Abstract:
To examine the enforceability of community-based resolution in criminal cases. The study is necessary for two main reasons. First, formal criminal justice system is in a critical situation owing to the persistent overload of cases and growing inefficiency of court-based adjudication. Second, informal justice is gaining importance progressively. The research finds that there are a multitude of informal methods to settle criminal conflicts between community members. But there is one problem: the community-based resolution may not be valid if any of the two parties refuse to abide by. As a result, the case may return to the formal justice system, hence duplicating the time and cost. To solve this problem, it is necessary to seek the authority of the criminal justice agency. To be precise, if the competent court has approved the process and finds that the decision is in accordance with some specified criteria, the community-based resolution should be binding and enforceable. The resolution can be deemed as a court's order. If any party fails to comply with it, they may be charged with contempt of court. The research also suggests the legalization of submitting certain types of criminal cases (e.g. compoundable nature and special relationship between the offender and the injured person) to a third neutral party selected or approved by the two disputing parties. The decision can be formally enforced when the process has been approved by the competent court.
