What is SJ?

Sustainable Justice (SJ) is a framework for assessing whether a justice arrangement can be sustained, and whether it supports dignity, wellbeing and flourishing while it lasts.

What SJ is

SJ is not a new kind of court or program. It is a way of looking at any justice arrangement, from a law or policy to a whole system or one person's case, and asking: can it last, and does it do good while it does? It asks who belongs to the community of justice, including those who cannot speak for themselves, what is being assessed, on what evidence, by which principles, with what resources, and at whose cost.

The idea builds on the Sustainable Justice Charter (2015) by Alexander de Savornin Lohman and Jaap van Straalen, written with Australian judge Andrew Cannon. The Charter called for a proper way to measure what justice systems contribute. Suzanne Visser's PhD thesis, Exploring Sustainable Justice, answers that call with a clear definition and practical evaluation tools.

Why it is needed

Justice systems tend to focus on the people in front of them today and on short-term results, and until now there was no framework for testing them against what sustainability demands. The thesis was written in Mparntwe/Alice Springs, where concern about youth crime kept attention on policing and punishment rather than on the lasting effects of disadvantage.

Punishment is costly. Imprisonment causes economic, social and health harms that reach children, families and communities. On 30 June 2025, 2,505 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were in Northern Territory prisons, 24 per cent more than a year earlier.

When the thesis tested eight justice arrangements, three gaps appeared every time. None looked beyond present people to future generations or nature. None avoided shifting costs or harm elsewhere. And none was shown to be adequately resourced for what it promised.

Core principles

• A wider circle. The community of justice includes future generations, animals and ecosystems.

• Enough for everyone. Minimum standards below which no one should fall: a floor, not a ceiling.

• Fair shares of responsibility. Duties follow contribution, capacity, knowledge and power.

• Everyone counts. Like cases are treated alike, and people affected are recognised and can influence decisions.

• Honest evidence. Say what is known, uncertain and assumed, and take care where harm could be irreversible.

• Money serves justice. Funding should be adequate, ongoing and not shift costs elsewhere. Cost can decide how a minimum is met, never whether.

How it works in practice

The thesis offers two evaluation tools, one for criminal matters and one for civil matters. Each criterion is rated green (no deficit found), orange (moderate deficit), red (significant deficit) or grey (information not published). Ratings are never added into one score, so a serious failure can't hide behind good results. Each assessment ends with a plain verdict, such as "sustainable in design" or "not yet sustainable in delivery".

Norway. Norway's humane prison system was rated sustainable in design but not yet in delivery: staffing and building conditions left people confined for 19 to 22 hours a day. Most fixes could be made within the existing system.

British Columbia's Civil Resolution Tribunal. This tribunal resolves civil disputes without court attendance or lawyers. It worked so well that disputes grew 66 per cent since 2021–22, and average resolution time rose from 208 to 277 days. The fix is funding to match its workload.

How SJ differs

Punitive justice looks backwards, at the offence and what is deserved. SJ also looks forward, at whether a response supports dignity and wellbeing over time. The Charter sees conflicts as chances to restore relationships, favours a minimal but effective use of power, warns that punishment which breaks social networks harms innocent relatives, and steers away from an adversarial attitude.

SJ and restorative justice. Restorative justice (RJ) repairs harm and restores relationships, and SJ draws on it. But RJ is a process; SJ asks whether the system around it can be sustained. Assessed as usually delivered in Australia, RJ's strengths sat inside the encounter: dignity, responsibility and repair. Its weaknesses sat outside: underfunded preparation and follow-up, and short-term grants that lose trained staff.

Questions

Isn't SJ soft on crime?

No. SJ keeps accountability. It simply doesn't assume punishment is what delivers it.

Is SJ just about the environment?

No. It moves beyond the three pillars of environmental, social and economic sustainability. Nature is one member of a wider community of justice.

Who can use it?

Lawmakers testing proposed laws, courts and tribunals, budget holders deciding what money can fix, and legal educators. The thesis also applies SJ to AI, outer space and data centres.

Does an assessment give one overall score?

No. A red rating can't be cancelled out by greens elsewhere.

Bring SJ to your work

Sustainable Justice Australia runs workshops for leaders, judges, lawyers, mediators and government officers, including Sustainable Justice principles for community legal centres and courts. Explore our workshops or get in touch.