MEDIATION or, in other words, MEDIATION and MEDIATION is one way of resolving a dispute in which a third party, mediator, helps the parties to a dispute in reaching an agreement. MEDIATION may not result in mutual agreement between the parties and, if successful in reaching an agreement, its provisions are usually determined by the parties themselves. Parties to the dispute may be countries, organizations, groups, individuals or anyone else who will benefit from MEDIATION. They should consider the mediator as a neutral person. MEDIATION applies to a variety of issues, including business, legal, diplomatic, work, and family issues. In MEDIATION, unlike arbitration and expert assessment, third party consideration is unnecessary for the parties. It is also an intermediary to make it possible for the parties to negotiate and to find out the exact cases of disagreement and to reach the best possible solution. More MEDIATION is useful in complex disputes that require unofficial dialogue between the parties. The speed and cost of MEDIATION is less than the benefits of this method of resolving disputes over the process of arbitration and litigation in the judiciary. Now the issue of MEDIATION status is discussed in the separate section. In the first section, "CRIMINAL MEDIATION and long-standing dispute resolution mechanism," and the second part, "MEDIATION in CRIMINAL cases," and in the third part, "The role of MEDIATION in the litigation chapter and responding to violations of norms in texts." Islamic jurisprudence, and in the fourth section, the "MEDIATION troubles".

Confidentiality is an important component of CRIMINAL MEDIATION. Without observing the principle of confidentiality of the MEDIATION process, it is impossible to have a meaningful dialogue between the victim and the offender. If the MEDIATION environment does not guarantee the principle of confidentiality, it may be up to the perpetrator and victim to not participate in the process, Therefore, ensuring the participation of the victim and the offender is one of the main reasons for the nature of the confidentiality of this process. The principle of confidentiality of the MEDIATION process is recognized in international documents and treaties and in the laws of different countries. Most CRIMINAL MEDIATION regulations have stated that this is a confidential process, but in some cases the information and conversations and documents presented may not be generalized or disclosed, or in some cases, the mediator has a duty to disclose it or maybe There is a conflict between the rules of confidentiality in the MEDIATION process and other CRIMINAL and legal rules. Therefore, mediators should warn participants in MEDIATION hearings that, other than the necessary information in the case, any acceptance of past crimes, such as confessions for offenses or threats of future offenses, may not be considered confidential and the court will use these evidences and grounds for subsequent proceedings.

Background and Aim: MEDIATION, which is referred to in the Holy Qur'an as the correction of the essence, is a method of confrontation between the victim and the offender, the process of which involves the participation of a person or third parties called a mediator or facilitator. The victim and the offender help to reach a mutual agreement. MEDIATION by a court judge is recommended by many jurists and in addition to civil matters, it also includes CRIMINAL matters (especially ta'zir punishments); , That is, mediates and seeks to answer the question of whether restorative justice can be done through MEDIATION and reform of the essence. Methodology: The research method in the present article is descriptive-analytical. Findings and Conclusion: The findings of the study indicate a significant effect of the use of MEDIATION mechanisms in reducing the volume of cases and also the number of court appeals. Based on this, it can be concluded that MEDIATION based on the Qur'an and Sunnah has a significant role in achieving restorative justice in the CRIMINAL proceedings.

Background and Aim: The process of CRIMINAL MEDIATION is one of the important programs of restorative justice that has not received much attention from the financial and economic point of view. The present article seeks to examine the financial dimensions of CRIMINAL MEDIATION in Iranian jurisprudence and law. Materials and Methods: This is a leading descriptiveanalytical article using a library method. Ethical considerations: In different stages of writing the article, ethical and scientific principles have been observed, including the scientific and accurate use of scientific resources. Results: CRIMINAL MEDIATION has different dimensions from financial and economic point of view; First, it is one of the lowcost and fast methods of resolving disputes and conflicts. Second, MEDIATION through de-judicialization and the reduction of court delays prevent the imposition of exorbitant court costs on the judiciary. On the other hand, MEDIATION seeks to compensate the victim and restore his rights through the active participation of the offender through negotiation and peace. Conclusion: MEDIATION has an important place in both jurisprudence and CRIMINAL law. Referral to MEDIATION is an action that is inspired by the teachings of restorative justice and in order to reconcile the parties and exclude only some less important cases from the judicial process, but it is necessary to expand the scope of those more important CRIMINAL cases.

After the system based on correction and treatment and the failure of the prison project, the second generation of punishment came into being, which was introduced as the restorative justice system, but in recent years, the third generation of punishment called participatory justice was discussed and accepted in legal circles and doctrine. However, with the clarification of the policy of restorative and participatory justice, the tendency towards it has increased even more and it has become more and more successful. The Islamic Penal Code also comes under various headings, such as alternatives to imprisonment and semi-liberty. Because the involvement of victims and offenders in CRIMINAL matters will be a kind of participation in punishment and participation in the rehabilitation of the offender and the return of the third side of the CRIMINAL justice system to society, in a general expression when the legislator from the title and word "can" It means that it wants to expand participation, which is more prominent in the new law on reducing the punishment of imprisonment. This research has been compiled in a descriptive and analytical manner, so that it can be considered.

