Restorative Justice — Publication Article

21 october 2026

What can be done with harm once it has been committed? This is the question that runs throughout Marie Monnet’s new book, Restorative Justice: Foundations, Practices and Methods, published in October 2026 by Domuni-Press in its “Law” collection. A lawyer admitted to the Paris Bar, holding doctorates in law and theology, and Rector of Domuni-Universitas, the author presents a concise yet substantial work that grew out of lectures delivered since 2024 in Toulouse, Brussels and Tours. She presents an alternative way of administering justice, one that is less conspicuous but profoundly humane.

What a trial cannot provide

The book opens with a scene. As part of a French programme bringing prisoners and victims together, a mother whose son was killed agrees to meet a man convicted of a similar homicide. He is not the murderer of her child. No lawyer pleads his case, and no sentence is at stake: he simply recounts the violence, followed by his gradual realisation of the harm he has caused. At the end, she says: “For the first time, I feel that someone has answered me.”

The entire book begins with this gap. Marie Monnet does not reject criminal justice. On the contrary, she recalls its historic achievement: replacing endless vengeance with a third party who passes judgement, from the Areopagus established by Athena in the Oresteia to the cities of refuge in the Torah. However, she also identifies its blind spots. Victims often remain on the periphery of a trial that pits the state against the accused. Offenders are invited to defend themselves, but are rarely asked to assess what they have destroyed. Social ties, meanwhile, are not restored, and reoffending rates remain high: 59% of those released from prison in 2016 were convicted again within four years. Finally, there are cases in which the limitation period has expired, offenders have died or remain unidentified, or complaints have been dismissed without further action, leaving victims alone with what they have endured.

Two truths, four pillars

In response to these limitations, restorative justice proposes a “change of lens”, to use the expression coined by Howard Zehr, one of its pioneers: viewing crime not primarily as a violation of the law, but as harm inflicted on individuals and relationships. The author thus distinguishes between two kinds of truth. The truth of the facts, established by the trial according to its rules of evidence and the adversarial principle, remains indispensable. But there is also a relational truth, which expresses not merely what happened, but what it did to those involved. “Such a truth cannot be proven; it is entrusted to others.”

The book structures this approach around four pillars: the truth of the facts, the free and personal commitment of each participant, the restoration of relationships, and the community dimension. The latter pillar, “often overlooked”, is decisive for the author, as it distinguishes restorative justice from a simple two-party mediation. Responsibility for an act belongs to its perpetrator, she writes, “but reconstruction belongs to everyone”.

Three thinkers shed light on this insight. Emmanuel Levinas shows that the face of the other places me under an obligation before any rule does. René Girard describes the temptation to seek a scapegoat that threatens every wounded community. Paul Ricœur sees judgement as establishing a “just distance”, which the restorative encounter, in turn, seeks to address. One interpretative key runs throughout the book: restorative justice is, on a small scale, what transitional justice is on a large scale, from Desmond Tutu’s South Africa to Rwanda, Peru and Colombia.

Rigorous methods, a precise legal framework

The book’s most practical contribution lies in its description of restorative justice procedures. Far from depicting the process as an improvised conversation, it presents the encounter as something “planned down to the smallest detail”. It unfolds in four stages: the request, which must always be voluntary and revocable; an extensive preparation phase, often lasting several months, involving individual interviews designed to identify unrealistic or dangerous expectations; the encounter itself, facilitated by two practitioners in the presence of two volunteers representing civil society; and, finally, the follow-up period. The book favours encounters in which victims and offenders are not connected through the same case: victims can ask their questions without having to confront the person who harmed them directly.

The legal framework is presented clearly. In France, the Act of 15 August 2014 introduced Article 10-1 into the Code of Criminal Procedure, allowing restorative justice measures to be proposed at every stage of proceedings. The facts must have been acknowledged, the participants must have consented, and the process must be facilitated by an independent, trained third party. Belgium, a pioneer in this field, has allowed mediation at any stage since the Act of 22 June 2005.

One chapter addresses situations in which a trial is not possible, beginning with sexual abuse within the Church. Following the report of the Sauvé Commission, INIRR and the Recognition and Reparation Commission offered a means of acknowledging harm outside the courtroom. The author also introduces the association Justice Autrement, founded in 2022 by Thérèse de Villette, of which she is a founding member, and its Offender–Victim Encounters. In Belgium, she also discusses the arbitration centre that handled 628 requests between 2012 and 2017: more than 80% of victims chose conciliation rather than a decision imposed by a third party.

Demanding justice, not a lesser form of justice

The book does not give way to unqualified enthusiasm. It reviews the available evaluations, including the Campbell Collaboration review (2013), based on ten randomised trials; the research conducted by Joanna Shapland in the United Kingdom; and a 2025 meta-analysis reporting an approximately 17% reduction in the risk of reoffending. The benefits are real, particularly for victims, but the effect on reoffending remains limited. It is also more pronounced when the restorative encounter complements criminal proceedings than when it replaces them.

The author also confronts the objections: that restorative justice is too lenient, that it may inflict further harm, that it may be instrumentalised, and, above all, that in cases of domestic and intrafamilial violence, an encounter may reproduce the dynamics of coercive control rather than break them. Her response is unequivocal: restorative justice takes place “after protection has been secured and alongside justice, never in its place”.

The final chapters open up a biblical perspective through the stories of Joseph and his brothers, David and Nathan, Zacchaeus, and the prodigal son. They then reflect on mercy, which must never be used to conceal wrongdoing: forgiveness belongs to the victim. A final chapter extends this approach to the “ordinary wounds” experienced within families, teams and communities.

Legal professionals, judges, educators, prison visitors, Church leaders and general readers alike will find in this book a clear synthesis, supplemented by bibliographical references and the principal source texts. It fulfils its promise: to show that truth, “when spoken and received, can help people rise rather than crush them”.

Marie Monnet, Justice restaurative. Fondements, pratiques et méthodes, Domuni-Press, “Law” collection, October 2026.