Retribution is an important punishment goal in the legal system. However, the price society pays for retribution is currently unknown. In this contribution, we develop a new framework for determining the price of retribution. We do this on the basis of criminal cases in which judges impose prison sentences of up to 6 months while they could have opted for a community service order. This despite the fact that community service leads to lower costs and less recidivism. Our calculations estimate the annual cost of retribution at over 400 million euros per year. This is approximately 45 euros per taxpayer per year, and is most likely a lower bound of the actual costs.

To limit the collateral consequences of a criminal record, there is increasing attention for ‘evidence of rehabilitation’, which can counterbalance risk factors stemming from a criminal history, for example when assessing requests for a Certificate of Conduct (‘VOG’ in Dutch). Since screening procedures are often regarded as complex, opaque, ambiguous and inconsistent – also by professionals within the criminal justice system – the authors present a first quantitative analysis of the factors that contribute to the chance of successfully winning a Certificate of Conduct in appeal. Our analysis of all published case law since 2004 (N=383) shows that administrative judges in Certificate of Conduct cases mainly refer to risk factors based on the criminal history: the number and seriousness of the offences and the times lapsed. Protective factors and evidence of rehabilitation play only a marginal role. Moreover, in a significant proportion of cases it remains unclear how relevant factors, such as the applicant’s interest, are weighed, if they are referred to at all. This necessitates not only reconsideration of rehabilitation policy, but also more foreseeability, certainty and transparency in criminal record screening decisions.

Many researchers have recently shifted their focus to opening the black box of restorative justice and answering the question how restorative justice works. Which theoretical assumptions are best suited to explain the relative success of restorative justice in terms of a sense of responsibility in perpetrators and reduced feelings of fear and grief in victims? This contribution discusses a number of promising, recent studies that pay attention to the how-question mentioned (how do 'positive' results come about, and what specific factors influence this?), in combination with the question for whom (which victims and offenders participate and what are their needs?) and the question in which context (which offenses lend themselves to restorative justice encounters?).