Abstract
Adherents to reconciliation, restorative justice, and related approaches to dealing with social conflict are well known for seeking to minimize punishment, in favor of offenders hearing out victims, making an apology, and effecting compensation for wrongful harm as well as victims forgiving offenders and accepting their reintegration into society. In contrast, I maintain that social reconciliation and similar concepts in fact characteristically require punishment but do not require forgiveness. I argue that a reconciliatory response to crime that includes punitive disavowal but not necessarily forgiveness is supported by an analogy with resolving two-person conflict and by relational facets of human dignity. I also specify a novel account of the type of penalty that is justified by reconciliation, namely, burdensome labor that is likely to foster moral reform on the part of wrongdoers and to compensate their victims, which would serve neither retributive nor deterrent functions. I illustrate this under-considered conception of punishment in contexts that include having cheated on an exam at a university, engaged in criminal behavior such as robbery, and committed atrocities during large-scale social conflict.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
After composing this essay I encountered Bill Wringe’s (2016) piece in which he aims to show that reconciliation can include punishment. One major difference between us is that he does not advance the view that penalties, even when part of a reconciliation, should be productive in the sense of fostering compensation of victims and moral reform of offenders. Another is that he eschews analogies between individuals and institutions of the sort I draw below in support of some central claims.
- 2.
On another occasion South Africa’s Constitutional Court articulated reconciliation in terms of establishing the “proper rule of law” and “strengthening peace, democracy and justice” (Constitutional Court of South Africa 2009: para. 21).
- 3.
Although it will not follow that, where there is no punishment, there is no reconciliation whatsoever, on which see the concluding section.
- 4.
I avoid systematic reflection on how to understand the nature of forgiveness, working with what is probably the most common––even if contested––approach.
- 5.
It is hard for me to pin Radzik (2009) down. She clearly denies that the concept of reconciliation analytically includes forgiveness, but seems to hold that a desirable kind of the former would normally include the latter.
- 6.
The next few paragraphs borrow from Metz (2019: 125–126).
- 7.
In the following, I assume that the degree to which an offender should express remorse and the degree to which a political community should express disapproval align, although I recognize that this assumption may be questioned and might deserve an extended defence elsewhere.
- 8.
- 9.
And not necessarily restore her to a position she would have been in had the offence not occurred.
- 10.
There is therefore a resolutely “objective” dimension to reconciliatory sentencing, where there are presumed to be facts of the matter about how bad a crime was, how severe a penalty is, and which penalties would track a given crime. Ultimately, the proponent of reconciliatory sentencing must provide accounts of them, but some headway can be made for now without them.
- 11.
Though I naturally intend reconciliatory sentencing to appear prima facie attractive to friends of punishment. For some defense of it relative to standard forms of retributivism and deterrence theory, see Metz (2019: 128–133).
- 12.
Some of the following borrows from Metz (2019: 131–132).
- 13.
If the reader continues to think that a genuine reconciliation between two romantic partners requires forgiveness (even if consequent to burdensome accountability), then it is indeed one limitation of the analogy––albeit one that is readily explained: the restoration of a relationship between intimates in which there had been good feelings may well differ from that of a relationship between strangers in which there was not.
- 14.
I am grateful to Krisanna Scheiter and especially Paula Satne for comments that have improved this essay.
References
Allais, L. 2008. Wiping the slate clean. Philosophy and Public Affairs 36: 33–68.
BBC News. 2016. Thailand drunk drivers face morgue work as punishment. 12 April. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36025937.
Bedau, H., and E. Kelly. 2015. Punishment. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. E. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/punishment/.
Burton, M. 2000. Making moral judgements. In Looking back, reaching forward: Reflections on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa, ed. C. Villa-Vicencio and W. Verwoerd, 77–85. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. 1993. Act No. 200. https://www.gov.za/documents/constitution/constitution-republic-south-africa-act-200-1993.
Constitutional Court of South Africa. 2006. Dikoko v Mokhatla. 2006 ZACC 10. http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2006/10.html.
———. 2009. Du Toit v Minister for Safety and Security and Another. 2009 ZACC 22. http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZACC/2009/22.html.
de Gruchy, J.W. 2002. Reconciliation: Restoring justice. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
de Klerk, F.W. 2010. The need for forgiveness and reconciliation. In In the balance: South Africans debate reconciliation, ed. F. Du Toit and E. Doxtader, 27–32. Jacana Media: Johannesburg.
du Bois, F., and A. du Bois-Pedain. 2008. Post-conflict justice and the reconciliatory paradigm: The South African experience. In Justice and reconciliation in post-apartheid South Africa, ed. F. du Bois and A. du Bois-Pedain, 289–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eisikovits, N. 2010. Sympathizing with the enemy: Reconciliation, transitional justice, negotiation. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Emerick, B. 2017. Forgiveness and reconciliation. In The moral psychology of forgiveness, ed. K. Norlock, 117–134. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
Fisher, J.L. 2010. Pioneers, settlers, aliens, exiles: The decolonisation of white identity in Zimbabwe. Canberra: Australian National University E. Press.
Gobodo-Madikizela, P. 2010. Reconciliation: A call to reparative humanism. In In the balance: South Africans debate reconciliation, ed. F. Du Toit and E. Doxtader, 133–139. Jacana Media: Johannesburg.
