WHAT PEOPLE KNOW

ABOUT MEDIATION?
By
POP CATALIN MARIAN
THEORY AND PRACTICE
OF SOCIAL RESEARCH



1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. RESEARCH INQUIERIES...2
1.1 THEME AND DEFINITIONS ............................................................... 2
1.2 RELEVANCE OF THE SUBJECT ................................................................... 2
1.2 RESEARCH TYPE ...................................................................................... 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND SAMPLING...3
3. HYPOTHESIS, QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES4
3.1 HYPOTHESIS ......................................................................................... 4
3.2 QUESTIONS .............................................................................................. 4
3.3 OBJECTIVES .............................................................................................. 5
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION..6
4.1 QUANTITATIVE DATA INTERPRETATED ..................................... 6
4.2 QUALITATIVE DATA ...18
4.2.1 MEDIATOR INTERVIEW 1 (DIVORCE MEDIATOR) ................................. 18
4.2.2 DIALOG INTRE VICEPRESEDINTELE CONSILIULUI DE MEDIERE ZENO
SUSTAC SI JUDECATORUL CSM CRISTI DANILET.22
4.2.3 INTERVIU REALIZAT DE REVISTA MEDIERII FOSTEI PRESEDINTE AL
CONSILIULUI DE MEDIERE ANCA CIUCA ....................................................... 23
4.2.4MEDIEREA IN CAZURILE PENALE (CRIMINAL CASES)........................ 24
5. CONCLUSIONS..27
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY.28





2

1. RESEARCH INQUIERIES
1.1 THEME AND DEFINITIONS
Peoples perception regarding the institution of Mediation, and its utility
when it comes to solving conflicts.
Mediation: A settlement of a dispute or controversy by setting up an
independent person between two contending parties in order to aid them in the
settlement of their disagreement.
Mediator: The individual who intervenes in order to help the other parties
settle their dispute.
1

The research theme tries to find out the degree of knowledge about
mediation in Romania, and whether people would use this procedure to settle their
disputes, or they prefer to sue themselves. This project contains interviews with
important figures in mediation, judges, lawyers, and ordinary people with no
juridical background.
1.2 RELEVANCE OF THE SUBJECT
The current theme is important due to the fact that mediation is a quite new
procedure in Romania. The bases were put in 2006, when the first law of mediation
was proclaimed. Since mediation is one of the fastest and cheapest ways to resolute
a dispute between sides, it is important to see what people actually know about this
procedure, and how many of them have actually been in a real mediation.
1.2 RESEARCH TYPE
This project is analyzing data quantitatively and qualitatively. The
quantitatively data will be gathered from questionnaires and the qualitatively from
interviews, web pages and media articles.


1
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/mediation


3
2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND SAMPLING
What is Mediation?

While, there is no universally agreed definition or general theory of
mediation (Bellman, 1998) argues that mediation is:

the intervention in a negotiation or a conflict of an acceptable third party
who has limited or no authoritative decision-making power, who assists the
involved parties to voluntarily reach a mutually acceptable settlement of the
issues in dispute.

Sources consulted were TV talk shows, websites, blogs, media articles,
journals and interviews. I did not manage to find any similar study done in
Romania. Although, it would have been very useful to find a similar study done a
few years ago to compare some of the results and to see the evolution of mediation
over time.
SAMPLING
The method used to pick the quantitative data was simple random sampling.
Using a list of names that contains people I know. From that list 65 persons were
randomly picked and answered the questionnaire.
For the qualitative data I chose to attach an interview with a Divorce
Mediator because these are the cases that are most often met in mediation. Next one
is a dialog between a Supreme Court Judge and a renowned mediator. The data
provided was very useful because it showed us the perspective of judges over
mediation. And finally an article made by a lawyer was attached, where he made
some comments about criminal cases that can be mediated.


