'Mahony et.al that communities are themselves composed of a range of diverse individuals who often lack uniformity in terms of age, race, socio economic profile, life experience, education and culture, and, in the particular context of Northern Ireland, religion or political opinion: O'Mahony, D et.al Crime, Community and Locale: The Northern Ireland Communities Crime Survey (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000).Google Scholar

68. Ibid, pp 6–7.

69. K McEvoy and A Eriksson ‘Restorative justice in transition: ownership, leadership and “bottom up” human rights’ in Sullivan and Tifft, above n 42.

70. Campbell et.al, above n 10, p 117.

71. See further McEvoy and Eriksson, above n 69; Eriksson, A Justice in Transition: Community Restorative Justice in Northern Ireland (Cullompton: Willan, 2009).Google Scholar

72. J Dignan and K Lowey Restorative Justice Options for Northern Ireland: A Comparative Review Criminal Justice Review Research Report No 10 (London: HMSO, 2000) p 26.

73. The Northern Ireland Office has now agreed funding for the projects which should secure the future of the projects in the short term; see ‘Goggins to fund restorative justice plan, despite row’Belfast Telegraph 30 July 2008.

74. See Ryan, B ‘Northern Ireland's district policing partnerships and the participatory ideals’ (2008) 23 Irish Pol St 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

75. Ibid. There is already a burgeoning body of literature which suggests that positive encounters with the police can help traditionally excluded minority groups to feel included within new social and political structures. See further D Smith ‘The foundations of legitimacy’ in Tyler, above n 20.

76. McEvoy, K and Eriksson, A ‘Who owns justice? Community, state, and the Northern Ireland transition’ in Shapland, J (ed) Justice, Community and Civil Society (Oxford: Hart, 2008).Google Scholar

77. Braithwaite, above n 38, p 150.

78. Morison, J ‘Democracy, governance and governmentality: civic public space and constitutional renewal in Northern Ireland’ (2001) 21 OJLS 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

79. Ibid, p 300, citing Giddens, A The Third Way and its Critics (Oxford: Policy Press, 2000) p 61.Google Scholar

80. See comments of Crispin Blunt MP, the Minister responsible for youth justice, at the seventh Annual Victims and Witnesses Conference in London, available at http://www.cypnow.co.uk/news/ByDiscipline/Youth Justice/1036899/Acclaimed restorative justice programme to England Wales/.

81. As opposed to ‘bonding’ social capital, which involves social networks between homogeneous groups of individuals who see themselves as sharing the same social identity.

82. Mutz, D ‘Cross cutting social networks: testing democratic theory in practice’ (2002) 96 Amer Pol Sci Rev 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

83. Roche, above n 35.

84. M Schiff ‘Models, challenges and the promise of restorative conferencing strategies’ in A von Hirsch et.al, above n 43.

85. The Eames Bradley Report was launched in Belfast in January 2009 (see the website available at http://www.cgpni.org). The level of controversy surrounding the report reflects the fact that there is a profound lack of consensus within Northern Ireland as to how to deal with the legacy of the Troubles. See further Lawther, C ‘“Securing” the past: policing and the contest over truth in Northern Ireland’ (2010) 50(3) Br J Crim 455 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ní Aoláin, F ‘Truth telling accountability and the right to life in Northern Ireland’ (2002) 5 EHRLR 50 Google Scholar; Rolston, B and Scraton, P ‘In the full glare of English politics: Ireland, inquiries and the British state’ (2005) 45(4) Br J Crim 547 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lundy, P and McGovern, M ‘Attitudes towards a truth commission for Northern Ireland in relation to party political affiliation’ (2007) 22(3) Irish Pol St 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

86. This is a marked difference with many other truth commissions established elsewhere – most notably the TRC where perpetrators were offered an amnesty from prosecution in return for giving evidence.

87. Somewhat controversially, the report proposed that an ‘ex gratia recognition payment’ of £12,000 would be offered to all the families of all those who were killed in the Troubles, including members of paramilitary organisations. However, the government subsequently announced that this proposal would not be implemented as there was a lack of public consensus on the issue: ‘Government rejects £12,000 payments for Troubles victims’The Times 25 February 2009. At the time of writing (October 2010), the Eames Bradley proposals still had not been implemented, with the government deliberating on how best to proceed following a public consultation.