Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The Brazilian prison population in 2016 had increased by more than 700%, compared with the situation in the early 1990s, from 90 thousand to 726.7 thousand. The ordinary response to prison overcrowding came through changes to the justice system, such as Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Restorative Justice. Although these new processes are socially relevant, there are few studies about them anywhere, but especially in Brazil. This study seeks to discuss the perceptions of Brazilian judges upon these new ways of dispensing justice from the perspective of institutional change theory. The data collection involved document analysis, court-hearing observations, and interviews with 14 key-actors in the Brazilian justice system. The results show four dimensions—beliefs, motivations, commitment, and intergroup relations—that characterize the roles played by Brazilian judges working with Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Restorative Justice. This movement can be classified as the modal type of institutional change called layering and “radical” frame blending.

Keywords

therapeutic jurisprudence restorative justice judges institutional change Brazil

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Annison

(2019). Transforming rehabilitation as “policy disaster”: Unbalanced policy-making and probation reform. Probation Journal, 66, 43-59.

Battilana

Leca

Boxenbaum

(2009). How actors change institutions: Towards a theory of institutional entrepreneurship. The Academy of Management Annals, 3, 65-107. doi:10.1080/19416520903053598

Bazemore

Umbreit

(2001). A comparison of four restorative conferencing models (Juvenile Justice Bulletin). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Bergseth

K. J.

Bouffard

J. A.

(2007). The long-term impact of restorative justice programming for juvenile offenders. Journal of Criminal Justice, 35, 433-451.

Birgden

(2004). Therapeutic jurisprudence and responsivity: Finding the will and the way in offender rehabilitation. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10, 283-295. doi:10.1080/10683160410001662771

Birgden

(2015). Maximizing desistance: Adding therapeutic jurisprudence and human rights to the mix. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42, 19-31. doi:10.1177/0093854814550024

Braithwaite

(2002). Restorative justice and therapeutic jurisprudence. Criminal Law Bulletin, 38, 244-262.

Butts

J. A.

(2001). Introduction: Problem-solving courts. Law & Policy, 23(2), 121-124.

Casey

Rottman

D. B.

(2000). Therapeutic jurisprudence in the courts. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18, 445-457.

10.

Conselho Nacional de Justiça. [National Council of Justice]. (2018). Relatório Analítico Propositivo—Justiça Pesquisa—Direitos e Garantias Fundamentais [Purposeful Analytical Report- Justice Search- Fundamental Rights and Guarantees]. “Pilotando A Justiça Restaurativa: O Papel Do Poder Judiciário [Piloting Restorative Justice: The Role of the Judiciary.]” Retrieved from https://www.cnj.jus.br/files/conteudo/arquivo/2018/03/f78b252321b7491ffbbf9580f67e8947.pdf

11.

Cooper

C. S.

Franklin

Mease

(2010). Establishing Drug Treatment Courts: Strategies, Experiences and Preliminary Outcomes: Vol. 1. Overview and survey results. Washington, DC: Justice Programs Office, School of Public Affairs, American University.

12.

Corby

(2017). Critical distance. Journal for Cultural Research, 21, 293-294.

13.

Dollar

C. B.

Ray

Hudson

M. K.

Hood

B. J.

(2018). Examining changes in procedural justice and their influence on problem-solving court outcomes. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 36, 32-45.

14.

Fair and Just Prosecution. (2018, December 3). 21 principles for the 21st century prosecutor. Brennan Center for Justice, Emily Bazelon, The Justice Collaborative. Retrieved from https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/publications/FJP_21Principles_FINAL.pdf

15.

Feigenson

Park

(2006). Emotions and attributions of legal responsibility and blame: A research review. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 143-161.

16.

Fensterseifer

D. P.

Welter

(2017). Cortes de Drogas no Brasil: a herança do Projeto de Frederico Westphalen/RS [Drug Cuts in Brazil: The Heritage of the Frederico Westphalen / RS Project]. Revista da Faculdade de Direito da UFG [UFG Law School Journal], 41, 87-103.

17.

Freitas

C. S. C.

Silva

(2009). Therapeutic jurisprudence applied in Brazil: “Therapeutic justice” (DTC)—The Brazilian program for drug users offenders. National Center for DWI Courts. Retrieved from https://www.dwicourts.org/wp-content/uploads/Paper%20TJ%20and%20TDC%20in%20Brazil%202009.pdf

18.

Glover-Thomas

(2019). Therapeutic jurisprudence and mental health tribunals: Changing patterns of demand and its impact. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, 41, 103-125. doi:10.1080/09649069.2019.1554798

19.

