Exploring restorative justice across legal systems: Stanislava Ochranova visits the CRJ

The Centre for Restorative Justice (CRJ) is pleased to welcome Stanislava Ochranova, a third-year doctoral student in criminal law at Masaryk University in Brno, Czech Republic. Stanislava is visiting ANU RegNet from 22 July to 2 September 2026.

Her research focuses on victim offender mediation in criminal proceedings, with a particular interest in restorative justice principles and their application in Czech law. During her time at RegNet, she is working on her doctoral dissertation and exploring comparative perspectives on restorative justice, with a focus on the Australian experience.

We spoke with Stanislava about her research, her interest in restorative justice and what she hopes to take from her time at ANU.

In conversation with Stanislava

What first drew you to restorative justice and mediation in criminal proceedings?

Restorative justice – and, more specifically, mediation in criminal proceedings – was already the subject of my master's thesis. What truly made it my topic was the screening and subsequent discussion of the Finnish documentary "Face to Face". In it, the father of a murdered son explains why he wanted to meet his son’s killer and take part in mediation. He says, "I cannot forgive, but I do not have to hate." This sentence struck a deep chord with me and convinced me that this was the topic for me.

After a crime, the victim is left with difficult emotions that they must somehow come to terms with, and hatred towards another person is in itself exhausting. That is precisely why the mere possibility of seeing the offender and asking them ‘Why?’ can bring relief without implying forgiveness. Which is fine; some things simply cannot be forgiven.

What are you hoping to learn from the Australian experience during your time at ANU?

I hope to take away from my stay here what reading the law cannot convey. I could read that in Brno, too, but it would not tell me whether and why the legal provision is actually being applied, which interests me most. The Australian Capital Territory is more established in restorative justice than the Czech Republic, so my main goal is to meet with the people who lead the conferences and see how restorative justice is approached here.

Are there any differences or similarities between restorative justice in Australia and the Czech Republic that have particularly stood out to you?

What struck me most was the difference in legal background behind restorative justice in both countries. For example, how they handle what seems like a trivial question very differently: who actually provides mediation in criminal proceedings/conferences. In the ACT, the Restorative Justice Unit, a clearly designated agency, handles this responsibility. In the Czech Republic, on the other hand, the law does not specify anywhere exactly who can or cannot provide mediation in criminal cases. That point and many more remain unstated in Czech law. This difference in legal clarity would surprise my Australian colleague most, and it is also why I was struck by how many aspects your “Crimes (Restorative Justice) Act 2004” covers and regulates.