Keynote speech for the 12th Annual Restorative Justice Conference in
Fresno Oct 20 ’06
Dr. John Dussich
Distinguished colleagues, students, victims, survivors, friends and potential
friends.
I am privileged to participate in this 12th Restorative Justice Conference and
to deliver this keynote address to you this morning, with the theme: the
victim in focus! I am especially pleased to know that today has been
declared Restorative Justice Day in Fresno County! Congratulations Fresno
County!!!
First I want to thank Ron Claassen, director at the Center for Peacemaking
and Conflict Studies here at the Fresno Pacific University for inviting me to
speak.
I am very pleased to talk to you about the victim, a topic that has been my
focus for the better part of the past thirty three years! I guess that makes me
a victimologist.
I’d like to start out by defining a few key terms. Victim is the word in focus
today! What is the meaning of this word? In the Old Testament’s Book of
Genesis we find the story of how Cain murdered his younger brother Abel.
Thus, the first murderer was Cain and we have read and heard about the
mark of Cain with stories and tales of Cain and his followers, However, the
first victim was Abel, and yet there are no stories about the mark of Abel...
Perhaps it is time to create a new metaphor to represent the victim who has
both suffered and survived, the victim who is wiser for his experiences, the
victim who is no longer helpless, the victim who is now empowered,
recovered and restored! Let the mark of Abel be our badge of courage. Let
us reject the images of injured, withdrawn and helpless persons. Let us
1
realize that for the most part, these are temporary conditions in the
immediate aftermath of victimization. Let us embrace and project the
positive notions that victims can successfully cope with their adversity, do
overcome their injuries and mostly emerge stronger because of their ordeals.
That is the mark of Abel!
In the ancient Hebrew culture the word for human or animal sacrifice to God
was “korban;” and, in the Roman culture, the word for sacrifice to a God
was “victima,” from whence our English word victim comes. Our Western
culture has adopted a variant from this origin to mean any living thing that is
injured. However, over the past millennia, the concept of victim has
evolved to mean any person who has been harmed or killed by: disasters,
disease, war, crime, accidents, abuse of power or other stark misfortunes.
From the word victim comes the noun victimization. Victimization is the
result of an imbalance between forces applied against an individual, and
forces used in defense of that individual, such that the individual is
overcome, cannot cope and is harmed or killed - victimization.
Many words have evolved from the word victim. Applying the word victim
to an action against a person, we arrive at the verb, victimize. The person
who uses these actions we call victimizer. There are even some new words
that most of you probably have not heard yet: victimity (as all the traits
common to victims), victimal (having the character of a victim),
victimogenic (producing or forming victims), and victimogenesis (the origin
or cause of victimization). So, from the word victim, we finally arrive at the
word victimology, which is the scientific study of victims. This word
“victimology” was first coined by the Rumanian lawyer, Beniamin
2
Mendelsohn in 1938. Originally he applied it to crime victimizations, but
eventually he realized that (regardless of the source of injury) all persons
who are significantly harmed suffer in similar ways or in the extreme they
die; and, if they live they recover in similar ways. Thus, Mendelsohn later
modified his concept of victimology to include all forms of victimizations.
He called this new science, general victimology. However, today there are
victimologists who restrict their study to only victims of illegal acts (crime
victimology), some who study man-made harm (human victimology) and
those who study all forms of harm (general victimology).
The field has greatly expanded and specialized. It is being used to describe
the entire range of human suffering and human healing.
I’d like to now tell you a little about how victimology as a movement, came
into being. In the aftermath of the horrible Nazi Holocaust the world
declared “never again” and it immediately set about forming the United
Nations so that nations would never again solve their conflicts with armed
power, so that our young men and women would never again be sent out to
kill one another, so that world peace could be maintained, so that all the
problems of the world could be resolved in partnership, and so that human
rights would be respected. Three years later this new organization created
an international mandate known as the Universal Human Rights
Declaration which was passed by the UN General Assembly on December
10th, 1948. Burn that date in your brain, it is such a significant date for us.
December 10th, 1948. So significant was its passing that is was dubbed The
Magna Carta for all Humanity. Since its passage, the Universal Human
Rights Declaration has been translated into 200 languages; it is the most
often cited human rights document in the world.