Gromet

D. M.

Darley

J. M.

(2009). Punishment and beyond: Achieving justice through the satisfaction of multiple goals. Law & Society Review, 43, 1-38.

20.

Innovare

(2008). Justiça Terapêutica: um programa judicial de redução do dano Social [Therapeutic Justice: A Judicial Program to Reduce Social Harm]. Retrieved from https://www.premioinnovare.com.br/praticas/l/justica-terapeutica-um-programa-judicial-de-reducao-do-dano-social-2127

21.

Inter-American Development Bank. (2017). The costs of crime and violence new evidence and insights in Latin America and the Caribbean. Retrieved from https://publications.iadb.org/en/costs-crime-and-violence-new-evidence-and-insights-latin-america-and-caribbean

22.

Kaiser

K. A.

Holtfreter

(2016). An integrated theory of specialized court programs: Using procedural justice and therapeutic jurisprudence to promote offender compliance and rehabilitation. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 43, 45-62. doi:10.1177/0093854815609642

23.

Kellogg

K. C.

(2011). Hot lights and cold steel: Cultural and political toolkits for practice change in surgery. Organization Science, 22, 482-502. doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0539

24.

King

M. S.

(2010). Should problem solving courts be solution-focused courts? (Monash University Faculty of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010/15). Revista Juridica Universidad De Puerto Rico. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1725022

25.

Leukefeld

McDonald

H. S.

Staton

Mateyoke-Scrivner

(2004). Employment, employment-related problems, and drug use at drug court entry. Substance Use and Misuse, 39, 2559-2579.

26.

Lucas

P. A.

Hanrahan

K. J.

(2016). No soldier left behind: The veterans court solution. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 45, 52-59.

27.

Mahoney

Thelen

(2009). A theory of gradual institutional change. In Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power (pp. 1-37). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511806414.003

28.

Maroney

T. A.

Gross

J. J.

(2013). The ideal of the dispassionate judge: An emotion regulation perspective. Emotion Review, 6, 142-151.

29.

McPherson

C. M.

Sauder

(2013). Logics in action: Managing institutional complexity in a drug court. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58, 165-196.

30.

Oliver

(1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145-179.

31.

Olson

D. E.

Lurgio

A. J.

Albertson

(2001). Implementing the key components of specialized drug treatment courts: Practice and policy considerations. Law & Policy, 23, 171-196.

32.

Persak

(2019). Beyond public punitiveness: The role of emotions in criminal law policy. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 57, 47-58.

33.

Roberts

J. V.

Stalans

L. J.

(2004). Restorative sentencing: Exploring the views of the Public. Social Justice Research, 17, 315-334.

34.

Scott

W. R.

. (2008) Institutions and organizations: ideas and interests (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

35.

Shoemaker

(1988). On knowing one’s own mind. Philosophical Perspectives: Epistemology, 2, 183-209.

36.

Spektor

(2018). The United States and the 1964 Brazilian military coup (History of Brazil, history of Latin America and the Oceanic World, 1945–1991). Diplomatic History Online Publication. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324892504_The_United_States_and_the_1964_Brazilian_Military_Coup_In_Oxford_Research_Encyclopedia_of_Latin_American_History_Oxford_University_Press_Article_published_April_2018_doi_101093acrefore9780199366439013

37.

Traguetto

Guimaraes

T. A.

(2019). Therapeutic jurisprudence and restorative justice in the United States: The process of institutionalization and the roles of judges. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63, 1971-1989.

38.

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. (2016, April 19-21). United Nations General Assembly special session on the world drug problem. New York, NY. Retrieved from https://www.unodc.org/documents/postungass2016/outcome/V1603301-E.pdf

39.

Walker

Davidson

(2018). In Gavrielides

(Ed.), The Routledge international handbook of restorative justice (pp. 1-520). New York, NY: Routledge.

40.

Walker

Rodgers

Umbreit

(2018). What is restorative about teen court? [Special issue: Restorative Justice and Complex Crimes]. Internet Journal of Restorative Justice. Retrieved from https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3294303

41.

Werner

M. D.

Cornelissen

J. P.

(2014). Framing the change: Switching and blending frames and their role in instigating institutional change. Organization Studies, 35, 1449-101472.

42.

Winick

B. J.

(2002). Therapeutic jurisprudence and problem-solving courts. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 30(3), 1056-1104.

43.

Winick

B. J.

Wexler

D. B.

(2001). Drug treatment court: Therapeutic jurisprudence applied. Touro Law Review, 18, 479-485.

Therapeutic Jurisprudence and Restorative Justice in Brazil

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References