[:lt]<\/p>\n
Siekdami pl\u0117sti alternatyvas baud\u017eiamajam persekiojimui, turime kalb\u0117ti apie mediacij\u0105 iki ikiteisminio tyrimo, jo metu ar iki teisminio nagrin\u0117jimo. Toki\u0105 pozicij\u0105 savo prane\u0161ime \u201eMediacijos baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje galimyb\u0117s\u201c i\u0161sak\u0117 Lietuvos teis\u0117s instituto (LTI) mokslininkas dr. Rokas Uscila.<\/p>\n
Teisingumo ministerijoje vykusioje apskritojo stalo diskusijoje \u201eMediacija baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje\u201c dr. R.\u00a0Uscila pabr\u0117\u017e\u0117, jog Teisingumo ministerijos ind\u0117lis leido prad\u0117ti formuoti mediacijos baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje praktik\u0105, ta\u010diau reikia \u017eengti kit\u0105 \u017eingsn\u012f ir formuoti visavert\u012f mediacijos model\u012f. \u0160iandien Lietuvoje veikia ni\u0161inis (dalinis) mediacijos baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje modelis, kuris \u012fgyvendinamas per probacijos sistem\u0105.<\/p>\n
Mediacijos ir probacijos sintez\u0117 galima, yra Europos \u0161ali\u0173 (pvz., \u010cekija, Latvija), kur mediacija \u201e\u012fkelta\u201c ir glaud\u017eiai susieta su probacijos sistema, ta\u010diau pats modelis kitoks nei Lietuvoje, mediacija n\u0117ra i\u0161skirtinai koncentruota \u012f probuojamus asmenis, yra sukurti teisiniai pagrindai, deleguotos funkcijos, kurios leid\u017eia maksimaliai i\u0161pl\u0117sti jos taikym\u0105.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Mokslininkas pasakojo, jog praktika Lietuvos probacijos tarnybose parod\u0117, kad 90\u00a0proc. vis\u0173 atvej\u0173, kurie nagrin\u0117jami mediacijoje, yra bausmi\u0173 vykdymo sistemoje. Vis d\u0117lto pa\u017eangi praktika ir tarptautiniai standartai ai\u0161kiai nurodo, kad mediacija turi b\u016bti prieinama tiek iki, tiek per, tiek po baud\u017eiamojo proceso.<\/p>\n
\u201eMoksliniai tyrimai ir mediacijos taikymo praktika rodo, kad ankstesnis mediatori\u0173 \u012fsiterpimas \u012f konflikt\u0105 ma\u017eina patirtos viktimizacijos (traumavimo) \u017eal\u0105, taupomi materialiniai ir \u017emogi\u0161kieji resursai\u201c, \u2013 kalb\u0117jo mokslininkas Teisingumo ministerijos, Mykolo Romerio universiteto ir LTI organizuotoje apskritojo stalo diskusijoje.<\/p>\n
[:en]<\/p>\n
In order to develop alternatives to prosecution, we have to talk about mediation before or during pre-trial investigation or before court proceedings. This position has been stated in a presentation \u201cPossibilities of mediation in criminal justice\u201d by Dr. Rokas Uscila, a researcher of the Law Institute of Lithuania (hereinafter – LIL).<\/p>\n
At a round-table discussion \u201cMediation in criminal justice\u201d held in the Ministry of Justice, Dr. Uscila highlighted that the contribution of the Ministry of Justice had enabled the start of formation of the practice of mediation in criminal justice, yet another step should be taken and a complete mediation model should be developed. A niche (partial) model of mediation in criminal justice, implemented through a probation system, functions in Lithuania today.<\/p>\n
A synthesis of mediation and probation is possible and there are European countries (e.g. Czech Republic, Latvia) in which mediation is closely integrated in the probation system, yet the model differs from the one functioning in Lithuania; mediation is not specifically focused on probationers, legal basis has been established and functions allowing maximum scope of its application have been delegated.<\/p>\n
The researcher stated that practice of Lithuanian probation services demonstrates that 90 percent of all cases examined in mediation come from the system of enforcement of sentences. However, good practices and international standards clearly indicate that mediation should be accessible before, during and after criminal proceedings.<\/p>\n
\u201cScientific research and mediation practice shows that earlier intervention of mediators in the conflict mitigates the damage caused by victimisation (traumatisation) and contributes to saving of material and human resources,\u201d commented the researcher at the round-table discussion organised by the Ministry of Justice, Mykolas Romeris University and LIL.<\/p>\n
[:]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
