Author

Debates about reparations and forms of restorative justice are related to the legacies of Britain's colonial past. Since the abolition of slavery in 1833, former enslaved peoples and their descendants have been demanding forms of compensation to allow them to access land and means to support their families and communities. With the compensation act of 1837, former slave owners received compensation from the British government for the loss of their so-called property. The issue of reparation has continued over the following centuries.

In the last three decades, institutions in the USA have tackled the question. Debates about forms of reparations and self-determination of people of African descent have also been at the forefront of discussions and demands in Africa during colonisation and since decolonisation from activists to intellectuals and policy makers.

At a basic level, the term 'reparations' entails a form of compensation paid by the perpetrators of wrongdoings to victims. The term is multi-layered and has often been used to reduce the idea of repairing to the notion of financial payment only. As far as the transatlantic and India Ocean enslavements are concerned, the remits are broader and include land restitution and dialogue about the cultural, social, economic legacies of the past and how they had an impact on people of African descent. The terms restorative/reparative justice are also used more broadly to engage with the various means to address the imbalances of the past in addition to or beyond, financial compensation. Restorative justice or reparations imply a dialogue in which the injured parties structure the conversation and the strategy in discussion with the perpetrators. Restorative justice is a process that has also been equated to transitional justice. The latter is used in societies transitioning from war to peace processes or in post-war societies that are struggling to reach social cohesion.

The current discussions in relation to colonial slavery are set around the notion of legality of the slave trade at the time or around the idea of direct and indirect links that would exonerate the beneficiaries of the slave trade, and slavery centuries after the abolition of the slave trade and slavery. The path towards forms of reconciliation at a local level necessitates a multi-agency approach and cannot be achieved only through discussions at academic levels. A restorative justice strategy in such context can only be informed by robust and transparent local, national and international debates and the willingness to challenge the multiple definitions of the term justice. Race is a social construct and racism is one of the many legacies of colonial pasts. Anti-racism strategies cannot therefore be substitutes to restorative justice, but they can provide important and necessary steps for debates and actions to address racial discrimination.

Continuing work on the links between the University of Bristol and people of African descent in the 19th and 20th century will therefore be incredibly important if the University wants to move away from the dichotomy of slave traders on the one hand, and enslaved or victims/ perpetrators on the other. The enslavement was a dehumanising process that reduced enslaved people to a monetary value but there was a more complex story of resilience and resistance that also took place. In the 20th century, various institutions (both private companies and universities) have been engaging with their history and in particular with their links with slavery. Understanding where the University of Bristol situates itself in these debates will be crucial if it is to address questions related to restorative justice.

Some institutions such as the National Trust and English Heritage have conducted academic research on those links but did not explicitly state that they were working on forms or restorative justice. Others such as Greene King and Lloyds Bank have examined their history and decided to focus on a continuation of their diversity strategy rather than specifically addressing the legacies of enslavement. They have acknowledged the past but have not seen it necessary to address the question of restorative justice. The merit of such approaches is to make the histories of the past available to all. They acknowledge their direct and indirect connections with enslavement. They acknowledged the negative legacies of the past including exclusion and racism and have sought to address the imbalances through an anti-racism strategy.

Other institutions such as the University of Glasgow have decided to establish links between accumulated wealth and what sums allocated to or what initiative should be answering demands for any form of reparations. As Stephen Mullen¹ showed, the sums allocated do not reflect direct enrichment as it is impossible to completely assess how much wealth was created and how much is directly linked to each enslaved labour. These institutions often seek to make a case for direct and indirect links to slavery, and those pieces of research are indeed valuable. However, enslavement was about the commodification of black and brown bodies as much as it was about intergenerational trauma, hierarchisation, and racism that led to centuries of racial inequalities and various forms of discrimination. Solely focusing on direct and indirect actors (such as the merchants) and links of such histories continues to perpetrate forms of erasure regarding the histories of African captives, enslaved in the Caribbean, including their descendants in Bristol. As fascinating as academic research is about slave traders, those pieces of research also serve as a marker of a significant tendency that is a fascination for the alleged entrepreneurial skills of Bristol's forefathers. Research about merchants needs to sit alongside work on enslaved populations and their descendants.

A path for the University of Bristol

To bridge the gap that exists between the stories of the past focusing on traders and merchant families, a study regarding the enslaved and their descendants in Bristol and their trajectories would be a valuable addition to understand the overall history of enslavement.

This report seeks to provide initial information about the University's links to slavery but also to look further into the question of restorative justice, highlighting that the key points are not about direct and indirect links but about the legacies of enslavement within and outside the University.

Based on similar approaches at universities with links with slavery, the following points are aimed at providing a starting point for a broader discussion about forms of restorative justice that are uniquely adequate for Bristol. Restorative justice is an on-going process that is open ended and is about transformative changes that address the broader issues of systemic racism and inequalities.

• It requires a culture shift and a rethinking of the notion of philanthropic deeds.
• It entails collaborations, co-production of a restorative justice strategy and a consultative process that go beyond one-off grants and short-term scholarships.
• It provides the space for various communities to engage with the legacies of the past.

The University of Bristol is already engaging with anti-racism and diversity processes through Anti-Racism Steering Group initiatives, the Decolonising the Curriculum groups, Widening Participation initiatives, mentoring schemes, apprenticeships, and activity with the Students' Union and scholarships.

• It needs to bring these strands together to work on a long-term strategy that address inequalities in education and research, and in Bristol in particular.
• It needs to involve people within the university working on the renaming of buildings.
• It needs to challenge assumptions about knowledge production and make a radical decision to reach communities that the University is not already working with.

Bristol's philanthropic tradition should be part of the debate about restorative justice, and addressing the profound social and racial divides that exist within the city should be a priority.

Practically, the University of Bristol could:

Expand on current scholarships and offer more substantial funds that allow research on the links between the University, the city and people of African descent at local and international levels.

Further and long-term engagements that must be part of a restorative justice strategy

• Engage more strongly with Bristol's Commission on Racial Equality and support its key priorities (education, health including mental health, the criminal justice system; housing and employment/business and economy; leadership, etc.)
• Consider, research, and support initiatives that look at intersectionality and in particular how race, class, age, religion and gender affect women of African descent especially in Bristol.
• Beyond Europe, the University needs to rethink its position on a longer and sustainable strategy regarding restorative justice. Engaging with people of African descent in the Caribbean and, crucially, with Africa itself must inform its long-term strategic approach to repairing.

It is not the University's role to solve all problems that the city of Bristol is facing but it needs to openly demonstrate that it is committed to working on the recommendations. The University of Bristol will thus demonstrate that it is not an 'ivory tower', and that it is indeed attuned to local, national and international imperatives and can contribute to positive change.

1. ^ Mullen, S., 'British Universities and Transatlantic Slavery: The University of Glasgow Case', History Workshop Journal v91 n1 (20210727), pp. 210-233.