In the Netherlands there is a tendency to make use of the methodology of conferencing circles in case of domestic violence and abuse. The 2009 evaluation showed positive results and since then the approach has been improved, giving way to an increase of requests coming from justice (related) authorities. The underlying approach and caveats are discussed, portraying Eigen Kracht-conferences as an adequate means to unravel the complex phenemenon of domestic violence and abuse, calling upon significant others.

Tackling honour related violence is part of the Dutch policy on domestic violence. On the police level a centre of expertise was installed, the LEC EGG. Next to strategies with regard to detection, the LEC EGG has put forward instructions with regard to the application of police mediation in cases of honour related violence. These rules, the ‘7 golden W’s’, are presented and discussed, paying attention to the institutional role of the police.

Restorative Justice is not evident in cases of intimate partner violence, but it can take and does take place under certain conditions. Wolthuis and Lünnemann explain about the European research they coordinated in six European countries (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, the Netherlands and the UK) on context and practicalities of the use of victim-offender mediation in such complex cases. Cases dealing with violence of mainly men against women and where power imbalances often play a role. That means that mediators, referrers and others involved should know about this complexity and the needs of participants. Austria and Finland turned out to have the most experienced working methods. Their models, good practices and challenges are presented as well as the main outcomes of the research. Interviews and focus groups in the countries gave additional insights. It resulted in a guide with minimum standards addressing the different stages of a mediation process with extra attention for safety and empowerment.

Some believe that the credibility of restorative justice can be increased if more attention is given to the quality of the mediator, as well as methods to select people with the right profile or by training. At first glance this seems a legitimate aim: mediation services should offer quality. Reflecting on practical experience and research into mediation between offenders and victims in Flanders, the author problematizes these assumptions. The quest for tangible quality to ensure ‘credibility’ refers to a neo-liberal approach aimed at reducing risks and promoting the client’s satisfaction. In this article the author confronts the apolitical approach of client satisfaction with alternative ideas about (restorative) justice. Ideally, the mediator is critical of established (legal) authorities and professional expertise. Mediation is political in nature, even if the mediator relies on neutrality. The mediator must be aware of his – inevitable – political stance and should be ready to be interrogated on this matter.

The mediator in criminal cases operates in special setting which requires specific competences: knowledge of the field of criminal law, knowledge of psychiatric/psychological problems and – if necessary – be able to consult a network of experts in that field, being prepared to operate in complex offender-victim relations and also to deal with high-escalated conflicts. These requirements raise a number of questions regarding the rules of the Dutch mediation federation, which are not designed to be used in the context of criminal law. Mediators in criminal cases are in need of other rules and pre-conditions to fulfil their work adequately.

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.