Abstract
This comparative research investigates restorative justice practices in juvenile offending in three different jurisdictions: India, Norway, and New Zealand. Through doctrinal analysis, policy evaluation, and empirical synthesis, this study identifies significant differences in institutional structure, procedural process, and alignment with international child rights. India’s Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 advances rehabilitative principles but lacks structured restorative justice pathways in the context of the controversial provisions to transfer 16–18-year-olds accused of heinous offences to adult courts. Norway’s Youth Punishment and Youth Follow-up process, delivered through the National Mediation Service, constitutes a fully developed restorative approach to justice that is focused on conferencing with consent and unique action plans for young offenders. New Zealand’s Family Group Conference model, governed under the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989 (now Oranga Tamariki Act), constitutes the initial diversion model with legislative victim inclusion. This report found that despite Norway and New Zealand aligning restorative processes to principles enshrined in the UNCRC, India’s framework exhibited normative tensions between rehabilitation and retribution.This study has engaged with received literature by proposing specific design transplants for India’s juvenile justice system: Youth Conferencing Orders at the Juvenile Justice Board stage, and restorative assessments prior to transfer for serious offences.
Key Words: Restorative Justice, Juvenile Justice, Comparative Law, Family Group Conferences, Child Rights, Victim Participation, Rehabilitation
Introduction
This comparative examination looks at how the juvenile justice systems in Norway, New Zealand, and India use the concepts of restorative justice. One new paradigm that shifts from conventional punitive approaches to a healing-oriented strategy that prioritizes the needs ofvictims, offenders, and communities is restorative justice.[1]By considering crime as harm done to people and communities rather than as a violation of a law, the book emphasizes how this approach differs from retributive justice.[2]
Juvenile justice systems were historically set up to treating children in a way different from adults, acknowledging their distinct developmental stage and capacity for recovery.[3]Indigenous justice cultures and studies on successful treatments for juvenile offenders had an impact on the restorative justice struggle, which got its start in the late 20th century. Indigenous systems in Australia, New Zealand, and North America that placed an emphasis on community reintegration and communal accountability served as examples for contemporary developments in restorative justice.[4]
In contrast to contemporary retributive techniques, the study contends that systematic restorative justice procedures—such as conferences, victim engagement, and action plans—produce superior results for community safety and child well-being. Because they place a strong emphasis on skill development and healthy relationships, these restorative techniques are in line with child development principles. However, effective models need to be flexible enough to accommodate each jurisdiction’s unique institutional capabilities, legal frameworks, and cultural settings.[5]This paper examines the statutory frameworks, institutional architecture, and results in the three jurisdictions using a comparative legal methodology and offers suggestions for institutional change.
[1] The Role of Restorative Justice in Modern Criminal Justice Administration, Park Univ. Blog (Sept. 23, 2024), https://www.park.edu/blog/the-role-of-restorative-justice-in-modern-criminal-justice-administration/ (last visited Dec.15, 2025).
[2] Univ. Wis. Law Sch. Restorative Justice Project, About Restorative Justice, https://law.wisc.edu/fjr/rjp/justice.html (last visited Dec. 15, 2025).
[3] Brooke Hartley, The Juvenile Justice System: The Impact of Rehabilitation on Juvenile Custody, Boston Bar J. (Spring 2024), May 17, 2024, https://bostonbar.org/journal/the-juvenile-justice-system-the-impact-of-rehabilitation-on-juvenile-custody/ (last visited Dec. 15, 2025).
[4] The Role of Restorative Justice in Modern Criminal Justice Administration, Park Univ. Blog (Sept. 23, 2024), https://www.park.edu/blog/the-role-of-restorative-justice-in-modern-criminal-justice-administration/ (last visited Dec. 15, 2025).
[5] U.N. Office on Drugs & Crime, Topic Two: Overview of Restorative Justice Processes, Crime Prevention & Criminal Justice Module 8 Key Issues, https://www.unodc.org/e4j/zh/crime-prevention-criminal-justice/module-8/key-issues/2–overview-of-restorative-justice-processes.html (last visited Dec. 15, 2025).