4
3. HYPOTHESIS, QUESTIONS AND OBJECTIVES
3.1 HYPOTHESIS
1. Most people would try to resolute their conflicts in a peaceful way, and if
they cant they would most probably sue one another, or would go to a
lawyer to ask for advices;
2. Only a few people know about Mediation, and less people are willing to
contact a mediator when a dispute appears;
3. People will most likely resort to a mediator if they have a civil conflict, and
very few people would contact a mediator if they have a criminal dispute;
4. Most of the people believe that mediation is not a viable alternative dispute
resolution method for Romania;

3.2 QUESTIONS
1. What is most likely to proceed in case of a conflict with your involvement?
2. Do you know what mediation is?
3. Would you be willing to use the services of a mediator in case of a civil
conflict between you and another person?
4. Would you be willing to use the services of a mediator in case of a criminal
conflict between you and another person?
5. What would you do if a conflict would outbreak between you and a work
colleague? ( a type of conflict that cannot be settled in court)
6. In what stage of the conflict you are willing to seek mediation?
7. What is the reason for which you would not be willing to call a mediator to
resolve a conflict?
8. If you were physically or verbally abused by another person, then that person
will convene mediation, what would you do?
9. If you would be in a situation when wanting to sue someone and as a prior
procedure you should go to mediation how would you act?
10. If you borrow a sum of money from one person and then you would be
unable to restore it, and that person threatens to sue you what would you do?
11. Do you think that mediation is a viable method to settle conflicts in
Romania?


5

3.3 OBJECTIVES
The paper has 5 main objectives:
1. To see if people have any knowledge about the institution of mediation;
2. To see the most common method picked by people in order to resolute their
disputes;
3. To find out if people are willing to resort to mediation in civil and criminal
conflicts;
4. To find out what people would do if their conflict cannot be settled in a
court;
5. To find out if people believe that mediation is viable ADR (Alternative
dispute resolution) method for Romania;


















6
4. DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1QUANTITATIVE DATA CHARTS AND TABLES INTEPRETATED
For this research 65 people answered to questionnaires, and also five
interviews were attached.

As we can see from the chart above most of the people questioned 54 % are
from the range between 16-25 years old, followed by the group of people between
25-50, with 26 %, and the last group between 50-70 with 20 %. People under 16
were not questioned because they are irrelevant for this study.

In terms of education, were questioned people with all lelvels of education,
except those with no studies which I could not find.

0%
54%
26%
20%
0%
1. Age
Under 16
Between 16-25
Between 25-50
Between 50-70
More than 70
12%
21%
28%
28%
11%
2. Education
secondary education
specialized secondary
superioare incomplete
incomplete higher education
33%
52%
6%
6% 3%
3. Ocupation
Ocupation
schoolgirl/schoolboy
student
employee
unemployed
retired
business owner


7


As we can see from the chart above most people (41 from a total of 65)
believe that they can solve their conflicts in a peaceful way, without implicating
other persons or institutions, 3 persons would go directly to court and sue the
person they are in conflict with, 7 of them will contact a lawyer, police or a
prosecutor, none will ask for advice from a jurist, 10 persons will seek advice from
family, friends or work colleagues, and 4 people said that it depends on the type of
conflict.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
I will try
to resolve
the
conflict
peacefully
I will go to
court
I will
contact a
lawyer,
police or a
prosecutor
I will seek
advice
from a
jurist
I will seek
advice
from
family,
friends or
work
colleague
It
depends
on the
type of
conflict
Series1 41 3 7 0 10 4
4. What is most likely to proceed in
case of a conflict with your
involvement?


8

Most of the persons questioned (33 out of 65) know partially about
mediation, probably heard a few things from the press or read about it on the
internet. 18 persons dont know anything about mediation. 14 persons believe that
they know what mediation is. After this question, the definition of mediation was
given in the questionnaire in order to see if people would resort to it in case of a
conflict.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
yes
no
partially
Do you know what mediation is ?


9

Most of the people dont know if they would resort to mediation in case of a
civil conflict between them and another person or institution (63%), 15% are not
willing to use the services of a mediator, and 22% would consider to use the
services of a mediator in case of a civil conflict.

