Beheld in terms of international law, its subjects such as states, governments or international organizations always communicate with each other based on the spirit of the provisions of the field of international law. In the framework of the breaches, respectively the deliberate violation of these provisions, is the case of the so-called "Gulenists", where all the links of the system under which the extradition matter is built upon, are exempted. Our country will keep this stain for a long time, while in the archives of justice it will be treated as a case that should not have happened, always based on the commitment to the strict implementation of the provisions of the field of international law that our state has always had. At least they should have been held accountable, even criminally; hence, such cases to have never been repeated in our country. The lack of criminal accountability of the actors-senior state officials directly implicated in this case has left scars in our system, which at that moment is widely considered as a delayed system, while at an instant the whole commitment in this direction is shaken. This stain could have been avoided post festum - even in the circumstances when it happened, that is, even in the situation when all the political actors had been implicated in this case. In this regard, whilst analyzing the provisions we can assume that despite the deficiencies and continuously looking at the volume of legal provisions of this law, yet, we can consider that our system in this area has advanced and has ongoing initiatives to improve this system to the extent that could meet the requirements in relation to the dynamics of social and international relations.

Restorative justice theory and programs have emerged over the past 35 years as an increasingly influential opportunity worldwide to practice criminal justice, based on the principles of restorative justice that, Crime causes harm and justice seeks to repair that harm; People who have been harmed must be able to take part in resolving it; The responsibility of the state is to preserve society to build peace. The fact of committing a certain criminal offense presupposes the mobilization of various legal mechanisms which are undertaken by certain competent bodies which must prove the fact whether we are really dealing with a criminal offense, the victim, its perpetrator and other issues that are directly related within these legal mechanisms, which is the purpose of research or study of the problem. The possibility of reconstructing the relations between the victim and the perpetrator in this paper is treated in the mediation procedure, the procedure on admission of guilt and compensation in damages in post-criminal proceedings according to the hypothesis of what are the possibilities of reconstructing relations between the victim and the perpetrator as current at the national, regional and international level, in a plane with the historical method and the normative method and presents the basic design of the research (study). The hypothesis with the results of the research has been tested that the reconstruction of relations between the victim and the perpetrator in the mediation procedure reaches the highest possible level, as opposed to a decrease in the level of reconstruction of relations between the victim and the perpetrator in the agreement of guilty plea, as well as the decrease in the lower degree of the possibility of reconstruction of relations in the post-criminal phase. Finally, the possibility of reconstructing the relations between the victim and the perpetrator is higher in the minor criminal offenses because the damage caused is smaller and presents a real possibility, while in serious criminal offenses such as murder, the reconstruction of relations it is simply utopia.