You are on page 1of 5

Mr Speaker, Hon.

Members, this Bill which we are considering today, is a


progressive one, and while it is not fortuitous that it has come at this time, in
consideration of the unabated escalation of domestic violence and other such
societal evils, a bill that provides for the devolution in part of judicial proceedings,
which facilitates mediation of disputes as an alternative to litigation, is a very
welcome one, and is indicative of Government’s continued commitment to
facilitate empowerment of people at the community levels.

Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR as it is more commonly called is not an


abdication of the judicial process, and I am aware that this is not an educational
exercise for any of our Hon. Members here today, most of them being intimately
acquainted with jurisprudential matters. But rather Sir, in the context of our
overburdened justice system, it has become an imperative. This Bill specifically in
Clause 4 indicates that a court may , by order refer a matter arising in proceedings
before it ( other than criminal proceedings) for mediation or neutral evaluation if
the Court considers the circumstances appropriate and whether or not the parties to
the proceedings consent to the referral . I can only assume Sir, and I rather suspect
that I am accurate in my assumption, that the intent of this proposed order is to
facilitate a peaceful, amenable resolution, even if the parties fail to see such an
intervention as being in their own individual or collective interest.

While this discourse may seem new to some, the advocacy for the introduction of
ADR has been on the Legislative agenda of the Government for a while. But as we
were reminded only recently by the Hon. Minister of Home Affairs, it may well
have been a great idea whose time had not yet come. As the wise King Solomon
once said, there is a time to every purpose under the heaven.
ADR is widely gaining use and acceptance in many developed and developing
countries around the world. Take India for example, Due to extremely slow
judicial process, there has been a big thrust on Alternate Dispute Resolution
mechanisms . To streamline the Indian legal system the traditional civil law
known as Code of Civil Procedure, (CPC) 1908 has also been amended and section
89 has been introduced. Section 89 (1) of CPC provides an option for the
settlement of disputes outside the court. It provides that where it appears to the
court that there exist elements, which may be acceptable to the parties, the court
may formulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for arbitration,
conciliation, mediation or judicial settlement.

But , the Question which I am sure will be asked by those of us with little
knowledge or interest in legal matters, is of what benefit is this to us here in
Guyana?

Permit me Sir to borrow from a publication of the Guyana Bar Association of May
2008, where it was propounded that ADR :

(1) Improves the Administration of Justice by reducing the huge backlog


of Court cases and the lengthy delays in the hearing and conclusion of
court matters.

(2) Mediation is cheaper .It is expected that since mediation does not incur
the cost relating to court procedures, it will be less expensive than
litigation.

 
(3) Mediation saves time. Mediation can also be productive by bringing
quicker closure to a dispute. It avoids the continuity of litigation by way of
appeals.

(4) Mediation is fair and neutral. Mediation is efficient and fair. It provides
an opportunity for parties to tell their story, to express their feelings, to
clarify misunderstandings, perceptions, assumptions and to discover new
information. It gives the parties control over how their dispute will be
resolved.

(5) Mediation is informal .The Mediation process is usually conducted in an


informal and private setting. It does not involve the formalities of a court
room where the litigants may have to give sworn evidence and be
subjected to cross examination. There are no fixed rules for the conduct of
the mediation process unlike the Court room where the Court is usually
confined to observing certain rules of practice and procedure.

Mediation can be conducted with or without lawyers for the parties. Where lawyers
are involved, they can play an important role.

(6) Mediation empowers parties to create their own solutions .Mediation


allows the parties to develop creative solutions to all issues important to
them and not just the underlying legal dispute. The Court only considers
the legal issues.  
 

(7) Mediation avoids uncertainty of judicial decision

Mediation eliminates the uncertainty of the decision by a Judge or Court.

(8) Mediation preserves relationships

Mediation also provides an opportunity to preserve rather than destroy personal,


professional and business relationships.

(9) Mediation agreements have high compliance rate

Since people are more satisfied with solutions that have been mutually and
voluntarily agreed to by them than those imposed by a judge or other third party,
they tend to comply with the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

(10) Mediation is confidential

Mediation is confidential and without prejudice and all statements and offers made
during the mediation process are inadmissible for any purposes in any legal or
other proceedings. This promotes communication and settlement discussion.  
                      

 
(11) Mediation is a WIN WIN situation

In a successful Mediation, everyone wins. In Court, there could be a win-lose


situation or often, after a court case, nobody is happy.

Sir, This Bill represents a significant advancement of the progress of our Justice
system, and I therefore commend this Bill and seek the support of this Hon. house
for its passage.

You might also like