Criminal mediation

Mediation in criminal cases is a negotiation between the victim and the person who committed the offence, conducted by an independent intermediary. The aim of such negotiations is not to "hush up" the case, but to give the victim an opportunity to obtain genuine compensation for the harm and an apology, and to give the other party an opportunity to recognise the consequences of their actions and make amends for them. In Kazakhstan, the procedure is based on the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Mediation" and the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, while the possibility of reconciliation itself is determined by the Criminal Code.

It is important to understand from the outset that mediation is a tool for reaching agreement between people. The decision to release a person from criminal liability or to discontinue a case is taken not by the mediator or the parties, but by the competent authority — the criminal prosecution body or the court — in accordance with the law and taking all the circumstances into account.

Which situations are suitable for mediation

Reconciliation through mediation is not permitted in every case, but only in cases expressly provided for by criminal law. As a rule, this concerns criminal misdemeanours and minor and moderately serious offences, and in certain cases other categories where this is expressly established by law. In practice, mediation is most often used in the following situations:

• road traffic accidents that caused harm to health or property without grave consequences;
• domestic conflicts that escalated into minor bodily harm;
• damage to or destruction of another person's property;
• petty theft and fraud, where the victim is primarily interested in getting the money back;
• insults and other conflicts between neighbours, colleagues or acquaintances;
• cases in which the parties will continue to interact after the proceedings have ended — for example, relatives or partners.

How the procedure works

1. Initiative. Mediation may be proposed by either party, their lawyer or representative, and the authority conducting the proceedings may also explain that this option is available. The consent of both parties is mandatory — no one can be compelled to mediate.
2. Choosing a mediator. The parties jointly choose a professional mediator and conclude a mediation agreement with them.
3. Separate meetings. The mediator often first talks to each party separately to understand their position, concerns and expectations, especially if the victim is experiencing fear or strong emotions.
4. Joint meeting. The parties discuss what happened; the victim has the opportunity to speak, and the other party has the opportunity to explain their behaviour and propose a way of making amends.
5. Working out the terms. The parties agree on the amount and procedure for compensation, the form of the apology and any other steps to make good the harm.
6. Signing the agreement. The outcome is a written settlement agreement, which is submitted to the authority conducting the criminal proceedings so that it can take a procedural decision.

Advantages over ordinary proceedings

For the victim, mediation is above all a real chance to obtain compensation faster than through a civil claim after the verdict, without having to recount traumatic events over and over again. For the suspect or accused, it is an opportunity to put things right voluntarily, which the law takes into account. For both parties, it means less stress, confidential negotiations and the ability to set acceptable terms themselves rather than having a decision imposed "from above".

The mediator's role

The mediator is neither an investigator, nor a judge, nor a defence lawyer. The mediator does not establish guilt, does not give a legal assessment of anyone's actions and does not make decisions. The mediator's task is to ensure a safe and respectful dialogue, to help the parties hear each other and to formulate realistic terms. The mediator is independent and impartial, and any information that becomes known to them in the course of mediation is confidential. This does not exclude the involvement of lawyers: the defence lawyer and the victim's representative may advise their clients at every stage.

The outcome and its legal significance

The settlement agreement records that the parties have reconciled and that the harm has been, or will be, made good in the agreed manner. This document serves as a basis for considering release from criminal liability in connection with reconciliation, but does not guarantee it automatically. The competent authority checks whether the law permits reconciliation for the offence in question, whether the agreement was concluded voluntarily and whether its terms have been fulfilled, and only then takes a decision. A clear understanding of this distinction helps avoid unrealistic expectations.

Limitations — when mediation is impossible or inadvisable

• where the law does not permit reconciliation for the particular category of offence;
• where one of the parties does not consent, or consent was obtained under pressure;
• where the victim is in danger or dependent on the other party, for example in situations of systematic violence;
• where the person who committed the act denies that the event took place and is not prepared to take responsibility;
• where the parties are unable to understand the meaning of their actions or do not have a proper representative.

How to prepare

Gather documents confirming the extent of the harm: receipts, medical bills, repair cost assessments. Think about what really matters to you — money, an apology, or assurances that the situation will not happen again. Discuss the legal consequences of reconciliation in your particular case with a lawyer. If you are the party who caused the harm, assess your financial means in advance so that you can offer terms you are able to fulfil.

Example (hypothetical)

A driver in a car park hit a pedestrian, who sustained an injury requiring a short course of treatment. After proceedings were opened, the parties agreed to mediation. In the separate meetings it emerged that what mattered to the victim was not only the cost of treatment but also the driver's acknowledgement of their carelessness. At the joint meeting, the driver apologised, and the parties agreed on compensation for expenses and non-pecuniary damage, to be paid in two instalments. The signed agreement was submitted to the authority conducting the proceedings, which took a decision within the limits of its powers.

How to choose a mediator on the portal

In the registry of professional mediators on our portal, you can filter mediators by city and by type of mediation by selecting "criminal cases". The mediator's profile shows their experience, specialisation and working format. Look for experience of handling criminal-law disputes specifically and for training in working with victims. You can apply online — the mediator will contact you, clarify the circumstances and propose how to proceed, including inviting the other party.

This material is for reference only and does not constitute legal advice. Please check with a mediator whether mediation is appropriate for your particular situation.