The author illustrates the complexity of cases mediators are confronted with by using two exemplary cases. Sometimes legal issues deriving from family law, divorce law and criminal law all are disputed at the same time, frustrating and even blocking all parties including their legal counsels who are also part of the conflict-system. When a conflict-system becomes contaminated, often support systems are mobilised. If a mediator wants to play a role in sorting out the process – which is not his fundamental task – it is best to seek co-operation with the legal counsels.

In the Netherlands more and more criminal lawyers recognize the importance of Restorative Justice. The author illustrates this on the basis of several criminal cases in different phases of the criminal process. Under conditions Restorative Justice is of importance for all parties, including the suspect/offender. Criminal lawyers have to find the courage to overcome cold feet, so that they can fully meet the needs and interests of their clients.

Suspects are often much better off when they take responsibility for the harm they caused. They will accept their punishment more easily when also their side of the story is told and listened to. Not only they themselves, also their victim can benefit from this. Even when there is under circumstances no place for mediation in the pre-trial stage, also in the trial-stage people could come closer to each other. The counsel for the defense can play a coaching role in this process, that is not so much guided by classical principles of criminal law but much more by the experiences of the ones involved.

The author first describes the deontological axioma for the role of the defense counsel in the domain of criminal procedure. Since here the most serious charges are brought against a suspect, who may have all his life-perspectives to lose by severe punishments, the duty of the legal counsel is to be as one-sided in the defense of his clients views and interests as possible and as allowed by professional ethics. He is the guardian of the legitimate interests of the suspect in the context of a legal battle in or out of court about the legal truth of what is said to have happened. In view of the ideals of restorative justice (illustrated by references to Nils Christies Conflicts as property) a new set of rules and customs should be developed that can function as a framework of ‘restorative procedural law’. In the context of restorative justice legal counsel of both the suspect and the victim should be expected and able to function much more as ‘restorative coaches’, seeking co-operation and deliberation between all stakeholders. But, should clients – suspects and victims alike – decide against such an approach and want ‘their day in court’ this should also be possible and be realised. The independent courts should always remain the ultimate refuge for those seeking justice.

In Antwerp there is a strong involvement of lawyers in all mediations for minor suspects following. All minor suspects are automatically assigned a lawyer. In this article the author describes the current mediation procedure for minor suspects. Furthermore he gives some personal comments from his perspective as a mediator.

In this article the author gives insight in the tasks of a lawyer in mediation for minors. In the first part of his contribution he describes the legal framework, giving an overview of all relevant existing national and international legislation on children’s rights. Subsequently he describes the different tasks a lawyer has to attend in all stages of the mediation.

In his contribution the author points out that the right to legal assistance during police interrogations offers a wonderful opportunity to pay attention to the possibility of mediation and to ensure that the interrogating police officer abides Article 51h of the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure.

This contribution contains a response to the article of Vincent Geeraets included in this issue. Following the structure of Geeraets’ article this reflection consists of two parts: 1. Stories that deal with the origin of criminal law and restorative justice and 2. The perspective of the offender as someone who harms himself in the views of Duff and Claessen. In this contribution these parts are connected through the concepts ‘dialectics’ (ad 1) and ‘mysticism’ (ad 2) – i.e. concepts in which ‘Western’ respectively ‘Eastern’ Enlightenment seem to intertwine.

Adherents to restorative justice are to be commended for systematically questioning whether the manner in which criminal law is currently organised is a good thing. The debate about criminal justice and restorative justice is therefore an important one. It is also a debate which is occasionally marred by a reliance on ideology. In this article, a number of ideological claims are identified and discussed. First, both adherents to criminal law and supporters of restorative justice invoke an ‘origin story’ to defend their view. The origin story of criminal law consists of the idea that without criminal law the world would be a chaos, i.e. the world would resemble the state of nature as depicted by Hobbes. In contrast: the origin story of restorative justice revolves around the idea that without central authority people tend to resolve their conflicts harmoniously. I argue that neither types of origin story can withstand scrutiny. Secondly, in both the context of criminal law (e.g. Antony Duff) and restorative justice (e.g. Jacques Claessen), it is claimed that an individual by violating the rules harms himself as a person. The point of punishment (criminal justice) respectively reparation (restorative justice) therefore is to enable the offender to restore himself and to once again take up his role of citizen. I argue that the claim of self-harm may be based on a primitive worldview. Moreover, I show that this claim can be used to describe criminal law respectively restorative justice in terms that are too harmonious. In this way we lose sight of the coercion and violence that is involved in both contexts.

Based on a literature research and program evaluation of the practice of Victim in Focus (Slachtoffer in Beeld) in 2013, two issues are addressed: What are the possible effects of victim offender mediation? Which active mechanisms will cause or contribute to these effects? The authors describe the current context and developments in The Netherlands concerning restorative justice and then describe the effects and possible active mechanisms such as satisfaction, diminishing fear, anger and shame, information and consent, procedural justice, reduction of recidivism, compliance. In a synthesis of active mechanisms they present four domains or mediating factors: from incomprehension to comprehension (cognitive restoration); from unease to ease (emotional restoration); from injustice to justice (moral restoration); from powerless to powerful feelings (restoration of control). The victim offender mediation as a ritual has an impact or is supposed to have an impact on these four domains for both victims and offenders. Within the four domains four activities or interactions within victim offender mediation are presented: creating understanding through inter-subjectivity; expression of fear, trauma and shame; doing justice by excuses/apologies and restorative actions; regaining self control. Further research is needed to validate the model and to get more insight in essential or primary and secondary aspects in the explanation of the impacts of victim offender mediation.

While most restorative justice research would suggest that victims and offenders are often satisfied with their experiences, the number of referrals to these type of programs remain low. This lack of accessibility was the topic of the European Forum for Restorative Justice project, ‘Accessibility and Initiation of Restorative Justice’. This article reports on the project’s findings with regard to several factors which limit greater accessibility, as supported by the attitudes of referral bodies and restorative justice practitioners examined in the frame of this project. The results of previous research and the current empirical research illustrate how accessibility is hindered by (1) lacking or insufficient restorative justice legislation, (2) exclusion criteria regarding which cases may be suitable to restorative justice procedures, (3) a lack of knowledge among legal actors, restorative justice practitioners and the general public about restorative justice and its benefits, (4) the persistence of a retributive legal culture within criminal justice and (5) a need for greater cooperation among those who are involved whether as referral bodies or mediators or facilitators. Qualitative data is presented to provide a better understanding of these elements, in addition to potential solutions that were reported by the respondents. Furthermore, the authors take a closer look at the current situation in the Netherlands, including an overview of the trainings that were developed within the Accessibility project. The results of these trainings reinforce the factors that were identified by previous research and the current empirical research, and aimed to look for solutions to the main barriers to greater accessibility.

In this article we describe the mediation practice that exists at the prosecution office in Maastricht/Limburg and which was established in 1999. First, we summarize the main results of our earlier study on the relation between mediation and recidivism/reoffending rates on the basis of the Maastricht mediation model. In the remaining part of this article, we focus on answering the question whether the main results of our earlier study differ when we distinguish between adult (23 years and older) and juvenile (under 23 years) offenders. In order to answer this question several extra analyses have been carried out. The main conclusion of this article is that offenders with whom is mediated, reoffend significantly less than offenders who got a regular criminal sanction – regardless of whether the offenders are older or younger than 23 years.

This article studies the position of young victims in restorative justice and mediation. First we study the literature, which shows that although young victims may have specific needs, their position within restorative justice remains underexposed. Therefore, we have set up a small explorative study in the beginning of 2015. Through nine interviews with young victims who have gone through a mediation process in Flanders, we sought to answer three central questions. The article discusses whether these victims were satisfied with the mediation process, whether they could have a say in the process and what the importance was of having support persons throughout the mediation process.
We found that the participation of the parents does influence the mediation process, since the parents are the main support persons for the young victim. Other support people are seldom present in the process, although some victims wanted the school or a friend to participate. Most of the young victims found they had a say in the process, but the presence of the parents could be an impediment in that regard. Young victims interviewed were generally satisfied with the mediator and mediation process, but not always with the outcome of the mediation. Ensuring that these young victims really get a say in the process proved to be a point of attention for practice.