Govier, T. 2006. Taking wrongs seriously. Amherst: Humanity Books.
———. 2009. A dialectic of acknowledgement. In Reconciliation(s), ed. J.R. Quinn, 36–50. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Hamber, B., and G. Kelly. 2009. Beyond coexistence: Towards a working definition of reconciliation. In Reconciliation(s), ed. J.R. Quinn, 286–310. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Hamber, B., D. Nageng, and G. O’Malley. 2000. “Telling it like it is....”; Understanding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission from the perspective of survivors. Psychology in Society 26: 18–42.
Hamber, B., and R. Wilson. 2002. Symbolic closure through memory, reparation and revenge in post-conflict societies. Journal of Human Rights 1: 35–53.
Hampton, J. 1988. The retributive idea. In Forgiveness and mercy, ed. J. Hampton and J. Murphy, 111–161. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Krog, A. 2008. “This thing called reconciliation....”; Forgiveness as part of an interconnectedness-towards-wholeness. South African Journal of Philosophy 27: 353–366.
Lenta, P. 2007. In defence of AZAPO and restorative justice. In Law, memory and the legacy of apartheid: Ten years after AZAPO v. President of South Africa, ed. W. le Roux and K. van Marle, 149–182. Pretoria: Pretoria University Law Press.
May, S.C. 2011. Moral compromise, civic friendship, and political reconciliation. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14: 581–602.
McNaughton, D., and E. Garrard. 2017. Once more with feeling: Defending the goodwill account of forgiveness. In The moral psychology of forgiveness, ed. K. Norlock, 96–116. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.
Metz, T. 2011. Limiting the reach of amnesty for political crimes. Constitutional Court Review 3: 243–270.
———. 2012a. An African theory of moral status: A relational alternative to individualism and holism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15: 387–402.
———. 2012b. African conceptions of human dignity. Human Rights Review 13: 19–37.
———. 2015. A theory of national reconciliation: Some insights from Africa. In Theorizing transitional justice, ed. C. Corradetti, N. Eisikovits, and J. Rotondi, 119–135. Surrey: Ashgate.
———. 2019. Reconciliation as the aim of a criminal trial. Constitutional Court Review 9: 113–134.
Minow, M. 1998. Between vengeance and forgiveness. Boston: Beacon Press.
Mookherjee, M. 2015. Restoring human capability: Reconciliation and liberal multiculturalism. In Theorizing transitional justice, ed. C. Corradetti, N. Eisikovits, and J. Rotondi, 137–150. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing.
Mugabe, R. 1980. Mugabe on reconciliation. Politicsweb.https://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/mugabe-on-reconciliation.
Murphy, C. 2010. A moral theory of political reconciliation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Murphy, J. 2003. Getting even: Forgiveness and its limits. New York: Oxford University Press.
Philpott, D. 2009. An ethic of political reconciliation. Ethics and International Affairs 23: 389–407.
Radzik, L. 2009. Making amends: Atonement in morality, law, and politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Russell, L. 2016. Forgiving while punishing. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94: 704–718.
Satne, P. 2018. Forgiveness and punishment in Kant’s moral system. In Kant's Doctrine of Right in the 21st century, ed. L. Krasnoff, N.S. Madrid, and P. Satne, 201–219. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Staub, E., and L.A. Pearlman. 2001. Healing, reconciliation, and forgiving after genocide and other collective violence. In Forgiveness and reconciliation: Religion, public policy, and conflict transformation, ed. R. Helmick and R. Petersen, 205–227. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa. 1998. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa report. http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/report/.
Tutu, D. 1999. No future without forgiveness. New York: Random House.
———. 2009. Foreward. In Walk with us and listen: Political reconciliation in Africa, ed. C. Villa-Vicencio, ix–xii. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Villa-Vicencio, C. 2000. Restorative justice: Dealing with the past differently. In Looking back, reaching forward: Reflections on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa, ed. C. Villa-Vicencio and W. Verwoerd, 68–76. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
———. 2009. Walk with us and listen: Political reconciliation in Africa. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.
Volf, M. 2001. Forgiveness, reconciliation, and justice: A Christian contribution to a more peaceful social environment. In Forgiveness and reconciliation: Religion, public policy, and conflict transformation, ed. R.G. Helmick and R.L. Petersen, 27–49. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.
Worthington, E. 2001. Unforgiveness, forgiveness, and reconciliation and their implications for societal interventions. In Forgiveness and reconciliation: Religion, public policy, and conflict transformation, ed. R.G. Helmick and R.L. Petersen, 171–192. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press.
Wringe, B. 2016. Punishment, forgiveness and reconciliation. Philosophia 44: 1099–1124.
Yandell, K. 1998. The metaphysics and morality of forgiveness. In Exploring forgiveness, ed. R. Enright and J. North, 35–45. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Metz, T. (2022). Why Reconciliation Requires Punishment but Not Forgiveness. In: Satne, P., Scheiter, K.M. (eds) Conflict and Resolution: The Ethics of Forgiveness, Revenge, and Punishment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77807-1_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77807-1_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-77806-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-77807-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)