Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) :A Case Study of Punjab

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.