3
Unfortunately, not all nations heeded its message: in that same year, 1948,
South Africa’s National Party came to power and established the brutal
apartheid system which lasted 43 years. Other major upheavals which
followed were: The People’s Republic of China’s bloody Cultural
Revolution; the violent Korean War; the political pogroms in Post-Stalin
Russia; the horrific Vietnam War; the vicious Nigerian civil war; the fierce
overthrow of Libya by Muammar al-Qaddafi; and many other examples of
strife, violence and death. And so, sadly and ironically, there have been
major conflicts that have killed hundreds of thousands of humans in every
decade since 1948. Peace did not come to the world and mass victimizations
were not halted.
Besides the creation of the United Nations and the Universal Human Rights
Declaration, another major development following World War II, was the
evolution of victimology – especially in Europe by a significant number of
Jewish scholars who tried to understand the genocidal holocaust that killed
roughly 6 million Jews in the death camps of places like Auschwitz, BergenBelsen, Buchenwald, Dachau, and Treblinka. These scholars wanted to
know, why had their people been singled out? Could they have prevented
such a significant slaughter of their own people? How could they learn from
this unbelievable experience so as to survive in the future. One of the
outcomes of the post-holocaust period were intense discussions and soulsearching debates about the victimization of the Jews: what was the cause of
anti-Semitism that had plagued the Jews since the Disapora in the early
classic periods in Rome and in Greece. Along with the mass exodus from
Europe to the new state of Israel came thousands upon thousands of
4
survivors. Among those who immigrated to Israel were sociologists,
psychiatrists, psychologists, philosophers and lawyers – all trained at the
best universities in Europe. Many immersed themselves in these intense
discussions and searched for the answers that eluded their people for
thousands of years. So it was logical that Israel became the first stage for
discussions about mass victimization – especially genocide.
In the year 1973 a small group of scholars, practitioners and students from
around the world came together for the first time in Jerusalem, Israel to
place the victim in focus and to change the perception that victims were
“the forgotten persons.” The event was the First International Symposium
on Victimology. I had the good fortune to have been invited by my former
professor, Stephen Schafer, to present a concept paper I had written some
months earlier to help crime victims that ultimately became known as the
“victim advocate.” I was honored to be there standing in the shadows of
giants. This first symposium became the galvanizing moment in history for
this new discipline of victimology and for me personally. It brought the
pioneers together for the first time and gave them a sense of identity,
solidarity and commitment as victimologists. They agreed to meet every
three years in a different country. And since then, we have met every three
years.
Eventually in 1979, just six years later, in Munster, Germany, the third
symposium was held by a much expanded group of scholars and
practitioners. It was there that the World Society of Victimology was
created! It was this new Society that played a major part in launching the
idea that the world needed a set of universally accepted principles
specifically crafted on behalf of victims, to emphasize that we again needed
to place the victim in focus, and that victims must be recognized and must
5
be given special rights. So, six years later in 1985 this new organization, at
its Fifth International Symposium in Zagreb, Croatia, created the
groundswell that, later that same year on November 29th, lead to the
unanimous passage by the UN’s General Assembly of the Declaration of
Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power.
This document was soon to be dubbed the “Magna Carta of Victim
Rights.” The essence of this document was to place the victim in focus so
that all governments would embrace the notion that “Victims deserve respect
for their dignity, privacy and security.” Those of us who had been part of
this process felt elated, ennobled and empowered. We had given a long
overdue voice to the silent, we had provided new options for the helpless,
and we had done a good deed for mankind!!!
Shortly thereafter the UN’s Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice was given the responsibility to help member-nations implement this
Declaration for victims across the globe. Initially only a handful of countries
embraced the opportunity to make reforms and passed new laws, created
victim support schemes and established victim compensation programs.
However and somewhat disappointingly, most governments were very slow
to make the suggested changes and so in 1999, to help breath life into these
abstract principles, the UN in partnership with the US Department of Justice,
created and published two special documents to move nations closer to the
implementation of the Declaration. These documents were: the Handbook
on Justice for Victims; and, the Guide for Policy Makers. The impact of
these two documents was significant. They helped many nations move from
theory to practice. Finally, for the first time countries had the tools in their
hands to form and operate victim assistance programs, change laws and
6
policies, establish victim rights and move their governments closer to the
ideals personified in the 1985 Declaration. The result was that more
countries set into motion important initiatives for the first time. Yet, for the
most part, the counties that took advantage of the Declaration, the
Handbook and the Guide were limited to the developed countries. Many
other countries were still resisting the changes called for by these innovative
documents.
