Abstract:
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) emerges as a judicious recourse to resolve legal
conflicts, circumventing the protracted judicial processes. Its efficacy in mitigating expenses
and time investment in comparison to traditional litigation is evident. In the context of Punjab's
Judiciary, the mounting backlog of cases has precipitated inordinate delays in dispensing
justice. In response, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Centres have been instituted across
Punjab's 36 districts, aimed at administering mediations with the concurrence of disputing
parties. This concerted effort seeks to alleviate the court's workload, concurrently fostering cost
and time efficiencies. Nonetheless, apprehensions loom among the populace, particularly legal
practitioners and adjudicators in Punjab, regarding the adaptability of the ADR framework to
contemporary methods. The prevailing ADR structure in Pakistan encounters pivotal
deficiencies, primarily stemming from deficient public awareness and limited judicial
endorsement. Consequently, the credibility of the ADR mechanism wanes, impeding the
resolution of backlog and exacerbating localized disputes. This study endeavors to illuminate
judicious strategies for the Pakistani Judiciary to assimilate ADR methodologies within the
prevailing framework. It embarks on discerning solutions to identified quandaries and
scrutinizing lawyers' roles and perspectives in relation to ADR. Employing a mixed-method
approach, this research amplifies the need for heightened cognizance, adept strategies, and
efficacious implementations to alleviate case congestion within the courts. While ADR
processes are extant in Pakistan, the study underscores the necessity for proactive measures to
surmount the backlog challenge.
