Ocampo, Lorenzo Angelo A.

ADR
2-D Reaction Paper

Judicial Dispute Resolution: As an innovative mode of Dispute Resolution,

Salvador Panga

Judicial Dispute Resolution is a process by which a judge attempts to facilitate

settlement between parties undergoing litigation after a similar effort by a court
appointed mediator has failed. This shows how the Supreme Court promotes and
encourages the use of Alternative Dispute Resolutions in the settlement of disputes,
wherein in case the Court-Annexed Mediation fails, parties will have to undergo Judicial
Dispute Resolution next before a full trial would commence.
In this article, it discussed on the Judicial Dispute Resolution as a superior process over
the Court-Annexed Mediation, which most people believe to be true. One factor is the
compensation of a mediator under the CAM wherein such mediators would tend to
leave their position for better financially stable positions or occupations because of the
low compensation of these mediators. Unlike in a JDR, the compensation of a judge
would be the same if the dispute would be settled in the process or if it would continue
in trial. Hence, the judge would really prefer the settlement in JDR as it would not only
declog the court dockets but it would also make the job of the judge easier since the
dispute would be settled in a speedy manner as compared to a formal trail. Another
factor is that a judge has a moral ascendancy over the parties and their counsels as
compared to a mediator in CAM who has no moral ascendancy since most mediators
are not even lawyers, which would also hider their understanding of the dispute unlike a
judge, who is more experienced in handling disputes.
This article also discussed on how judges would undertake the process of settlement of
the dispute, other than by adjudication, under the guidelines issued by the Supreme
Court. The issued guidelines did not mandate any manner on how judges would
undertake the process of the second tier mediation. Hence, it gives a judge the freedom
to how proceed with the process of Alternative Dispute Resolution System and this
should be the way to use the processes of ADR. Judges would be able to come up with
solutions that are in an interest-based manner and not a positional based manner since
a positional based manner, the participants in the dispute would approach the dispute in
a more legalistic manner, which is what the ADR processes avoid. In the use of an
interest-based approach in the process of settlement of the dispute, the judge would not
be restricted by technical rules thus giving the neutral third party more freedom in
coming up with solutions to the dispute which would be in the best interest of both
opposing parties.