Recent studies on police discretion highlight inequities in access to victim–offender mediation. However, little is known about how discretion shapes pathways of both restorative and criminal justice in countries where mediation could serve as an alternative to criminal proceedings. Drawing on interviews with Finnish justice officials, this study explores the factors that may influence the decisions of police and prosecutors regarding mediation during criminal proceedings. Thematic analysis reveals varying use of discretion among justice officials referring cases to mediation and deciding whether to prosecute or divert cases from criminal proceedings. In decisions about referral, justice officials vary in how they consider the influence of a mediation agreement on further proceedings. Following mediation, they vary in their consideration of its fulfilment in decisions about diversion. Consequently, some criminal cases appear more likely than others to be denied access to mediation, or to be diverted from criminal proceedings while reparations are ongoing. Our findings imply that the use of discretion among justice officials regarding mediation could reflect their holistic consideration of justice mechanisms, which interconnectedly incorporate both criminal and restorative justice. Hence, we argue that inequities in access are not only restricted to mediation but also concern restorative outcomes and criminal justice.
Jauhiainen et al. (2026) studied this question.