Our hopes for universal adoption of the Basic Principles of Justice for
Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power were not yet realized.
It has become clear that what is needed is a stronger mandate, one with
teeth: oversight and monitoring, legal obligations and with sanctions. Again,
the World Society of Victimology has taken it upon itself to stand up and
advocate on behalf of victims world-wide. It has decided to champion the
creation and eventual passage of a United Nations Convention on Justice
and Support for Victims of Crime, Abuse of Power and Terrorism. This
convention is clearly an extension of the four previous UN documents;
however, it adds language on behalf of victims of terrorism. Although,
greatly expanded and elaborated, it still is focused on the principle that
“Victims deserve respect for their dignity, privacy and security.” It is made
up of 25 articles, and article 9 addresses Restorative Justice. It reads: “(1)
States Parties should endeavor to establish or enhance the systems of
restorative justice, which shall seek as a priority to restore the victim.
States should emphasize the need for acceptance by the offender of his or
her responsibility for the offence and the acknowledgement of the adverse
consequences of the offences for the victim. (2) States Parties shall ensure
7
that victims shall have the opportunity to choose restorative justice forums
under domestic laws, which accord to victims’ dignity, compassion and
similar rights and services to those described in this convention.” Making
this convention a reality is currently one of the major projects of the World
Society of Victimology. If any of you would like to sign a petition in support
of this draft proposal, the petition is in the lobby awaiting your signature.
This is an opportunity for each of you to personally contribute to this
international effort to place the victim in focus throughout the world.
The core purpose of this victim movement, now almost 70 years old,
recognized very early that victims had lost their role in the justice process.
The first two sentences in the Doerner/Lab Victimology textbook says,
“Something not very funny happened on the way to a formal system of
justice. The victim got left out.” Well, I say we have a responsibility to put
the victim back in focus and back in the justice process. If one reads the
contemporary literature in Restorative Justice an annoying message keeps
surfacing; that is that the offender still has the lime-light and the victim is
still a secondary citizen – even in some of the current restorative justice
practices. The selection of this conference’s theme, The Victim in Focus,
emphasizes the continuing importance to remember the victim in all
restorative justice models. I would like to suggest that it is more than just a
reminder to keep a balance between the offender and the victim, it is more
than just a plea for equality, I think it is a recommendation to Restorative
Justice practitioners that they should make every effort to not only be
responsive and sensitive to the needs of victims, but also to be certain that
victims should be considered as more than just tools for offender
rehabilitation. Victim rehabilitation must have an equal value in the way
8
we prioritize our objectives and our resources. Victims are still largely
relegated 2nd class status throughout the Criminal Justice System,
consequently they participate from a position of weakness, helplessness,
powerlessness, and vulnerability. That status must be changed – victims
need and deserve empowerment if they are to feel any sense of equality in
their participation. This process requires that victims must have choices.
These choices should include: the chance to have a companion to support
them during their ordeal with the Criminal Justice System; the choice to
have a say in the location of where they participate; the choice of whether to
participate in mediation or reconciliation sessions or even terminate that
participation at any time; the choice to decide whether to be the first speaker
or even where to sit at a mediation session; the choice to select the most
convenient time for them and, the choice to select the type of restitution that
best fits their needs.
One of the pioneering Restorative Justice models is the family group
conference – invented in New Zealand. I particularly like this model because
it makes the victim the central participant in the response to crime. In the
New Zealand family group conferences, victims are invited to meet the
offenders and their families. They are given a significant voice to tell about
the impact of the crime on them and their family, plus to ask questions
directly to the offenders. Because of a national will to implement restorative
justice principles in New Zealand the victim is in focus in their criminal
justice process.
