چکیده:
The transformation of criminal policy in recent decades from the traditional criminal justice model toward restorative justice is considered one of the most fundamental changes in contemporary criminological thought. Restorative justice, by focusing on compensating the victim, offender accountability, and reconstructing social relationships, seeks to transform the criminal response from a purely punitive form into a human, participatory, and community-oriented process. Mediation, as one of the practical mechanisms of this approach, provides the basis for direct interaction between the victim and the offender and can help realize social justice by repairing material and spiritual damages. In Iran, the Criminal Procedure Code passed in 1392 (with amendments up to 1401) has officially predicted criminal mediation for the first time in Articles 82 to 84. Despite this, executive ambiguities, weakness in supervisory guarantees, and a lack of specialized training for mediators have caused the actual function of this institution to diverge from the goals of restorative justice. This research, using a descriptive-analytical method and utilizing modern Persian and English sources, examines the position of mediation in Iran's criminal policy and evaluates its degree of compliance with the principles of restorative justice. The research findings show that although the legislator has taken a positive step toward humanizing the judicial process, the full realization of restorative justice depends on reforming structures, training mediators, and changing cultural attitudes toward the role of punishment.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Despite this, the practical implementation of these articles faces serious challenges: including the lack of clear criteria for selecting a mediator, the lack of legal and psychological expertise among mediators, the conflict between the deterrent goals of punishment and consent-based settlement, and the vacuum of institutional coordination between the Judiciary and the Dispute Resolution Councils (Abbasi, 1401).
Consequently, the effective implementation of restorative justice in Iran requires legislative reform, specialized training for mediators, and a redefinition of the philosophy of criminal policy in light of human dignity and international standards (Zehr, 2015: 102; UNODC, 2020: 18).
5. Evaluating the alignment of Iran's criminal policy with international principles of restorative justice Based on the rules and principles of restorative justice approved by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC, 2002) and the Vienna Declaration 2000 on restorative justice, states are obliged to create mechanisms in which: The voluntary participation of the victim and the offender is guaranteed, Mediation is conducted by trained and impartial individuals, The victim enjoys psychological and legal support at all stages, And mediation reports are reviewed under the supervision of an independent judicial authority (UNODC, 2020: 18).
Comparing Iran with successful systems in criminal mediation A comparative study of the criminal systems of Germany, Canada, and New Zealand shows that criminal mediation in these countries is not merely a formal tool for reducing case volumes, but part of the philosophy of restorative justice institutionalized in national criminal policy.
(
, 
, 
)