60 % of the people questioned said that they would not resort to mediation in
case they are involved in a criminal conflict, 34 % dont know what they would do,
and only 6 % affirmed that they will be able to resort to mediation.
22%
15%
63%
6. Would you be willing to use the
services of a mediator in case of a
civil conflict between you and
another person?
Da
Nu
Nu stiu
6%
60%
34%
7. Would you be willing to use the
services of a mediator in case of a
criminal conflict between you and
another person?
Da
Nu
Nu stiu


10

As the chart above states, people are more opened to go to mediation in a
civil conflict (14 out of 65) than in a criminal conflict (only 4), we can also see a
high level of rejection to mediation procedure when it comes to criminal conflict,
39 people said that they would not go to mediation, compared to the civil conflict.
Most of the people questioned (41) said that they dont know if they will resort to
mediation when if they are involved in a civil conflict. This is most probably
because most of the civil conflicts have a pecuniary value.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
yes no don't know
Corelation between civil and criminal
conflict
Civil Conflict
Criminal Conflict


11

In case of a work conflict more than half of the people questioned (52 %)
said that they will try to solve the problem without implicating somebody else, this
means they want to keep their issues confidential. 29 % would ask the boss or
another superior to give a decision, this procedure is similar to arbitration, it does
not matter if you agree with it or not you need to respect it. 11 % of the people said
that it depends on the type of conflict and 8 % care about the relationship they have
with that colleague. For example if they are beer buddies after work they would try
to solve their problem without implicating somebody else, or if its a colleague that
he/she is rarely in contact with most probably would ask the boss to solve their
problem.
29%
52%
11%
8%
8. What would you do if a conflict
would outbreak between you and a
work colleague? (a type of conflict
that cannot be settled in court)
I would ask the boss or
another superior to solve the
problem
I would do anything in my
powers to solve this problem
withouth the implication of
other sides
It depends on the type of
conflict
It depends on the
relationship i have with that
colleague


12

This question was answered only by people who are willing to use the
services of a mediator in case of a conflict. None of the people who answered
would go to mediation when they have a disagreement with someone. 7 out of 18
people would go to mediation when the conflict is at the confrontation stage, and
11 people would go to mediation only if the conflict escalates. This proves that
people tend to postpone things and only if there is no way out they would resort to
mediation.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
disagreement confrontation escalation
9. In what stage of the conflict you
are willing to seek mediation?


13

Even though people read the definition of mediation which states that the
mediator is impartial, and has no decision power, 4 people are still afraid that
impartiality may still occur during the mediation process. 3 persons believe that the
costs of mediation are too high, even though costs were not mentioned in the
questionnaire, 7 persons dont trust their capabilities to take a durable decision, 9
persons believe that they can sort any conflict by themselves and they do not need
to go to court when they have a problem, and 20 people said that they dont know
or they refused to answer.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
I don't trust
that a
mediator
can be
impartial
The costs
are to high
I am afraid
that I can
take a
decision
based on
emotions
that I might
regret in
the future
I am
capable to
deal with
any kind of
conflict
without
going to
court
Don't
know/don't
answer
Series1 4 3 7 9 20
10. What is the reason for which you
would not be willing to call a
mediator to resolve a conflict?


14

20 out of 65 persons said that they would participate to a mediation session
to assess the advantages and disadvantages of this procedure. This answer is quite
intriguing because at an earlier question where they were asked: Would you be
willing to use the services of a mediator in case of a criminal conflict between you
and another person? Only 4 persons were willing to go to mediation. 30 persons
said that they would never go to mediation in this case, 5 persons said that it
depends on the degree of aggression, 3 persons said that they will let it pass if it
would be only verbal aggression, and 5 persons dont know or refused to answer.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
I would
participate to
an
informative
session about
mediation to
find out what
advantages I
have in case I
decide to
continue in
this procedure
I would go to
mediation
I would never
go to
mediation,
and I will sue
that person
as fast as I
can
It depends on
the degree of
agression
If the
agression
would be only
verbaly I let it
pass and do
nothing
I don't know/
don't want to
answer
11. If you were physically or
verbally abused by another person,
then that person will convene
mediation, what would you do?


15


28 % of the people questioned would follow the mediation procedure, from
which 17 % would go and ask the mediator to do anything in his power to invite the
other party to mediation, and for 8 % depend on the qualities of the mediator and
the degree of trust he inspires. A majority of 72 % would just ask for the minute
that certifies they followed the prior procedure. I believe we have such a high
majority of people that want to go to court because a lot of them follow the prior
procedure of mediation information only after talking and paying a lawyer.
17%
11%
72%
12. If you would be in a situation
when wanting to sue someone and
as a prior procedure you should go
to mediation how would you act?
I would go and ask the
mediator to do anything in
his power to invite the other
party to mediation
It depends on the qualities of
the mediator and the degree
of trust he inspires
I would only ask for the
minute that certifies that I
followed the prior procedure,
and I would continue in court


