Regulating Restorative Justice: What Arbitration Teaches Us About Regulating the Restorative Process in Criminal Courts

Harriman focuses on what arbitration teaches about regulating the restorative process in criminal courts. The way the US has been administering criminal justice isn't working, and restorative justice could be one important step in a new and better direction. However, the process is relatively new to courtrooms in the US and still very much in the experimental phase. To give restorative justice a head tart, it is important to take inspiration from how other forms of ADR have successfully structured and regulated their private dispute resolution processes. As the arbitration process illuminates, federal statutes and ethical codes go a long way in regulating the procedure that generates an ADR award without meddling in the content of the award itself. As demonstrated, these principles can - and should - be translated to the restorative justice context. Basic regulations regarding confidentiality and judicial monitoring in the restorative justice process will protect defendants' rights and ensure that a judge cannot baselessly vacate a valid Repair of Harm Agreement.