Araştırma Makalesi


DOI :10.26650/JPLC2019-0009   IUP :10.26650/JPLC2019-0009    Tam Metin (PDF)

Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar

Boran Ali Mercan

Onarıcı adalet mağdur ve failin gönüllülük temelinde, yakınlarıyla birlikte ve arabulucular eşliğinde, karşı karşıya geldiği ve birbirleriyle empati kurarak uzlaştıkları alternatif bir adalet pratiğidir. Tartışmaların onarıcı adaletin hukuki ve sosyokültürel imkanlılık koşullarına odaklaştığı kriminoloji yazınında, sözü pek geçmese de taraflar arası uzlaşının aslî koşulu, failin utanç ve pişmanlık duymasını mümkün kılacak karşılıklı pozitif duygusal etkileşim ve aktarıma dayanmaktadır. Öte yandan onarıcı adalet araştırmaları, mağdur-fail karşılaşmalarında pişmanlık duygusu, özrün samimiliği ve sahihliği sorununu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu makale, psikososyal kriminolojik bir perspektifle duygu ve duygulanım arasında bir ayrıma gitmekte; duyguların sosyal bağlama göre bilinçle manipüle edilebilir sembolik bedensel–dilsel gösterenler olduğunu tartışırken, duygulanımların bilinçdışı deneyimlenen ve sembolikleştirilemeyen enerji ve yoğunluklar olduğunu ileri sürmektedir. Çeşitli vaka analizi ve bulgulardan hareketle makale, failin onarıcı adalet pratiğinin başarısızlığı neticesinde olası bir ceza tehdidi karşısında deneyimlediği endişe ve korku gibi negatif duygulanımlar nedeniyle, karşılaşmadan beklenilen idealize edilmiş sonucu sağlayacak ve mağduru ikna edebilecek pozitif sembolik-duygusal temsiller sergileyebilme durumunu tartışmaktadır. Bu nedenle, mağdur ve fail arasındaki etkileşim sürecinde duygusal kırılma anlarındaki duygulanımsal yoğunluklara dikkat edilmelidir. Belirli bir sosyal ve hukuki düzlemde onarıcı adalet uygulamalarının başarısı ve tesisi ileri sürülürken psikososyal kriminolojik perspektif göz önünde bulundurulmalıdır.

DOI :10.26650/JPLC2019-0009   IUP :10.26650/JPLC2019-0009    Tam Metin (PDF)

Victim-Offender Encounters in Restorative Justice Practices: Emotional Representations versus Genuine Affects

Boran Ali Mercan

Restorative justice is an alternative practice in justice whereby offenders and victims voluntarily encounter, empathise and finally reconcile with each other in the presence of family and relatives, and other mediators. However, studies of restorative justice reveal the problem of offenders’ sincerity and genuineness in terms of their remorse and guilt in such encounters. Based on a psychosocial criminological perspective, this paper offers a conceptual distinction between emotion and affect, and further argues that emotion refers to symbolic bodily–linguistic signifiers being adaptable and consciously manipulable according to social contexts, whilst affect indicates an energy or intensities experienced unconsciously and not being symbolised. Setting out various case studies and pieces of evidence, the paper suggests that under the pressure of negative affects such as anxiety and fear of a possible failure of restorative justice conferences, offenders tend to display positive symbolic-emotional representations in a way that would convince victims and other mediators of their guilt and shame. The latter usually leads to the expected–idealised result of the victim-offender encounter. A psychosocial criminological perspective should always be taken into consideration while restorative justice practices are claimed to be successful and implemented in a specific social and judicial setting.