16

49 % of the people stated that they would try to negotiate personally with the
person who owes money, 22 % would ask for the services of the mediator.
Probably they gave this answer because they saw mediation as an opportunity to
reschedule the debt. 17 % would do another loan to a family member or a close
friend to be able to pay the initial debt and 12 % prefers to be sued because they are
certain that the process can take years and this way they will be able to postpone
the payment.
22%
12%
49%
17%
13. If you borrow a sum of money
from one person and then you would
be unable to restore it, and that
person threatens to sue you what
would you do?
I would contact a mediator,
to summon the other party
to mediation, where I will try
to obtain a rescheduling of
the debt
I would prefer to be sued,
because the procedure is
long and hard and it Is
possible to last a few years
I would try to negogiate
personally with the person I
own money
I would do a second loan
from a family member or a
close friend to pay my initial
debt


17

As the graphic above states 33 persons out of 65 believe that mediation is a
viable option for solving conflicts and dispute. Probably this high number is
because they were influenced by the questioned prior to this one. They learned that
through mediation they can negotiate a rescheduling of a debt or that they can use
the procedure to reconcile with another person in a civil or a criminal case. 12
persons still dont think that mediation is a viable option in Romania, and 15
persons dont have an opinion yet.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Yes
No
Dont know
14. Do you think mediation is a
viable option for setteling conflicts
and disputes in Romania ?


18
4.2 QUALITATIVE DATA INTERVIEWS, FACTS AND ARTICLES
4.2.1 MEDIATOR INTERVIEW 1 (DIVORCE MEDIATOR)
Interviewer: Im here with Paul Merlyn, founder of New Resolution. Paul, youre
a divorce mediator. Help me understand why divorce mediation is becoming such a
popular choice for couples today.
Paul: I think its because people are increasingly recognizing that divorce actually
creates a set of problems rather than a contest. The problems are things like how
should we divide our property? How will we coparent our children after the
divorce? And Will I need financial support? I think you see the difference: Contests
beget winners and losers, whereas problems need solutions. If you think of divorce
as a contest, then you should probably roll the dice and play the litigation game. If
you think of divorce as a set of problems, then mediation starts to look like a better
way to go.
Interviewer: So youre saying mediation is more solution-oriented than litigation.
But I imagine some people feel a lot of emotion that makes it hard for them to be
practical.
Paul: Youre right. Most divorces are steeped in emotion. You know, people are
people. Yet some mediators think they can somehow force emotional parties into
logical and cooperative behaviors. I personally think that approach to mediation is a
mistake. It seems to me that our emotions are expressions of our authentic feelings.
So I like to work WITH emotions rather than pretend their not there. So, for
example, I spend a lot of time validating, reflect, and redirect emotions to help
clients settle their disputes. At the same time, Ill manage emotions when they get
out of hand. I need to ensure that sessions provide a safe environment for clients to
express their emotions without making anyone too uncomfortable.
Interviewer: Divorce is notoriously expensive. But are there other reasons besides
saving money to try mediation?
Paul: Yes, there are several other reasons, though youve hit upon the biggest
reason when you mentioned cost. The average litigated divorce in California costs
about $50,000 in attorney fees per spouse or $100,000 total. And Ive known
people spend as much as $150,000 when child custody is an issue. Thats enough to
diminish or even completely deplete the estate of some couples. Mediation, in
comparison, costs a fraction of that.


