Özet:

Where there are people, there is always the possibility of conflicts. The important point here is not that the conflicts do not arise, but that the conflicts are resolved. In general terms, it is possible to divide the understanding of justice, which tries to resolve the disputes in the field of criminal law, into two as punitive justice and restorative justice. The crime committed in the understanding of punitive justice is accepted as a threat to the state authority because it means a violation of the law, and therefore, the task of detecting and punishing the crime and the criminal is given to the state in order to re-establish the deteriorated state authority. In principle, the punishment of the perpetrator is essential, and the issue of redressing the victim's grievances is ignored. In the restorative justice system, on the other hand, the principle of eliminating the victim's grievances is adopted, the perpetrator's direct responsibility for their criminal acts is adopted, and the active participation of the society in this process is envisaged. In other words, in the restorative justice system, the conflict is ended with the free will of the parties in an environment where the perpetrator-victim and other participants in the conflict are present. While the powers of the state are at the forefront in the resolution of the conflict in the punitive justice approach, the parties and the society are at the forefront in the resolution of the conflict in the restorative justice approach. Alternative dispute resolution methods, which are an institution of the Anglo-Saxon legal system and are increasingly effective in the Continental European legal system, are also a result of the restorative justice approach.

Anahtar Kelimeler: