Mediation in a criminal case gives the injured party and the suspect or accused an opportunity to discuss the consequences of an incident, reparation for harm and possible terms of agreement. It takes place within a defined procedural framework and requires voluntary participation. It is not a promise that proceedings will be discontinued or a way to impose forgiveness on the injured party. Below, we explain the main principles of criminal mediation in Poland and questions worth asking before consenting.
Key points before you start
- A participant may withdraw consent until mediation is concluded.
- The referring authority receives information about the outcome and any settlement.
- The State Treasury bears the costs of mediation proceedings in a criminal case.
Who refers the case, and who conducts the mediation?
Article 23a of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure (KPK) allows a court or court referendary, and at the preparatory stage a prosecutor or another authority conducting the proceedings, to refer a case to an authorised institution or person. This takes place at the initiative or with the consent of the accused and the injured party. These rules apply correspondingly to a suspect in preparatory proceedings.
The Regulation of 7 May 2015 sets requirements for institutions and individuals and for the register maintained at the regional court. In Kraków, the register for criminal cases is separate from the list of permanent civil mediators. When making contact, have the case reference, the authority conducting the proceedings and the referral order ready. A private enquiry does not replace a formal referral in a criminal case.
Consent must be informed and capable of being withdrawn
Before obtaining consent, the authority or mediator explains the aims and rules, including the possibility of withdrawing consent until the mediation proceedings conclude. The injured party is not obliged to accept an apology or a proposed amount. The suspect or accused should understand the significance of their statements and the draft, with the opportunity to consult defence counsel. Participation does not transfer the decision on criminal liability to the mediator.
Concerns about safety should be raised before a joint meeting. The regulation also provides for indirect discussions where a direct meeting is not possible. A change of format does not, however, resolve every situation involving pressure. If a participant cannot decide freely, the conditions for mediation and whether it is appropriate need to be reconsidered.
How does the process work, and how long can it take?
After receiving the order, the mediator contacts the participants, explains the rules and arranges preliminary meetings and the subsequent approach. Discussions may concern the consequences of the incident, the injured party’s needs, ways to repair harm, payment deadlines and other lawful terms. The mediator helps formulate any settlement and checks performance of the resulting obligations to the extent provided for in the regulation.
Article 23a § 2 KPK states that mediation should last no longer than one month. In justified cases, the regulation allows the competent authority to extend the deadline at the mediator’s request. This is therefore not a guarantee that the entire criminal case will end within a month. A report is prepared after mediation, with the settlement attached if one has been reached.
What does a settlement change, and what does it not determine?
Article 53 § 3 of the Polish Criminal Code (KK) provides for the court to take positive mediation outcomes or an appropriate settlement into account when determining the sentence. The assessment nevertheless depends on the case as a whole and the relevant statutory conditions. A particular sentence, an acquittal or automatic discontinuance cannot be promised simply because the parties have signed a document.
Obligations capable of enforcement may be assessed under Article 107 KPK, which also covers mediated settlements. The relevant conditions must be met; not every moral commitment becomes an enforceable claim. Before signing, check the amount of the obligation, the deadline, how it is to be performed and its relationship to earlier payments and court decisions, so that the terms do not conflict.
Confidentiality and costs: two important distinctions
Criminal mediation is confidential, and Article 178a KPK prohibits questioning the mediator about facts learned from participants during the process. The exception concerns information about offences listed in Article 240 § 1 KK. The authority receives the outcome and settlement, so confidentiality should not be presented as a promise that the agreement itself will remain outside the case file.
Under Article 619 § 2 KPK, the State Treasury bears the costs of the mediation proceedings. This does not mean that every private consultation, a participant’s own defence lawyer or all their expenses are free of charge. At first contact, establish whether the matter is criminal mediation following a formal referral or another service that requires separate payment arrangements.
Research: restorative justice and the Polish procedure
The 2013 review by Strang and co-authors covered ten randomised studies of restorative justice conferences. In the groups studied, whose members participated voluntarily, the authors found favourable average outcomes for reoffending and victim satisfaction. However, these were conferences of a particular type conducted abroad, not an assessment of every form of criminal mediation in Poland. The findings should not be converted into a promise in an individual case or a success rate for the Foundation.
Sources for this section: [5]
Educational scenario — a fictional example, not a case handled by the Foundation.
A conversation about repairing harm
In a fictional scenario involving damage to an item, the injured party wants to know a realistic deadline for reparation and agree arrangements for future contact. The suspect expresses a willingness to talk, and the authority refers the case to mediation after obtaining the required consent. The mediator first speaks to the participants about the conditions for taking part and their expectations.
A hypothetical settlement might specify an agreed amount, a schedule and confirmation of payment. The participants seek advice on the effects, and the outcome goes to the competent authority. The example does not assume discontinuance, a particular sentence or a duty to forgive. It illustrates only a possible subject of agreement and the fact that the procedural decision remains the responsibility of the authorised authority.
Questions about this topic
Can I withdraw after the first meeting?
Yes. Participation is voluntary, and consent can be withdrawn until mediation is concluded. Participants should be informed of this possibility.
Sources for this section: [1]
Does a settlement guarantee that proceedings will be discontinued?
Sources and further reading
- Ustawa z dnia 6 czerwca 1997 r. – Kodeks postępowania karnego, tekst jednolity Dz.U. z 2026 r. poz. 490, ze zmianami; w szczególności art. 23a, art. 107, art. 178a i art. 619 § 2.
- Rozporządzenie Ministra Sprawiedliwości z dnia 7 maja 2015 r. w sprawie postępowania mediacyjnego w sprawach karnych, Dz.U. z 2015 r. poz. 716; w szczególności § 2–4 i § 14–17.
- Sąd Okręgowy w Krakowie, Listy mediatorów: lista stałych mediatorów, lista mediatorów w sprawach karnych oraz listy organizacji pozarządowych i uczelni.
- Ustawa z dnia 6 czerwca 1997 r. – Kodeks karny, tekst jednolity Dz.U. z 2026 r. poz. 1342; w szczególności art. 53 § 3 i art. 240 § 1.
- Strang, H., Sherman, L. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., Woods, D., Ariel, B. (2013). Restorative Justice Conferencing (RJC) Using Face-to-Face Meetings of Offenders and Victims: Effects on Offender Recidivism and Victim Satisfaction. A Systematic Review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 2013:12, 1–59.
Educational material based on sources checked on 23 October 2026. It does not replace an individual legal assessment of a particular case. The scenarios are fictional and do not describe clients’ experiences or outcomes achieved by the Foundation. Legislation, judgments and research publications are cited alongside the relevant topics; DOIs are provided only for publications that have such an identifier.