How Does the Reconciliation Process Work? Steps for a Fast Resolution in Crimes
Reconciliation is a method used in criminal law to resolve disputes arising from crimes between parties without going to court. This process ensures that justice is served quickly and prioritizes the satisfaction of the parties, especially when seeking a solution between the victim and the perpetrator. Let’s examine the steps of the reconciliation process in detail below.
1. Determining the Crimes Included in Reconciliation
Reconciliation cannot be applied to every crime. The law clearly states which crimes will be subject to reconciliation. Generally:
Minor crimes committed against a person (e.g. simple assault, threat)
Crimes committed against property (theft, fraud) fall within this scope. Example: If a perpetrator who steals agrees to compensate the victim for his/her damages, reconciliation can be reached.
2. Making a Reconciliation Offer
If it is determined that a crime subject to reconciliation has been committed during the investigation or prosecution phase, the prosecutor or judge makes a reconciliation offer to the parties. The parties may refuse or accept to participate in the reconciliation process. For example: In a simple wounding crime, if the victim agrees to enter into a reconciliation process with the perpetrator, the process begins.
3. Determination of the Reconciliator
If the parties accept reconciliation, an impartial reconciliator is appointed. The reconciliator is usually selected from individuals who have received training in the justice system and have legal knowledge. The reconciliator tries to find a basis for agreement by mediating between the parties. For example: In a fraud case, the person who will provide reconciliation between the victim and the perpetrator is appointed by the court.
4. Meeting of the Parties
The reconciliator tries to understand what the parties want by meeting with the parties separately or together. The aim here is to protect the rights and interests of both parties. During the reconciliation process, the perpetrator may usually agree to compensate for the damage or apologize to the victim. Example: While the victim requests financial compensation for the damages he/she suffered from the perpetrator, the perpetrator may agree to compensate for this damage.
5. Reconciliation
If the parties reach an agreement under the guidance of the mediator, this agreement is recorded in a report. This report is an official document and is submitted to the court. The court may approve this agreement and drop the case or provide a penalty reduction. Example: If a compromise is reached between the victim of theft and the perpetrator regarding compensation, the case may be dismissed.
6. Failure to Reconcile
If the parties cannot reach an agreement, the mediator reports this situation and the file is sent back to the court. In this case, the trial process continues normally. Example: If the victim does not accept the offer presented by the perpetrator, the reconciliation process ends and the case continues to be heard.
7. Legal Consequences of Reconciliation
If a compromise is reached, the perpetrator may be exempted from punishment or a penalty reduction may be applied.
The conciliation process ensures that the victim’s damages are compensated quickly.
The workload of the courts is reduced and justice is provided more quickly.
Conciliation offers a fast and effective way for the parties to resolve their problems without going to court. Reaching an agreement between the parties is important both for justice and for the protection of the parties’ rights. What is important is that the conciliation process is carried out correctly and fairly.