19
Interviewer: And the other reasons to try mediation?
Paul: I think we list a dozen reasons on our web site. Perhaps the most important is
that mediation empowers people to make their own decisions rather than delegate
decision-making to judges. I think thats important because studies show people
who are active in resolving their disputes do better emotionally as well as
financially than those who pursue litigation.
Paul: Uhh. Another benefit is that mediation works. About 80% of cases actually
settle in mediation.
Interviewer: Wow
Paul: Yeah, and people are much more likely to stand by the terms of their
settlement. I think thats because they feel less resentment when theyve
participated in shaping its terms.
Interviewer: So, higher compliance. That makes sense. But does mediation ever
fail?
Paul: Chances are that mediation will keep you out of a costly and emotionally
damaging litigation. But it doesnt always produce a settlement. Here I think its
reassuring to recognize that trying mediation doesnt diminish any of your rights to
pursue litigation if mediation fails.
Interviewer: Okay
Paul: I like to think of mediation as a first resort, a provisional alternative to
litigation. Uhh. Other important benefits are protecting children from the often-
traumatic experience of an adversarial divorce; speed (mediation is usually much
quicker than an adversarial litigation), and also convenience. We provide mediation
in locations throughout the Bay Area, and we do our best to accommodate peoples
schedules by offering evening and weekend appointments.
Interviewer: Thats great. Now I dont really like confrontation, so Im
wondering: What do you say to people who hate confrontation and just cant face
the idea of being in the same room as their spouse.
Paul: Well, we do offer telephone mediation, but thats usually when one spouse
lives outside the Bay Area or out of state. But in general mediation really works
best when parties are in the same room with each other and the mediator. (Just in
passing, thats totally different from litigation, which isolates people, making
them UNABLE to communicate directly with one another.) So, we emphasize joint
sessions in which both parties are in the same room with their mediator. However,


20
we do also meet privately with each party to explore concerns or at points of
impasse.
Interviewer: So each person has a chance to raise any issues theyre maybe
uncomfortable saying while their spouse is in the room?
Paul: Thats right. Im also watching the parties body language to detect any
moments of discomfort. But hopefully there wont be too many of those. The
process is informal, open, and intrinsically non-confrontational. That said, its not a
free-for-all. The mediators guiding the process at every step towards settlement
without ascribing blame, fault, or guilt.
Interviewer: Youre not an attorney, right? Where do attorneys fit into mediation?
Paul: Im not an attorney. There are attorney-mediators, but they arent allowed to
give legal advice to either party while acting as mediators. If they did, theyd
compromise their neutrality and face a conflict of interest.
Interviewer: That makes sense.
Paul: Yeah. I see the role of mediator and attorney as complementary but separate,
Mediators are experts in conflict resolution. Of course, we have to know
Californias Family Code, which is the divorce statute for California, but our
primary purpose is to guide parties through a complex set of interlinked disputes
around custody, support, and property division. Usually, the real blockages to a
settlement are emotional issues, especially fear: Will I have enough money? Will I
see my children? Will I have to find a new place to live? Its these kinds of things
rather than questions of law that are usually at the heart of why a husband and wife
cant just agree settlement terms over the kitchen table.
Interviewer: So what role would attorneys play in the divorce?
Paul: I think attorneys can play a very valuable role as legal consultants during a
mediation process rather than as legal representatives in a litigated divorce. In fact,
I recommend my clients consult attorneys for independent legal advice so their
informed and empowered. And they should always have independent attorneys
review any proposed settlement agreement before they sign it. Likewise, they might
need to consult other experts during the mediation process such as real estate
appraisers, business appraisers, CPAs, financial planners, and career counselors.
Interviewer: What are the best and worst parts of your work?
Paul: Thats a fun question! Id say the best part is definitely watching the
transformation that takes place from when people begin mediation to when they


21
leave. In fact, theres often a discernible moment during a session when I can feel
the session tipping from conflict to collaboration. Those moments are electrifying. I
think I do good work in saving people from an adversarial litigation, and I think I
really make a difference in situations that are very high stakes in peoples lives.
Interviewer: And the worst part?
Paul: [Laugh] Mmmm. Well, Id say this is hard work. My clients are often in a
tumultuous phase of their lives. Theyre sometimes scared, hurt, angry, anxious,
worried. And you have to be comfortable inserting yourself in the middle of
conflict.
Interviewer: It sounds like you really love what you do.
Paul: I do.
Interviewer: And I want to thank you for letting me interview you.
Paul: Its been a pleasure. (Merlyn)

Paul Merlyn a mediator from US, that talks about the advantages of
mediation in a divorce, or a family conflict.
Analyzing this interview I reached the conclusion that mediation, is the
best alternative to court when talking about a divorce because it is a
confidential procedure, and the couple wont need to wash their laundry in
public, another advantage is that children are less affected as long as they are
not dragged in a court room full of people to testify for a parent or the other.
Mediation is also cheaper than the court because you dont pay taxes to the
state. If the degree of hostility between sides is high they have the possibility to
talk with the mediator in separate sessions without meeting each other. If they
follow the mediation procedure they can split they assets faster. In mediation
they have the possibility to negotiate themselves, or bring a lawyer; in court
the lawyer does most of the talking. The most important fact about mediation
is that it helps maintain a healthy relationship between the separated couple in
most of the times from which benefits the children.






