Alternative Dispute Resolution in Pakistan: Legal Framework, Judicial Support, and Practical Challenges

Abstract

ADR has been increasingly marketed in Pakistan to solve the long-term delays, case backlog, and access-to-justice issues in the formal judicial system. In the last twenty years, the legislative reforms and judicial programs have attempted to institutionalize ADR via statutes, procedural regulations, and court-related methods after acknowledging the possibility of ADR offering a quick, economical, and mutually agreeable settlement of disputes. Although this normative and institutional backing has increasingly been forthcoming, ADR, in Pakistan, is yet to fulfill its transformative potential. The article critically looks at the evolution and functioning of ADR in Pakistan by looking at the juridical framework that regulates arbitration, mediation, conciliation and other mechanisms of ADR, the role of judicial branch in facilitating ADR and the challenges that present practical limitations to the use of ADR. It claims that Pakistan has a fairly well-developed legal and judicial framework of ADR, but it is not realized because of low institutionalization, inadequate professional capacity, insufficient awareness of the populace, and enduring propensity to use the adversarial litigation. The article also illustrates that there has been disparity in judicial approval of ADR, which sometimes is not systemic but iconic, and implementation of ADR results is an issue of concern. The gap between the legislative intent and the culture of dispute resolution is brought out by the study by placing the ADR regime in Pakistan in the context of comparative and international practices of dispute resolution. It concludes that to achieve meaningful integration of ADR in the justice system in Pakistan, it needs better institutional support, regular judicial participation, professionalization of ADR services, and there should be a cultural change to consensual dispute resolution.