LA GIUSTIZIA RIPARATIVA. DAL CONCETTO ALLA RIDEFINIZIONE

The body of scientific literature on Restorative Justice is vast and continues to expand at a relentless pace. At first glance, choosing this topic might seem far from original. Yet, it is precisely the overwhelming scale of this literature that provides the starting point for this work. Paradoxically, the more one explores the extensive writings on Restorative Justice, the less clear its meaning appears to become. This research does not claim to offer a definitive solution to this semantic confusion. Instead, it stems from a pressing need for conceptual clarity. Addressing this need involves, first, identifying a common ground and, second, putting forward a redefinition. The structure of this work reflects this approach, dividing the analysis into three chapters. The first chapter, ‘‘Problemi e metodo di un’analisi della giustizia riparativa’’, serves two purposes. It introduces the subject of the research, focusing on the significant conceptual vagueness surrounding the term ‘‘Restorative Justice’’, and outlines the objectives and methods adopted to achieve them. Two key objectives guide the research. The first is to determine whether it is possible to identify shared assumptions about Restorative Justice that are broadly accepted within the relevant scholarly and professional community. In simpler terms, the aim is to establish whether a stable conceptual core of Restorative Justice exists. The second objective is to propose a re-definition of Restorative Justice. The second chapter, “Alla ricerca di un’area solida”, is devoted to achieving the first objective. The analytical method used here is meta-dogmatic and meta-normative. It involves examining key doctrinal definitions (from both international and Italian contexts) and significant normative definitions (both national and supranational) to identify shared assumptions regarding the term ‘‘Restorative Justice’’. The doctrinal definitions selected for analysis are those that occupy a central or highly influential position in the academic debate on the conceptual and definitional aspects of Restorative Justice. Normative definitions were chosen using two criteria: their contemporary relevance and their institutional representativeness. This meta-jurisprudential approach not only identifies common ground but also brings to light the central and most contentious issues surrounding the concept. This insight proves particularly valuable for the subsequent redefinition effort. In the third chapter, titled “A Redefinitional Proposal”, the redefinition is presented. This redefinition builds on the findings of the second chapter and is further developed in light of the solutions proposed to the contentious issues previously outlined.