[:lt] Siekdami pl\u0117sti alternatyvas baud\u017eiamajam persekiojimui, turime kalb\u0117ti apie mediacij\u0105 iki ikiteisminio tyrimo, jo metu ar iki teisminio nagrin\u0117jimo. Toki\u0105 pozicij\u0105 savo prane\u0161ime \u201eMediacijos baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje galimyb\u0117s\u201c i\u0161sak\u0117 Lietuvos teis\u0117s instituto (LTI) mokslininkas dr. Rokas Uscila. Teisingumo ministerijoje vykusioje apskritojo stalo diskusijoje \u201eMediacija baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje\u201c dr. R.\u00a0Uscila pabr\u0117\u017e\u0117, jog Teisingumo ministerijos ind\u0117lis leido prad\u0117ti formuoti mediacijos baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje praktik\u0105, ta\u010diau reikia \u017eengti kit\u0105 \u017eingsn\u012f ir formuoti visavert\u012f mediacijos model\u012f. \u0160iandien Lietuvoje veikia ni\u0161inis (dalinis) mediacijos baud\u017eiamojoje justicijoje modelis, kuris \u012fgyvendinamas per probacijos sistem\u0105. Mediacijos ir probacijos sintez\u0117 galima, yra Europos \u0161ali\u0173 (pvz., \u010cekija, Latvija), kur mediacija \u201e\u012fkelta\u201c ir glaud\u017eiai susieta su probacijos sistema, ta\u010diau pats modelis kitoks nei Lietuvoje, mediacija n\u0117ra i\u0161skirtinai koncentruota \u012f probuojamus asmenis, yra sukurti teisiniai pagrindai, deleguotos funkcijos, kurios leid\u017eia maksimaliai i\u0161pl\u0117sti jos taikym\u0105.\u00a0 Mokslininkas pasakojo, jog praktika Lietuvos probacijos tarnybose parod\u0117, kad 90\u00a0proc. vis\u0173 atvej\u0173, kurie nagrin\u0117jami mediacijoje, yra bausmi\u0173 vykdymo sistemoje. Vis d\u0117lto pa\u017eangi praktika ir tarptautiniai standartai ai\u0161kiai nurodo, kad mediacija turi b\u016bti prieinama tiek iki, tiek per, tiek po baud\u017eiamojo proceso. \u201eMoksliniai tyrimai ir mediacijos taikymo praktika rodo, kad ankstesnis mediatori\u0173 \u012fsiterpimas \u012f konflikt\u0105 ma\u017eina patirtos viktimizacijos (traumavimo) \u017eal\u0105, taupomi materialiniai ir \u017emogi\u0161kieji resursai\u201c, \u2013 kalb\u0117jo mokslininkas Teisingumo ministerijos, Mykolo Romerio universiteto ir LTI organizuotoje apskritojo stalo diskusijoje. [:en] In order to develop alternatives to prosecution, we have to talk about mediation before or during pre-trial investigation or before court proceedings. This position has been stated in a presentation \u201cPossibilities of mediation in criminal justice\u201d by Dr. Rokas Uscila, a researcher of the Law Institute of Lithuania (hereinafter – LIL). At a round-table discussion \u201cMediation in criminal justice\u201d held in the Ministry of Justice, Dr. Uscila highlighted that the contribution of the Ministry of Justice had enabled the start of formation of the practice of mediation in criminal justice, yet another step should be taken and a complete mediation model should be developed. A niche (partial) model of mediation in criminal justice, implemented through a probation system, functions in Lithuania today. A synthesis of mediation and probation is possible and there are European countries (e.g. Czech Republic, Latvia) in which mediation is closely integrated in the probation system, yet the model differs from the one functioning in Lithuania; mediation is not specifically focused on probationers, legal basis has been established and functions allowing maximum scope of its application have been delegated. The researcher stated that practice of Lithuanian probation services demonstrates that 90 percent of all cases examined in mediation come from the system of enforcement of sentences. However, good practices and international standards clearly indicate that mediation should be accessible before, during and after criminal proceedings. \u201cScientific research and mediation practice shows that earlier intervention of mediators in the conflict mitigates the damage caused by victimisation (traumatisation) and contributes to saving of material and human resources,\u201d commented the researcher at the round-table discussion organised by the Ministry of Justice, Mykolas Romeris University and LIL. [:]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":3007,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,261],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3006","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-naujienos","category-2018-naujienu-irasu-metai"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3006","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3006"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3006\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6790,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3006\/revisions\/6790"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3007"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3006"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3006"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/teise.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3006"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}