Restorative Justice & Gender-based Violence
According to the European Commission, gender-based violence (GBV) refers to violence directed against a person because of their gender or violence that disproportionately affects persons of a particular gender. The term is often used interchangeably with violence against women, as most GBV is inflicted on women and girls by men.
The UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women defines violence against women as:
“Any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.”
The Council of Europe’s Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence (Istanbul Convention) further clarifies GBV as:
“Violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately.”
While GBV overwhelmingly affects women, it is not limited to them. LGBT+ individuals also experience violence due to their perceived sexual orientation and gender identity. Men can also be victims of GBV, though at lower statistical rates. GBV stems from power imbalances and abuse and aims to humiliate or subordinate individuals or groups. It is deeply embedded in societal norms, structures, and values, often reinforced by denial and silence.
Hence, using the definition of ‘gender-based violence against women’ from the Explanatory report to the Istanbul Convention as a starting point we can say that:
“Gender-based violence refers to any type of harm that is perpetrated against a person or group of people because of their factual or perceived sex, gender, sexual orientation and/or gender identity.”
Forms of Gender-Based Violence
GBV can manifest in various forms, including:
◉ Physical violence (e.g., domestic abuse, assault)
◉ Sexual violence (e.g., rape, sexual harassment)
◉ Psychological violence (e.g., coercion, verbal abuse)
◉ Economic violence (e.g., financial control, workplace discrimination)
◉ Digital violence (e.g., cyber harassment, revenge porn)
Perpetrators can include intimate partners, family members, colleagues, or strangers, and it can occur in both private and public spheres.
Gender-based violence is a stark example of how power imbalances manifest within society, reinforcing structural inequalities and perpetuating harm. It is not merely an individual act of wrongdoing but a reflection of systemic power abuse, where victims are stripped of agency and silenced.
Gavrielides challenged Restorative Justice as a “biopower that can restore persistent inequalities and the misuse of power by top-down structures.” (Gavrielides 2021, p.5) He argues that fairness, in particular, can serve as the biopower that can “counterbalance the power structures that blind us all.” (Gavrielides 2021, p.38). In restorative justice, both victims and offenders are viewed as free individuals responsible for their actions and decisions. They are considered free from power, equal, and possess rights that must be respected and protected. (Gavrielides 2021, p. 69)
In cases of GBV, this framework challenges the existing power hierarchies by offering a space where survivors can reclaim their voice and agency while holding offenders accountable in a way that traditional justice systems often fail to do. Under the RJ framework, the oppressive structures that enable GBV collapse, allowing RJ to restore the broken liaison – a social connection that bonds individuals in a relationship of respect for the rights and freedom of others – that used to exist before harm occurred. By addressing these imbalances, RJ operates as a biopower capable of reconstructing fairness, challenging dominance, and fostering a justice process.
The Victims’ Rights Directive ensures that victims of crime, including GBV survivors, have access to safe and competent restorative justice (RJ) services. Another key RJ document includes the Recommendation CM/Rec(2018)8 (Restorative Justice in Criminal Matters)
Restorative justice (RJ) is defined by the Victims Directive as:
“Any process whereby the victim and the offender are enabled, if they freely consent, to participate actively in the resolution of matters arising from the criminal offence through the help of an impartial third party.”
Gavrielides (2007) expands on this definition, describing RJ as:
“An ethos with practical goals, among which is to repair harm by including affected parties in a (direct or indirect) encounter and a process of understanding through voluntary and honest dialogue.”
Theoretical critics argue that RJ may:
◉ Reinforce power imbalances in intimate violent relationships.
◉ Shift GBV cases into the private realm, reducing state intervention.
◉ Be perceived as an “easy way out” for offenders.
However, research counters these concerns. Studies indicate that RJ can be highly effective in serious cases, including GBV (Gavrielides, 2017; McGlynn et al., 2012; Knowles, 2013; Chan et al., 2015). RJ plays a crucial role in empowering victims, enabling them to voice the full extent of their harm and articulate their healing needs.
RJ supports victims in ways the traditional criminal justice system often fails to:
◉ Immediate protection – victims are given support to stop the violence received as a first step.
◉ Provides agency – victims can actively participate (EMPOWERMENT) rather than being passive observers of the conventional criminal justice system. Victims have the chance to state their story and seek validation and vindication.
◉ Acknowledges harm – offenders take responsibility without victim-blaming.
◉ Encourages healing – victims receive public validation and emotional closure.
◉ Balances power dynamics – facilitated dialogue in a non-judgmental environment ensures victim safety and dignity.
Pelikan (2010) and Gavrielides (2021) emphasize empowerment as RJ’s most significant benefit for GBV victims. During RJ processes, victims experience:
◉ A safe space to be heard and believed.
◉ Support from facilitators who ensure balanced communication.
◉ Opportunities for offenders to accept responsibility and demonstrate empathy (Loeffler et al., 2010).