22
4.2.2 DIALOG INTRE VICEPRESEDINTELE CONSILIULUI DE MEDIERE ZENO
SUSTAC SI JUDECATORUL CSM CRISTI DANILET

Cum vedeti medierea in Romania peste 5-10 ani?
CD: Intr-o tara framantata de probleme sociale majore, in care apelarea la
judecator este vazuta drept singura solutie viabila, in care neincrederea in autoritati
este mare, medierea poate avea succes numai daca este sustinuta in mod constant.
Statul roman trebuie sa investeasca mult in promovarea medierii, chiar in mod
agresiv si inca de pe bancile scolii, pentru ca populatia sa ia cunostinta de aceasta
noua profesie. De asemenea, institutiile juridice trebuie sa popularizeze medierea,
in mod viral chiar. Daca acestea vor fi realizate, impreuna cu o cresterea a
profesionalismului mediatorilor, peste 10 ani vom putea vorbi despre un succes al
medierii in Romania. Important este ca deja cei 10 ani - iata - au inceput


ZS: Ce modificari legislative s-ar impune pentru eficientizarea
procedurii medierii?
CD: In anumite cauze medierea ar putea sa fie obligatorie. De asemenea, ar
trebui extinsa in materie penala. Codul familiei ar trebui amornizat cu noua
institutie. Si, in fine, lamurite chestiunile reglementate eliptic referitoare la ajutorul
public judiciar in materia medierii. In rest, totul e legat de bune practici: trebuie sa
avem cat mai multe intalniri comune judecatori-mediatori si cat mai multe acorduri
de mediere ca sa depasim dificultatile practice ce se pot ivi in aplicarea in concret a
dispozitiilor legale privind medierea la spetele care ajung in fata noastra
ZS: Tot mai multi magistrati (dvs, Adi Neacsu, Loreley Mirea, Ana
Maria Puiu etc) sunt promotori ai medierii...Ce a determinat acest lucru?
CD: Facem parte dintre cei care inteleg rolul social al judecatorilor: in afara
de activitatea de solutionarea cauzelor in mod impartial, judecatorul mai are inca
doua roluri foarte importante: sa promoveze si sa sustina drepturile omului,
respectiv sa asigure existenta statului de drept. Ori, drepturile omului pot fi lezate
in conditiile in care un judecator in Romania are prea multe dosare de solutionat


23
intr-o sedinta de judecata, caci durata de rezolvare a unui caz va creste, iar calitatea
muncii sale va scadea. De aceea, medierea o vedem ca una din metodele prin care
putem eficientiza activitatea instantelor. In al doilea rand, sunt multe aspecte din
viata oamenilor pe care ii judecam asupra carora nu avem nu numai timp, poate nici
abilitati sa ne aplecam - in special cele legate de cauzele conflictului si mai ales
cele legate de aspectele de familie: intotdeauna va fi preferabil ca intr-un cadru
comod, fara stres si zorite de timp limita, partile sa ajunga sa rezolve definitiv
conflictul dintre ele decat sa stea prin instante ani de-a randul, sa cheltuie enorm si
la sfarsit sa obtina o hotarare care sigur va nemltumi vreuna dintre parti. Asadar,
chiar credem in pacea sociala la care medierea poate contribui. (Sustac, Zeno
Sustac in dialog cu judecatorul Cristi Danilet)
Supreme Court Judge Cristi Danilet sees mediation as the only viable
alternative for conflict solving in Romanian society. He believes that the
mediation should be promoted more aggressively by the govern. He believes
that in 10 years from now mediation will reach its full potential. Mr. Danilet is
one of the first judges that promoted mediation in Romania. He believes that a
few adjustments are needed to be done to the family law in order for the
mediation law to be more efficient. He confirms what divorce mediator Paul
Merlyn stated above that mediation is very useful for family conflicts, and he
also sees mediation as a fast way for a conflict resolution.
4.2.3 INTERVIU REALIZAT DE REVISTA MEDIERII FOSTEI PRESEDINTE AL
CONSILIULUI DE MEDIERE ANCA CIUCA

RM: Este pregtit societatea romneasc s utilizeze medierea?

