Post by rajiyakhatun406 on Feb 12, 2024 4:20:47 GMT
This work is based on the current state of criminal mediation in Spain, contemplating its evolution and carrying out an exegesis, both of the current regulations and of the projects and protocols, even of lege ferenda , to intuit where we are going, analyzing said mediation in phase of criminal execution, its typologies, its purposes, as well as the direct and indirect participants in the process and the multiple advantages it entails, making brief reference to its limits, ending with a brief mention of collaborating entities in their relationship with legal operators, with a review even by autonomous communities, pointing out some final conclusions about it. I. CRIMINAL MEDIATION IN SPAIN: PRESENT AND FUTURE PROSPECTS 1.
Introduction Previously, we warn about a possible terminological confusion between criminal mediation and negotiated justice, leading us to analyze restorative or reparative justice and retributive justice. I Ecuador Email List understand that this will be resolved in this work. I have already advanced my position that an embodiment of the first, when it leads us to conformity resulting from an agreement between the parties in the criminal process, lightens the work of the courts, but means leaving out the victim , unless it is a private accusation, and it is impregnated with the idea of punishment through punishment for the sake of the security and tranquility of the society that trusts the system, while retributive justice goes further.
Thus, in the masterful words of GIMENEZ-SALINAS COLOMER [1] : “Conciliation-mediation-reparation is not a faster form of justice, as has often been presented, but on the contrary, reaching a conciliation process can be more laborious than the imposition of a sentence. Reparation is not a way to expedite justice, to “remove” cases, but rather to introduce in criminal terms, in a broad sense, the possibility of negotiated justice. Mediation and confrontation are important aspects of a dynamic process between victim and offender, of active participation to resolve the conflict. Thus the idea of an intervention model arises in which the State chooses to cede the leading role to interested individuals and consolidate a subsidiary role. The new strategy is to return the role to the perpetrator and the victim.
Introduction Previously, we warn about a possible terminological confusion between criminal mediation and negotiated justice, leading us to analyze restorative or reparative justice and retributive justice. I Ecuador Email List understand that this will be resolved in this work. I have already advanced my position that an embodiment of the first, when it leads us to conformity resulting from an agreement between the parties in the criminal process, lightens the work of the courts, but means leaving out the victim , unless it is a private accusation, and it is impregnated with the idea of punishment through punishment for the sake of the security and tranquility of the society that trusts the system, while retributive justice goes further.
Thus, in the masterful words of GIMENEZ-SALINAS COLOMER [1] : “Conciliation-mediation-reparation is not a faster form of justice, as has often been presented, but on the contrary, reaching a conciliation process can be more laborious than the imposition of a sentence. Reparation is not a way to expedite justice, to “remove” cases, but rather to introduce in criminal terms, in a broad sense, the possibility of negotiated justice. Mediation and confrontation are important aspects of a dynamic process between victim and offender, of active participation to resolve the conflict. Thus the idea of an intervention model arises in which the State chooses to cede the leading role to interested individuals and consolidate a subsidiary role. The new strategy is to return the role to the perpetrator and the victim.