Possibilities of applying the sociological theory of intellectual movements to the study of institutionalization of the russian movement for restorative justice

This article describes the Russian restorative justice movement using the sociological theory of intellectual movements by S. Frickel and N. Gross. By using the heuristic possibilities offered by this theory, it was possible to construct a historical and sociological reconstruction of the emergence, formation and institutionalization of the Russian restorative justice movement. This movement was chosen as an object of analysis because it is a vivid example of an intellectual movement that within a relatively short period of time (about 30 years) managed to achieve institutionalization and turned out to be a successful example of the transformative activity of intellectual movements. The development of the restorative justice movement in Russia was reconstructed using the explanatory power of the theory of intellectual movements. The theory of intellectual movements by Frickel and Gross puts forward four assumptions regarding the dynamics of intellectual movements. The analysis of written sources and normative legal acts showed that the Russian restorative justice movement emerged in the 1990s as a response to the crisis of Soviet justice during the period of reform of the domestic legal system. Then, beginning with the translation of foreign literature, the study of foreign experience and attempts to form its own practice, the Russian restorative justice movement eventually became part of the Russian legal system and achieved the adoption of separate normative legal acts. With access to limited resources (power and state funding), the movement received institutional support from state authorities and the introduction of restorative justice practices in education and criminal justice. The restorative justice movement recruited new members through academic events, conferences, publications in academic journals, and the expansion of its activities in education. Thus, using the example of the Russian restorative justice movement, it was possible to confirm the assumptions put forward by Frickel and Gross regarding the dynamics of intellectual movements using the possibilities of intellectual movement theory. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References