GENİŞLETİLMİŞ ÖZET


Restorative justice is an alternative practice of justice whereby offenders and victims voluntarily encounter, empathise and finally reconcile with each other in the presence of family and relatives, and other mediators. It has emerged as a substitute for the criminalising effects and humane-fiscal cost of the retributive justice system and initiated the active participation of community members in justice procedure. In this regard, community values and norms function as replacements for the written law of the state and criminal justice courts but with regard to more integrating and inclusionary means. The aim is, simply, to restore the broken rule of law by reintegrating perpetrators into the law-abiding community. The main condition for reconciliation between parties relies on a mutual positive emotional interaction and transference between parties, the aim of which is to make offenders reflect on their illicit behaviours and ultimately feel shame and remorse. Even though debates mostly focus on the judicial and socio-cultural viability of this alternative justice system, it is the possibility of a positive emotional interaction that plays a critical role in setting peace and reconciliation between victim and offenders. The idealised process is personified by the revealing of positive emotional expressions, mutual empathy and understanding between the parties in a conflict of interest. A psychosocial criminological approach to the evidence found in the literature on restorative justice has thus far shown that shame and remorse are the two key emotions anticipated for reconciliation in this setting. While not referenced explicitly, this emotional interaction process bears rather on a psychosocial character given that certain psychoanalytical processes are implicitly at work when victims and offenders are seeking to empathise with each other. Given the previous successful results of restorative justice conferences, emotional interaction between the parties has been observed to lead to the construction of mutual empathy and final closure, relying on identification and transference. In the course of the interaction, certain emotional turning points have been identified as taking place between the victim and the offenders, the latter of whom attempts to initiate a possible closure by symbolicemotional posture, facial expressions and gestures. These emotional turning points usually change the course of the conversation between the parties, resulting in the expression of a cordial apology by the offender and its acceptance by victim. However, studies on restorative justice reveal the problem of offenders’ sincerity and the genuineness of their remorse and guilt in such encounters. Some researchers argue that a genuine flow of shame and remorse, in an idealised form, is not displayed by offenders in contrast to the idealised expectations. To exemplify this, setting out the findings of the South Australia Juvenile Justice Research and Conferencing Project, Kathleen Daly draws attention to the fact that victims thought that only 30 per cent of offenders’ apologies were genuine, whereas offenders claimed that 60 per cent of apologies were truly sorry. This means that victims do not think offenders’ apologies are sincere and that offenders think that their apology does not truly reflect any genuine intent. Put it another way, the evidences suggest that there is a radical difference between offenders’ psychic-inner experiences and the presentation of themselves regarding the imperatives of restorative justice setting. This paper offers a conceptual distinction between emotion and affect as viewed from a psychoanalytically-inflected psychosocial criminological perspective. It further argues that emotion refers to symbolic bodily–linguistic signifiers being adaptable and consciously manipulable according to social contexts, whilst affect indicates an energy or intensities experienced unconsciously and not being symbolised. Setting out various case studies and pieces of evidence, the paper suggests that under the pressure of negative affects such as anxiety and fear of a possible failure of the restorative justice conference, offenders tend to display positive symbolic-emotional representations in a way that would convince victims and other mediators of their guilt and shame. The latter usually leads to the expected–idealised result of the victim-offender encounter. Thus, affective intensities in the emotional turning points need to be considered within the interaction process between victim and offender. A psychosocial criminological perspective should always be taken into consideration while restorative justice practices are claimed to be successful and implemented in a specific social and judicial setting.


