Islamabad: The Supreme Court is keen to find alternative solutions to disputes. A bench of the Supreme Court headed by Justice Mansoor Shah has said in its order that more new avenues need to be explored for the resolution of perpetually pending disputes and cases.
The court believes that alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is also a way forward. About 2.22 million cases are pending in the courts of Pakistan. Out of these, 0.35 million (347,173) cases are pending in the constitutional benches of the Supreme and High Courts. Along with this, a large portion of the pending cases are with the district courts, which accounts for 82%. In this regard, more solutions need to be found to resolve perpetually pending disputes.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah wrote in a 7-page judgment that ADR is also an avenue for adjudication of pending cases, which the parties have agreed to.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Mansoor Shah reiterated that a pound of mediation is worth a ton of litigation. Our courts have recently encouraged ADR.
Courts should not only encourage more deliberation and less litigation in this regard, but also demonstrate a pro-meditative bias that indicates a preference for mediation over litigation for resolving disputes within the legal system.
Such bias does not favor one party over the other, but rather favors mediation as the preferred method of dispute resolution. It is based on the belief that settlements are generally more effective and satisfactory to all parties than decisions reached by the court,” Justice Shah said in a written judgment that both parties walk away with dignity and satisfaction as compared to litigation. The judgment said that the value of mediation for amicable resolution of disputes has been recognized globally, including the United Nations Convention on International Settlements Resulting from Arbitration, known as the Singapore Convention on Arbitration. The court also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Attorney General of Pakistan so that recommendations regarding ratification of the Singapore Convention can be considered by the relevant quarters. The judgment also said that mediation should be seen as a right of the parties in the process of litigation. “Access to justice includes the right to timely and effective resolution of disputes.”
Unlike litigation, mediation respects the autonomy of the parties and gives them control over the process and outcome. The court said that litigants have the right to avoid adverse consequences of litigation such as financial stress, emotional distress, and damage to reputation, etc.
The court’s written order said that mediation is not a mere substitute for litigation but a complementary and necessary part of the justice system.
Justice Mansoor Shah highlighted the reasons why mediation is a great option for resolving disputes effectively and efficiently. He said that mediation involves fewer legal fees and costs and saves time as court proceedings can often take years to reach decisions.
The mediation process has flexibility in which the parties agree to choose their own arbitrator and decide on the rules for the proceedings. Unlike court cases, the mediation process has a confidentiality aspect that can avoid negative publicity.