AC: Eu cred c da, avnd n vedere c i n actuala situaie, cnd nu exist
obligativitatea nici mcar pentru a avea o prim ntlnire cu un mediator pentru a
afla ce este i cum poate s te ajute mediere, un numr din ce n ce mai mare de
persoane apeleaz la mediere i ajung la un acord cu cealalt parte, asistai fiind de
mediator.
Simplul fapt c din luna martie 2010 instanele au nceput s informeze prile c
pot recurge la mediere, a crescut considerabil numrul de medieri efectuate n


24
Romnia. Nu am date statistice din toat ara, dar acolo unde asociaiile
profesionale au colectat astfel de date pot s va spun c, la nivelul unui jude cu
aproximativ 40 de mediatori autorizai, numrul medierilor a crescut de la 10 15
n perioada 2008 - 2009, la peste 400 de contracte de mediere ncheiate n perioada
martie iunie 2010.

RM: Ce msuri ar trebui ntreprinse pentru popularizarea medierii?

AC: Sunt foarte multe forme de popularizare a medierii, dar cea mai eficient
metod este prin activitatea de calitate desfurat de mediatori. Asociaiile
profesionale au i ele un rol important, dar i beneficiarii serviciilor de mediere pot
face foarte mult n acest sens. n susinere, doresc s dau exemplul asociaiilor
profesionale ale magistrailor, asociaii care de la nceputul acestui an au organizat
multe aciuni de promovare a medierii i care au avut un rol determinant n
includerea n codurile de procedur i n proiectul Mica Reform a unor prevederi
favorabile medierii. Le mulumesc pe aceast cale tuturor magistrailor care au
susinut i susin mediere i le promit c eforturile Consiliului de mediere vor fi
permanent orientate spre asigurarea calitii serviciilor de mediere, pornind n
primul rnd de la formarea mediatorilor. (Sustac, Interviu Anca Ciuca)
Former president of Mediation Council Anca Ciuca considers that the
Romanian society is ready to utilize mediation as an alternative dispute
resolution method; the number of mediation agreements realized in our
country is growing by each day and will continue to grow in the future. She
appreciates the role of judges that have promoted this relatively new
institution.
4.2.4MEDIEREA IN CAZURILE PENALE (CRIMINAL CASES)
Cand poate avea loc medierea in penal?

Puteti apela la mediere in cazul infractiunilor pentru care impacarea partilor
nu inlatura raspunderea penala. In aceste cazuri este posibila recupararea
prejudiciului inante de definitivarea procesului penal, prin punerea in executare a


25
acordului de mediere. In cazul in care inculpatul, in urma acordului de mediere,
acopera prejudiciul cauzat, beneficiaza de circumstante atenuante.
in termenul prevazut de lege pentru introducerea plangerii prealabile;
inaintea procesului penal sau a demararii urmaririi penale;
dupa inceperea procesului penal sau a urmaririi penale;
pe tot parcursul procesului penal pana la ramanerea definitiva a hotararii
judecatoresti.
Infractiunile supuse medierii

Infraciunile a cror rspundere penal se nltur prin retragerea plngerii
prealabile sau prin mpcarea prilor sunt expres prevzute n Codul penal:
Lovirea sau alte violene (art. 180 C.pen., pentru care mpcarea i poate produce
efectele i n cazul n care aciunea penal a fost pus n micare din oficiu);
1. Vtmarea corporal (art. 181 C.pen., pentru care mpcarea i poate produce
efectele i n cazul n care aciunea penal a fost pus n micare din oficiu)
2. Vtmarea corporal din culp (art. 184 alin. 1 i 3, C.pen.);
3. Violarea de domiciliu (art. 192 alin 1, C.pen);
4. Seducia (art. 199 C.pen, pentru care doar mpcarea poate nltura rspunderea
penal);
5. Furtul pedepsit la plngerea prealabil (art. 210 C.pen);
6. Abuzul de ncredere (art. 213 C.pen);
7. Distrugerea (art. 217 alin 1, C.pen);
8. Tulburarea de posesie (art. 220 C.pen. pentru care doar mpcarea poate nltura
rspunderea penal;
9. Abandonul de familie (art. 305 C.pen.);
10. Nerespectarea msurilor privind ncredinarea minorului (art. 307 C.pen.);
11. Tulburarea folosinei (art. 320 C.pen).
Art. 16.1 introdus in Codul de Procedura Penala prin legea 202/2010 stipuleaza ca,
in cursul procesului penal, cu privire la pretentiile civile, inculpatul, partea civila si
partea responsabila civilmente pot incheia o tranzactie sau un acord de mediere,
potrivit legii, cu privire la despagubirile civile.


