Md J R Khan Robin :
Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) includes dispute resolution process and techniques that act as a means for disagreeing parties to come to an Agreement short of litigation.
The delay in the conventional judicial system is acknowledged in the case due to long-term and unbearable expense, everywhere with lower Court to Higher Court. There is no scope to settle any case in short time as well as minimum cost in the existing method. The ADR system has been circulated in different countries for the purpose of setting up disputes quickly among the parties.
ADR is generally classified into at least four types i.e. Arbitration, Negotiation, Mediation and Conciliation. ADR is of two historical types. First, methods for resolving disputes outside of the official judicial mechanism. Second, informal methods attached to or pendant to official judicial mechanism. It is important to realize that conflict resolution is one major goal of all the ADR process. If a process leads to resolution, it is a dispute resolution process.
ADR adopted in our legal arena in different laws i.e. section 89A, 89B, 89C of the Code of Civil Perocedure, section 10 and 13 of the family Court Ordinance,1985,section 44(ka) & 45 of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003, Section 124(ka)of the Labour law,2006, section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Besides, this government has enacted Arbitration Act 2001along with “Birod Mimangsha (Poura Alaka) Board Ain, 2004 and Gram Adalat Ain, 2006 for resolution both of the pretty Civil & Criminal disputes among the parties.
There are some advantages of ADR i.e. 1. The flexibility of procedure. 2. Lower costs and less complexity. 3. Parties choice of neutral third party (and therefore expertise in area of dispute) to direct negotiations/adjudicate. 4. Likelihood and speed of settlements; 5.Practical solutions tailored to parties’ needs; 6.The durability of agreements; 7.Confidentiality 8.The preservation of relationships. 8. Traditional people’s mediation has always involved.
On the other hand there are some Challenges of ADR in Bangladesh i.e. Bangladesh still could not manage to institutionalize and make the ADR tools truly functional. The high expectation of success of ADR tools in curbing case backlog and providing quick but inexpensive remedy avoiding procedural complexity and formality in the civil, Artha Rin (Money Loan) and to some extent in the family cases has met with failure. More over the people of the country are not aware about the procedure of the ADR.
Beside this the legislature failed to make the provision of ADR mandatory. On the other hand the Judges and Lawyers failed to take positive initiative to resolution the dispute with ADR method.
In fine it is easily say that the legal framework of ADR has developed in Bangladesh over the last few years and acquired a distinct position in the dispute resolution process. ADR mechanisms can now be applied in resolving a wide array of commercial disputes, family disputes and civil disputes, among others, thus easing access to justice. It is true that Court Based ADR under different laws can be transformed not only to an aid to the earlier resolution of litigation but can also be used as a tool for case management. Alternatively, mandatory ADR requires careful oversight to ensure that it should not be coercive and should not impose too much of a barrier to trial for those parties who want or need judicial determination.
(The writer is Advocate, Bangladesh Supreme Court).
