This book poses a normative question. It asks how institutional responses to criminal wrongdoing should be reframed so as to better achieve justice. The question is asked in the context of the potential for a wider role for restorative justice, and from the perspective that justice is primarily about distribution. Conventional responses to wrongdoing accept that offenders must be given their just deserts and treated equally, and that all persons affected by wrongdoing must have their rights promoted and protected. However, what is most often distributed to meet all these needs is punishment. Missing is a focus on removing the harm and damage caused to individuals and relationships. Lacking is a more effective means to trigger crime prevention. This book offers fresh insight into what else should be distributed and how this might be done, arguing that it is only by taking into account restorative questions that institutional responses can be truly said to be just. The book is about how the criminal law might develop from today to bring the need for restoration directly into the mix tomorrow. The restorative practice of justice has many answers but cannot be the sole solution. Restorative processes can begin the process of repair and seek to deter crime through means other than punishment. But restorative practice’s own limitations are highlighted when the seriousness of the wrongdoing calls for a strongly retributive response and there is a rushed return to punishment. Rather than seeing restorative justice as a replacement discourse, this book argues that it should be situated in a close complementary role with conventional legal justice.