26

Avantaje:
1. Evitati un proces penal pentru infractiunile la care plangerea prealabila pun in
miscare actiunea penala.
2. Beneficiati de serviciile impartiale si neutre ale unui mediator autorizat.
3. Este o cale civilizata de a decide dumneavoastra solutia care sa va satisfaca.
4. Este o metoda rapida si fara costuri mari.
5. Prin accesarea serviciilor de mediere, beneficiati de un ragaz de 3 luni pentru
solutionarea unor situatii dificile pentru ambele parti.
6. Impacarea partilor inlatura raspunderea penala.
7. Confidentialitatea este garantata.
8. Va protejati de expunerea in public si de stres.
Nu este obligatoriu ca victima s ntlneasc fptuitorul n cadrul procedurii
de mediere. Prile pot fi reprezentate de mputernicii cu procur notarial, sau de
avocai. (Predut)
As we can see mediation can be widely utilized to settle any kind of
conflict. Criminal conflicts are no exception. With the introduction of the New
Criminal Code, mediators can practically mediate in any criminal conflict.
Even tough for serious charges the mediation agreement is only a mitigation
circumstance. For small charges for which the prior complaint can be
withdrawn, if a mediation agreement is reached it means that the perpetrator
will no longer need to be present in a court in front of a judge and will not
have a criminal record for the rest of its life. This is very useful especially for
foolish teenagers that commit minor crimes, because in mediation they have
the possibility to face the party that they injured and apologize or pay for their
losses.







27
5. CONCLUSIONS
I structured the conclusions based on the hypothesis. The first hypothesis
confirmed that most of the people are trying to solve their conflicts by themselves.
It is known that is a Romanian hobby to be good at everything and have knowledge
in every domain. The second hypothesis according to which only a few people
know about mediation was also confirmed by the questionnaires. The third
hypothesis according to which people will most likely resort to a mediator if they
have a civil conflict and only very few would contact a mediator if they have a
criminal conflict confirmed, but at this question I observed a big degree of
reservation, a lot of people did not knew how they would handle a conflict. The
final hypothesis did not confirmed, and to my surprise a lot of the questioned
people believed that mediation is a viable option for Romania, more than half of
them. There was also a category of people that did not know what to answer and
those who believed that mediation is no a viable alternative to traditional justice in
our country.
In my opinion more elaborated studies about mediation should be done in
order to know what is needed to be done in order to better promote the institution
of mediation, from which the people have most benefits. By promote I mean laws
and financial aid to support it. Conflict surrounds us every day and is only up to us
to how we approach it. Not all of us have the capacity to negotiate, this is why
sometimes we must surpass our ego that knows everything and talk to a
professional.









28
6. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bellman, H. (1998). Some reflections on the practice of mediation. Negotiations Journal,
205-210.
Merlyn, P. (n.d.). http://www.newresolutionmediation.com/. Retrieved from New resolution
mediation: http://www.newresolutionmediation.com/mediator-interview.shtml
Predut, M. C. (n.d.). Medierea in penal. Retrieved from http://avocat-mediator.net/:
http://avocat-mediator.net/mediere_penal.php
Sustac, Z. (n.d.). Interviu Anca Ciuca. Retrieved from http://medierea.ro:
http://medierea.ro/interviuri/646-interviu-acordat-revistei-medierea-de-ctre-
doamna-anca-elisabeta-ciuc-preedinte-al-consiliului-de-mediere
Sustac, Z. (n.d.). Zeno Sustac in dialog cu judecatorul Cristi Danilet. Retrieved from
http://medierea.ro: http://medierea.ro/interviuri/554-zeno-sustac-in-dialog-cu-
judecatorul-cristi-danilet
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/mediation