PDF Görünüm

Referanslar

  • Acorn A, Compulsory Compassion: A Critique of Restorative Justice (UBC Press, Vancouver 2004). google scholar
  • Ahmed S, The Cultural Politics of Emotion (Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh 2004). google scholar
  • Bailly L, Lacan Beginners Guides (Oneworld, London 2009). google scholar
  • Baytaz AB, ‘Onarıcı Adalet’e Genel Bir Bakış’ [2013] 71 İÜHFM 117, 122–6. google scholar
  • Bosworth M, ‘Affect and authority in immigration detention’ (2018) PC https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1462474518803321/ erişildi 15 Ocak 2019. google scholar
  • Braithwaite J, ‘Rape, Shame, and Pride: Address to the Stockholm Criminology Symposium’ [2006] 7 JSSCCP 2. google scholar
  • —— ‘Restorative justice: Assessing optimistic and pessimistic accounts’ [1999] 25 CJ 1, 4–9. google scholar
  • —— Crime, Shame, and Reintegration (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1989). google scholar
  • —— Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation (Oxford University Press, New York 2002). google scholar
  • Breuer J ve Freud S, Studies on Hysteria (ilk basım 1895 Penguin, London 1988). google scholar
  • Clarke RV, ‘Situational crime prevention’ [1995] 19 CJ 91. google scholar
  • Cullen FT ve Agnew R, Criminological Theory: Past to present (Oxford University Press, New York 2006). google scholar
  • Daly K ve Stubbs J, ‘Feminist engagement with restorative justice’ [2006] 10 TC 9, 17. google scholar
  • —— ‘Restorative justice and sexual assault: An archival study of court and conference cases’ [2005] 46 BJC 334, 346. google scholar
  • —— ‘Restorative justice: The real story’ [2002] 4 PS 55 google scholar
  • Dolu O, Büker H ve Uludağ Ş, ‘Türk Ceza Adalet Sisteminin Caydırıcılık Kapasitesine İlişkin Bir Değerlendirme’ [2012] 61 AÜHFD 69. google scholar
  • Ekman P ve Friesen WV, Unmasking the face: A guide to recognizing emotions from facial clues (Prentice Hall, New Jersey 1975). google scholar
  • Ferrell J ve Sanders CR, Toward a cultural criminology (Northeastern University Press, Boston 1995). google scholar
  • —— ‘Criminological Verstehen: Inside the Immediacy of Crime’ içinde Jeff Ferrell and Mark S. Hamm (der) Ethnography at the edge: Crime, deviance, and field research (Northeastern University Press, Boston 1998). google scholar
  • ——, Hayward K ve Young J, Cultural Criminology: An Invitation (Sage, London 2008). google scholar
  • Freud S, Inhibitions, Symptoms and Anxiety (ilk basım 1926 Hogarth Press, London 1971). google scholar
  • ——, On Metapsychology (ilk basım 1915 Penguin, London 1991). google scholar
  • Glynos J ve Stavrakakis Y, ‘Lacan and political subjectivity: Fantasy and enjoyment in psychoanalysis and political theory’ [2008] 24 S 256, 267. google scholar
  • Goodwin J, Jasper JM ve Polletta F (der), Passionate politics: Emotions and social movements (University of Chicago Press, Chicago 2009). google scholar
  • Gregg M ve Seigworth GJ (der), The affect theory reader (Duke University Press, Durham 2010). google scholar
  • Gross JJ ve PJ Oliver, ‘Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being’ [2003] 85 JPSP 348. google scholar
  • Hayward K, ‘Situational crime prevention and its discontents: rational choice theory versus the ‘culture of now’’ [2007] 41 SPA 233. google scholar
  • Hirschi T, ‘Self-control and crime’, içinde Kathleen D. Vohs ve Roy F. Baumeister (der), Handbook of Self-Regulation: Research, Theory, and Applications (Guilford, New York 2004). google scholar
  • Johnston A ve Malabou C, Self and emotional life: Philosophy, psychoanalysis, and neuroscience (Columbia University Press, New York 2013). google scholar
  • Johnstone G, Restorative justice: Ideas, values, debates (Routledge, London 2002). google scholar
  • Karstedt S, ‘Emotions and criminal justice’ [2002] 6 TC 299. google scholar
  • Katz J, Seductions of Crime: The Moral and Sensual Attractions of Doing Evil (Basic Books, New York 1988). google scholar
  • Luke G ve Lind B, Reducing Juvenile Crime: Conferencing vs Court. Crime and Justice Bulletin (New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research 2002). google scholar
  • Massumi B, Parables for the Virtual: Movements, Affect, Sensation (Duke University Press, Durham 2002). google scholar
  • Matsumoto D, ‘Ethnic differences in affect intensity, emotion judgments, display rule attitudes, and selfreported emotional expression in an American sample’ [1993] 17 ME 107. google scholar
  • Maxwell G ve Morris A, ‘Restorative Justice and Reoffending’ içinde John Braithwaite ve Heather Strang (der) Restorative Justice: Philosophy to Practice (Ashgate Publishing, London 2000). google scholar
  • Mercan BA, ‘Doing criminological research: Affective states versus emotional reactions’ (2018) TC https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1362480618779399/ erişildi 15 Ocak 2019. google scholar
  • Munezero MD, Montero CS, Sutinen E ve Pajunen J, ‘Are they different? Affect, feeling, emotion, sentiment, and opinion detection in text’ [2014] 5 IEEETAC 101. google scholar
  • Nugent W, Williams M ve Umbreit M, ‘Participation in Victim-Offender Mediation and the Prevalence and Severity of Subsequent Delinquent Behavior’ [2003] 1 ULR 137. google scholar
  • Retzinger S ve Scheff T, ‘Strategies for Community Conferences: Emotions and Social Bonds’ içinde Burt Galaway and Joe Hudson Monsey (der) Restorative Justice: International Perspectives (Criminal Justice Press, New York, 1996). google scholar
  • Rodriguez N, ‘Restorative Justice at Work: Examining the Impact of Restorative Justice Resolutions on Juvenile Recidivism’ [2007] 53 CD 35. google scholar
  • Rossner M, ‘Emotions and interaction ritual: A micro analysis of restorative justice’ [2011] 51 BJC 95. google scholar
  • Sherman LW, Strang H ve Woods D, Recidivism Patters in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE) (Australian National University, Canberra 2000). google scholar
  • Shouse E, ‘Feeling, emotion, affect’ (2005) MJ http://journal.mediaculture.org.au/0512/03-shouse.php/ erişildi 15 Aralık 2018. google scholar
  • Spinoza B, ‘Ethics’ içinde Michael L. Morgan (der) Spinoza Complete Works (ilk basım 1677 Hackett Publishing, Indianapolis 2002). google scholar
  • Strang H, Repair or Revenge: Victims and Restorative Justice (Oxford University, Oxford 2002). google scholar
  • Stubbs J, ‘Beyond apology? Domestic violence and critical questions for restorative justice’ [2007] 7 CCJ 169, 170–1. google scholar
  • Sümer O ve Önkal G, ‘Onarıcı Adalet Bakımından Uzlaştırma Mekanizmasının Suç Önleme İşlevi’ içinde Hukuk Felsefesi ve Sosyolojisi Arkivi, 26. Kitap (İstanbul Barosu Yayınları, İstanbul 2014) 383–403. google scholar
  • Thrift N, Non-Representational Theory: Space Politics and Affect (Routledge, London 2008). google scholar
  • Tibbetts SG ve Myers DL, ‘Low self-control, rational choice, and student test cheating’ [1999] 23 AJC 179. google scholar
  • Triggs S, New Zealand Court-Referred Restorative Justice Pilot: Two year Follow-up of Reoffending (New Zealand Ministry of Justice 2005). google scholar
  • Umbreit M, Coates R ve Vos B, ‘Restorative Justice Dialogue: A Multi-Dimensional, Evidence-Based Practice Theory’ [2007] 10 CJR 23. google scholar
  • van Stokkom V, ‘Moral emotions in restorative justice conferences: Managing shame, designing empathy’ [2002] 6 TC 339, 341–3. google scholar
  • Walshe B ve Geske J, ‘Dialogical Processes Examined: A Victim offender dialogue case study’ [2007] 1, 1. google scholar
  • Wetherell M, Affect and Emotion: A New Social Science Understanding (Sage, London 2012). google scholar
  • Williams S, Emotion and social theory: corporeal reflections on the (ir)rational (Sage, London 2001). google scholar
  • Wright BRE, Caspi A, Moffitt TE ve Paternoster R, ‘Does the perceived risk of punishment deter criminally prone individuals? Rational choice, self-control, and crime’ [2004] 41 JRCD 180. google scholar
  • Yavuz HA, ‘Onarıcı Adalet ve Uzlaştırma Kurumu Bağlamında Ceza Adalet Sisteminde Mağdurun Konumu’ [2015] TAAD 85. google scholar
  • Young A, Imagining Crime (Sage, London 1996). google scholar

