Acceso usuarios
This paper examines the comparative relationship between contemporary restorative justice and traditional conflict resolution practices, specifically the sulha in Israeli-Palestinian communities and the Kanun-based dispute resolution system in Northern Albania. While these models share fundamental principles such as reintegration and restitution, significant differences emerge in their mediation structures, reconciliation objectives, and the role of ritual. The study highlights how restorative justice emphasizes voluntary participation and individual agency, whereas traditional models prioritize collective harmony and social cohesion. By analysing these differences, the paper underscores the importance of contextualized approaches when applying restorative justice principles across diverse cultural settings.