It has been my observation that the strongest, most active and most
productive groups in most countries where victim assistance has become a
viable part of the criminal justice system, have been ex-victims. I think there
9
must be ex-victims here. Let me see the hands of all the ex-victims in the
audience. They call themselves “survivors” and many work as tireless
volunteers for the cause of victims. They have become a mighty force for
reform in this area of public policy and human concern. They have suffered,
but are unwilling to remain silent and unwilling to remain idle. That is the
mark of Abel!!! They have struggled but they have used their misfortunes as
“stepping stones” rather than as “stumbling blocks.” That is the mark of
Abel!!! They represent one of our most significant resources in the
implementation of the United Nations’ Declaration for victims. The task
before you is not just the responsibility of those in power, those who are the
leaders, or those who are at the upper levels of society. No! It is the
responsibility of everyone who is aware of these problems and has resources
available to them to make changes happen. Those in power must invite
those not in power to join in this noble effort. For without the help of the
people, the powerful will fail. This task should only be accomplished in a
true partnership with all parts of society, because it is a problem of the
entire society. What I am speaking about is not just the blueprint for
change, like the Declarations I just mentioned, but also the will to make
change. Make no mistake about it, implementation of these UN Basic
Principles is not just some abstract idea that is interesting to discuss in polite
conversation, or study in the safety of the classroom, or use as an excuse to
invite guest speakers to entertain so as to project the illusion of progress. Oh
no! Implementation is a dynamic, necessary and sometimes disturbing
process. But I am convinced that changing the way things have been done in
the past is the only constructive way to improve the human condition.
History has shown us that societies improve themselves by taking stock of
the new realities which confront them and adjusting honestly and decisively.
10
Finding the will to change is a much greater requirement than getting the
blueprint to make the change. Remember, the UN Declaration of Basic
Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power, emerged
twenty five years AFTER victim assistance became a reality in roughly ten
countries. The will to change preceded the creation of the blueprint! You
might ask how is it possible for those countries to make these changes
without a blueprint. Obviously the changes were made with trial and error;
and with a will! Changing is usually unpopular, confusing, and it is always a
struggle!!! However, if you find the will to change and nurture it and create
the process to implement these UN Basic Principles, and the principles of
Restorative Justice, I promise you, that this process will lead you to a better
place, a place where the conditions will be much improved for victims,
offenders and communities.
Thus far, I have spoken about the definitions of victims, victimology, the
history of the victim movement, the UN Declarations on behalf of human
and victim rights, about a new convention in the making and about one of
the important needs of restorative justice – focusing on the victim. My last
message was about finding ways to implement these principles and finding
the will to make these changes. In conclusion, I would encourage each and
every one of you, to ask yourselves, why did I come here to listen to this
stranger, talk about victims, and victimology and restorative justice and
changing my society. What were your motives for coming and staying for
the entire speech? Were you expected to come by you boss, your colleagues
or your constituents? Where you trying to impress your professor or your
students? Or, could it be you were genuinely interested in learning how to
make a difference in our society within the scope of restorative justice. I can
11
never know the answers to those questions, but I think each of you knows
the answers. It really doesn’t matter what brought you here. What matters is
that you were present and you heard and you thought about many things as I
was speaking. The issue then becomes, what have you learned this morning
about your motives, your will and your sense of social responsibility.
Perhaps you have convinced yourself these messages are mostly for the folks
in charge: the governor, the Assistant District Attorney, the dean, the judges,
the lawyers, - someone else for sure. Or, could it be that there is a valid,
logical, plausible role for each of you to play in this grand scheme of social
reform? I would tell you there is a role for each of you to play. I cannot
tell you what it is; it is for you to discover and to find the will to change!
The student could decide to write more term papers on restorative justice
topics, insuring that the victim and the offender are treated equally, the
professor might commit to conducting research on some of these compelling
RJ questions. Why not? Perhaps the lawyer could promise to render probono work on behalf of a victim involved with a mediation case. Why not?
The judge might try to forge a new legislative initiative to support the
implementation of a pilot restorative model here in California, logically here
in Fresno. Why not? And, the assistant district attorney might offer to host
such a model restorative project within the juvenile justice system. Why
not? Each of you can make a difference in your own way and in your own
space. I believe that a person with knowledge has a responsibility to act on
that knowledge. Sure, being ignorant of how to proceed is a reasonable
excuse for inaction. However, each of you can no longer use that excuse on
these topics.
12
So, I challenge each of you to act on the information you have been given
this morning. Act within the limits of your reality, so that your actions
address some part of the solution. Do it with dignity; do it with
compassion; do it with love! Believe me when I say, it is a wonderfully,
ennobling experience to give of yourself freely for a cause that alleviates
pain and suffering; and significantly improves the human condition. Above
all, please keep the victim in focus!!! And, remember the mark of Abel!!!
Thank you.
13