Atıflar

Biçimlendirilmiş bir atıfı kopyalayıp yapıştırın veya seçtiğiniz biçimde dışa aktarmak için seçeneklerden birini kullanın


DIŞA AKTAR



APA

Mercan, B. (2019). Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar. Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi, 7(1), 103-125. https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


AMA

Mercan B. Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar. Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi. 2019;7(1):103-125. https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


ABNT

Mercan, B. Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar. Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi, [Publisher Location], v. 7, n. 1, p. 103-125, 2019.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Mercan, Boran Ali,. 2019. “Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar.” Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi 7, no. 1: 103-125. https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


Chicago: Humanities Style

Mercan, Boran Ali,. Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar.” Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi 7, no. 1 (Oct. 2022): 103-125. https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


Harvard: Australian Style

Mercan, B 2019, 'Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar', Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 103-125, viewed 2 Oct. 2022, https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Mercan, B. (2019) ‘Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar’, Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi, 7(1), pp. 103-125. https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009 (2 Oct. 2022).


MLA

Mercan, Boran Ali,. Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar.” Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi, vol. 7, no. 1, 2019, pp. 103-125. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


Vancouver

Mercan B. Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar. Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi [Internet]. 2 Oct. 2022 [cited 2 Oct. 2022];7(1):103-125. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009 doi: 10.26650/JPLC2019-0009


ISNAD

Mercan, Boran Ali. Onarıcı Adalet Pratiklerinde Mağdur-Fail Karşılaşması: Duygusal Temsiller karşısında Hakiki Duygulanımlar”. Ceza Hukuku ve Kriminoloji Dergisi 7/1 (Oct. 2022): 103-125. https://doi.org/10.26650/JPLC2019-0009



ZAMAN ÇİZELGESİ


Gönderim19.02.2019
Kabul29.04.2019
Çevrimiçi Yayınlanma13.05.2019

LİSANS


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


PAYLAŞ




İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları, uluslararası yayıncılık standartları ve etiğine uygun olarak, yüksek kalitede bilimsel dergi ve kitapların yayınlanmasıyla giderek artan bilimsel bilginin yayılmasına katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır. İstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları açık erişimli, ticari olmayan, bilimsel yayıncılığı takip etmektedir.