The modern criminal policy in most of the contemporary legislations has focused on creating alternatives to short-term freedom-depriving penalties because of their negative effects. The most important of these alternatives is to work for the public benefit, as stipulated by the Palestinian legislator in Article (399) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and regulated by the Omani legislator. In Article 57 of the Omani Penal Code. As well as in Article 326 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that regulates work for the public benefit as an alternative to physical coercion, by addressing the legal organization of work for the public benefit. We tried to answer the main problem of the research, which revolves around “Did the Palestinian legislator and the Omani legislator agree in applying and organizing work for the public benefit as an effective tool and means to achieve the rehabilitation of the convict. In addition, we took the descriptive analytical approach and the comparative method to answer them. We reached many results, the most important one is that the Omani legislator made public service work an alternative to physical coercion and did not make it a substitute for physical coercion about short-term freedom depriving penalties. Finally, we reached several recommendations, mainly adding an article in the Omani Code of Criminal Procedure that allows the possibility of applying work for the public interest is an alternative to short-term freedom-depriving punishments and it is not enough to do so as an alternative to physical coercion.