Criminal Reconciliation in Crimes Against Persons and Property (An Analytical, Doctrinal, and Comparative Study)

Following the commission of a crime, the State’s right to impose punishment arises, and the mechanism through which this right is exercised is the public criminal action. This indicates a necessary correlation between the public criminal action and the State’s right to punish, as no penalty may be imposed without the initiation of a public criminal action leading to a judicial verdict.In this context, criminal reconciliation emerges as a procedural system that is triggered exclusively upon the commission of a crime. Its primary purpose is to terminate the criminal proceedings that result from the crime, and it is effected only through an agreement between the parties involved, within the limits set by law—whether with or without compensation.Criminal reconciliation holds significant value in sparing the offender from the stigma of criminal conviction, as well as from the costs associated with legal proceedings and the necessity of appointing legal counsel to represent them in court, which may be a lengthy process.Moreover, the importance of criminal reconciliation lies in alleviating the burden on criminal courts by bringing about the termination of criminal proceedings through simplified procedures that allow for expedited resolution, as opposed to resorting to the traditional, and often complex, criminal procedures.The adoption of criminal reconciliation is a response to the urgent need to address the punitive inflation crisis faced by many states, a phenomenon resulting from the dramatic increase in the number of cases before the courts—an increase that threatens to paralyze the administration of justice.