Although going to court is one of the most common methods of resolving disputes, it is not necessarily the best method, and in some cases, although the case is assigned to a lawsuit, it does not resolve the dispute. Hence, alternative dispute resolution methods have become more common today, including MEDIATION. Accordingly, in the amendments to the Code of CRIMINAL Procedure of Iran, we see the possibility of resolving some CRIMINAL disputes with conditions through MEDIATION. Based on this, we examine the place of resolving CRIMINAL disputes in the Iranian legal system? And does the Code of CRIMINAL Procedure have the necessary capacity to resolve CRIMINAL disputes? On this basis, it can be said that although Iranian law has accepted CRIMINAL MEDIATION, its scope is limited to 6th to 8th degree CRIMINAL offenses, provided that their punishment can be suspended, and there are some restrictions in the referral and enforcement process. In addition, according to the goals of MEDIATION, in the amendments to the law, it is possible to resolve disputes through MEDIATION in all stages of CRIMINAL proceedings and even after the trial and during the execution of the sentence.

CRIMINAL MEDIATION is one of the innovations of Iran's CRIMINAL policy in the field of CRIMINAL proceedings, which is based on the idea of restorative justice. This institution was accepted by the Iranian legislator for the first time in Article 82 of the CRIMINAL Procedure Law of 1392 under the criminological teachings of protective victimology. Victimization, compensation for damages and losses, deCRIMINALization and an alternative to the legal system of prosecution are among the reasons for the tendency to use the institution of CRIMINAL MEDIATION. The purpose of this article is to describe the methods of MEDIATION in CRIMINAL matters and the criticisms of it. This research shows that there are different methods of CRIMINAL MEDIATION, which leads to more use of MEDIATION in the CRIMINAL process. With a comparative look at the Indonesian judicial system and a descriptive-analytical method based on library studies, the conclusion was reached that among the various methods of this institution, CRIMINAL MEDIATION accepted in CRIMINAL policy, the type of community MEDIATION along with judicial supervision with an emphasis on The facilitator's role is a mediator, which can be used directly in some cases and indirectly in other cases. Suspension of crimes and agreement between the parties of the case is one of the most important conditions for using this institution in Iran's judicial system. In this regard, to expand and develop the use of this institution, the regulation of MEDIATION in CRIMINAL matters was approved by the Board of Ministers on 7/28/2015. With a comparative approach between Iran and Indonesia, it seems like this; Although the approval and acceptance of CRIMINAL MEDIATION is a good and desirable thing, but this has not been done properly and the legal requirements, including the certainty and certainty of the decisions taken, are questionable, and even the failure to reach an agreement and refer the parties to the judicial authority in some way It is considered the cause of delaying the proceedings and violating the victim's right. This requires that by clearly explaining the crimes subject to CRIMINAL MEDIATION and adopting the rule of "pardonability of crimes" as a criterion for crimes subject to MEDIATION in order to make wider use of the said institution and predict CRIMINAL MEDIATION at the stage of execution of the sentence and specify the jurisdiction of the execution judge. Rulings to refer the matter to MEDIATION and explain and describe the responsibility of the mediator in terms of CRIMINAL, civil and disciplinary liability in order to raise the position of the MEDIATION institution as a friendly institution in lawsuits and in order to facilitate and speed up the process of justice, the necessary regulations and laws of the current issue be corrected.

Background Creating the ground for peace and reconciliation through recourse to arbitration has been one of the common methods of litigation that is rooted in ethics. In the CRIMINAL justice system, judicial and police officials are the reference for investigation, inquiry and investigation. The sovereign and their representatives have the exclusive competence and no other person has the authority to interfere in it. In restorative litigation, on the other hand, because the view of the offense is different, individuals or councils, as mediators, intervene in the decision-making process and make decisions under the supervision of the CRIMINAL authority. However, the penal system is closely related to public order and government sovereignty, and its fate cannot be left to civil society and ethics. With the aim of judicial adjudication and amicable settlement of disputes arising from crime in Article 82 and its executive regulations were approved by the head of the judiciary in 1394. This regulation was amended and approved by the Cabinet in September 2016 and it is binding. Conclusion This regulation was the beginning of the formal introduction of CRIMINAL MEDIATION in Iranian law, although for a long time in Iranian customary law, both religiously and morally, in all crimes there is a culture of MEDIATION in various forms. The realization of the restorative justice system has gradually progressed towards MEDIATION.

After the system based on correction and treatment and the failure of the prison project, the second generation of punishment came into being, which was introduced as the system of restorative justice but in recent years, the third generation of punishment called participatory justice has been discussed and accepted in legal meetings and doctrine, but with the clarification of the policy of restorative and participatory justice, the speed of desire towards it has become greater and more successful and in the Code of CRIMINAL Procedure adopted in 2013, in several articles the discussion of MEDIATION and resolving the chapter of lawsuits has been mentioned, And this point of view is even mentioned in the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013 under different headings, which can be referred to as alternative punishment of imprisonment and semi-liberty system. Because the involvement of victims and offenders in CRIMINAL matters will be a kind of participation in punishment and participation of the rehabilitation of the offender and return of the third side of the CRIMINAL justice system to society. In general expression when the legislator uses the title and the word “, Can”,it means that it wants to expand the participation, which has become more detailed in the law on reducing prison sentences.