Foley (2013) examines the link between retribution and punishment, concluding that restorative justice may also acheive retributive aims. 

Abstract (pp. 130)

‘One of the challenges in doing justice in response to serious criminal wrongdoing committed by young people is to meet the need for retribution. The risk is that in meeting this need the primary needs of restoration and rehabilitation are lost or diminished. Much has been written about the capacity of diversionary programs to restore affected parties and to address consequential outcomes such as deterrence, rehabilitation and protection. But little regard has been given to their capacity to also do much of the “work” of retribution. Acknowledging that retribution is much wider than simply punishment, and includes bringing offenders to account, denouncing their behaviour, providing public vindication for victims and setting reparation and sanctions, means that diversionary programs have much to offer. This article argues that much of the work can be done through diversionary programs such as circle sentencing, family group conferencing and restorative panels which involve contact between those affected by wrongdoing. The article examines the “retributive scope” of diversion by reporting the views of facilitators, conference convenors, judges and others involved in programs in a range of jurisdictions. The article suggests that many of the requirements of retribution are better met through such non-punitive approaches.’

This article can be downloaded here: AJA_Foley_Retribution in RJ setting_2013.pdf