PART III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
5. Introduction: Nested case design and research methodology
5.3 Embedded sub-units
The reason for including each sub unit is discussed hereunder:
5.3.1 Victims
I initially planned to interview 10 victims in total. Five who had experienced a victim offender mediation process within the 12 months prior to the research interview and five who had been involved in a process 12 or more months ago. In addition to getting their perspective on the restorative justice process and victim offender mediation in particular,
Practitioners
Victims Offenders
Key experts Norwegian keyhole lens Prosecutors
VOM
157 I also wanted to assess the difference between perspectives after a considerable amount of time had elapsed. I eventually interviewed six victims for reasons set out in 5.5.
5.3.2 Offenders
Similarly, I initially planned to interview 10 offenders in total. Five who had experienced a victim offender mediation process within the 12 months prior to the research interview and five who had been involved in a process 12 or more months ago. In addition to getting their perspective on the restorative justice process and victim offender mediation in particular, I also wanted to assess the difference between the perspectives after a considerable amount of time had elapsed and they had returned to the same ecosystem that co-produced their criminal behaviour. In the event I interviewed four offenders for reasons set out in 5.5.
5.3.3 Prosecutors
A group interview was held with five control and one senior prosecutor as the focal criminal justice institution involved in restorative justice processing that involves both victim and offender. The perspectives of prosecutors were important to shed light on the state’s position with regard to restorative justice in general and victim offender mediation in particular. Prior research on magistrates and prosecutors’ views on restorative justice was used to supplement this perspective given the time required to seek permission from different institutions. The initial exploratory interview with the Western Cape Provincial head of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Affairs provided sufficient
additional information given the specific focus of this research.
5.3.4 Mediators
The perspectives of mediators were pivotal to understanding restorative justice
processing. This sub unit also shed light on the training they received and I was allowed to observe a mediation process which enabled me to compare and contrast interview data, observation and the training curriculum to understand the philosophy and theories which inform the strategies, techniques and tactics in use.
158
5.3.5 Key experts
I interviewed three external key experts who straddled the restorative justice, criminal justice and peacebuilding sectors, to provide a broader view on South Africa’s unequal, transitional status. External experts were interviewed for their historical knowledge of how contemporary restorative justice processing was introduced to South Africa and for their expert opinion on constructions of ‘the criminal’ that lay and professional people use. These interviews were conducted via skype and facebook inbox to Australia, skype to Johannesburg, email to Pretoria and face to face in Cape Town. These interviews were conducted from July 2011 to the period of the final write up. Some of the mediators and organisational and programme leaders straddled the key expert sub-unit based on their practical and academic knowledge. The internal experts were interviewed for their perspectives on restorative justice processing and specifically to assess the organisation’s underlying philosophy and theories about criminality.
5.3.6 External sub-unit
During the period that I had no firm commitment from South African NGOs I decided, in consultation with my supervisor, to make contact with the Norwegian konfliktråd21 since I was travelling to Norway for work purposes the following month.
Supported by literature on case study research, I argued that victim offender mediation, as a form of restorative justice processing, is an embedded (Yin, 1994:41) instrumental (Stake,1995:4) case to shed light on peacebuilding in an unequal, transitional society. In research done elsewhere, it has been argued that the ‘conceptual and implementation issues [of restorative justice] are not attached to any specific local or national system, but can relate to four community levels (local, national, regional or international)’. These theoretical and practical developments which occur at different levels ‘are not disengaged from each other’ (Gavrielides, 2007:80). This thinking resonates with the logic I used to include the Norwegian konfliktråd. Its inclusion as a sub-unit of analysis expanded the
21 According to the Konflikråd website ‘Mediation is a public service which helps to resolve conflict – whether between private parties or between victim and perpetrator where a criminal offence has taken place. The intention is that the parties through dialogue can find solutions, whether it’s to make up for specific offenses – or restoring human relations. Mediation is offered to all, regardless of age. The service is free throughout the country.
159 diversity of perspectives in a 360° formation on restorative justice processing. As an external sub-unit the konfliktråd added a perspective on restorative justice processing within a different political and economic context. As Zerubavel (2007:133) has noted,
‘general patterns …transcend their specific instantiations’ – I therefore focused on general patterns in practice in both countries. In addition, the original konfliktråd idea is the brainchild of Nils Christie, a world renowned restorative justice expert and the opportunity for comparison was exciting. I interviewed one present and one past mediator, the head of training and a deputy director.