English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Legal Leadership Conclave on Arbitration & Mediation: need for proper training and support system

Published

on

The need for trainers, training of mediators and some essential infrastructure and legal framework was emphasized by speakers at the second technical session of the Legal Leadership Conclave on Arbitration & Mediation organised by India Legal magazine and ENC group at Bengaluru today (Saturday, August 17).

The session was chaired by former Supreme Court judge, Justice RV Raveendran with Karnataka Lokayukta Justice PV Shetty as the co-chairperson.

Justice BV Nagarathna, speaking on Mediation: Achievements and Challenges, referred to Justice P V Shetty  as “a progressive judge” to say “we have progressive judges on the bench, there will be progress in the bar also.”

She said the Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhiwas an effective mediator who, before coming to India, spent most of his professional life in South Africa, more as a mediator than as an advocate speaking for one side only.

To make a point on the importance and relevance of mediation, she quoted from his autobiography, “after a successful mediation, but both were happy over the result, and both rose in the public estimation. I realized that the true function of a lawyer was to unite Parties riven asunder. The lesson was so indelibly burnt into me that a large part of my time during the twenty years of my practice as a lawyer was occupied in bringing about private compromises of hundreds of cases. I lost nothing thereby- not even money, certainly not my soul.”

“This should be an inspiration for us in Mediation,” said Justice Nagarathna, “restricted not only to the learned mediators, message is more to our advocates – give Mediation as a process of alternative dispute resolution.”

Giving a little background of mediation in India, she said Section 89 of the court procedure, under which Mediation is recognized as the alternative to settlement of disputes between the parties, was there in 1908, but was deleted in 1940 and re-inserted in 2002.

Now SC has exhorted the state government and central governments to take action for bringing into effect alternative disputes resolution.

She said, “Legalfraternity talks of two concepts – Docket explosion and Docket exclusion. Today’s conclave is about Docket Explosion, how to curtail the Docket explosion in courts. One of the remedies found by legislature is Alternative Dispute resolution – by Mediation.”

She spoke of recognition of Mediation as an effective tool of dispute resolution, noting that the core challenge is to encourage the litigant public to mediate the disputes.

The second aspect relates to infrastructure for the mediation of disputes, which has two fold aspects: (i) software – we should have trained mediators and (ii) hardware – facilities and amenities.Legal Leadership Conclave

Among other points she made were:

Training of the mediators and providing corresponding facilities to the trainers, the mediators and the litigants is a challenge.

Emphasis should be not only training mediators but updation of legal knowledge too is important.

Parliamentary recognition of Mediation is an achievement.

Corresponding implementation is a challenge.

United Nations Convention on International settlements, agreements resulting from mediation know as Singapore Convention on Mediation are only for international commercial disputes. This is a Pre-Arbitration Mediation proceedings but implementation is a challenge as far as India is concern.

Emphasis is on the need for a Pre-Arbitration Mediation.

Challenges of Mediation

  1. Lack of trained mediators: content, schedule of training
  2. Lack of trainers
  3. Lack of referrals
  4. Lack of infrastructure particularly in district levels.
  5. Absence of suitable legislation – central/ parliamentary legislation on mediation
  6. Resistance amongst basic actors and stake holders namely judges, lawyers and litigants towards mediation.
  7. Lack of mediation managements.
  8. Lack of adequate funds

Ending on a secular note, she said, “We are all warriors seeking justice, resolution of disputes, we want there should be peace in society and peace is now guaranteed through mediation because relationship is restored. “

Senior advocate Shiv Kumar spoke on “Med-Arb : Need for Statutory Reforms and Trainings” and talked about the gaps in the system.

“We do not have a definition of ADR we do not even have a definition of Arbitration, we also do not have a definition for Med-Arb or Arb-Med,” he said.

He said we need a definition “because in this country a lot of us believe that ‘khaap panchayats’ and ‘honor killings’ is also Alternative Dispute Resolution methods. “

What we really need, he said, is to recognize and accept Med-Arb (mediation-arbitration) as a form of ADR.

“So, the first Statutory Reform that we need is the amendment of section 89-1 which will record in addition to what is already recorded the concept of Med-Arb, Arb-Med and neutral evaluation as a form of dispute resolution,” he said.

He said what is needed as a Legislative Reform is a comprehensive Code not on Mediation but on ADR.

He ended by stressing that “what ae need is creation of an independent autonomous body outside of government control  on the lines of the ISO 2000-2001organizations that certify quality, and also the creation of a Dispute Resolution Ombudsmen who will have  powers to supervise and receive and deal with complaints against this process.” 

Senior Advocate Sriram Panchu had as his topic “Arbitration and Mediation: strange bed fellows or harmonious partners “.

Panchu started with the observation that “In every litigation, relationship goes for a toss.”Mediation respects relationships, promotes them and tries to save and salvage every bit of harmony left.

Panchu quoted Chief Justice Menon of Singapore on the question of choice of mediation as dispute resolution mechanism – “What’s not to like about it?”

Pointing out a distinction between Arbitration and mediation, he said Arbitration is result oriented. “Combining mediation and arbitration has one hurdle – confidentiality of mediation proceedings is breached in arbitration. So, one way is a mediator should never become the arbitrator in the same case,” he said.

He suggested that the structure of contracts should be such as to place mediation clause before arbitration. Courts can then enforce the contract terms and contribute in effective dispute settlement. He said it was his experience that parties would want to mediate at any stage of arbitration.

He said an effective tool is the mediator sits with arbitrators while all arguments are put forth and gains complete knowledge of the case. And then, before the arbitral award is arrived at or declared, mediator speaks with parties to arrive at a mutually accepted decision.

He said mediation considers human factors like equity, fairness, family relations, emotions and sentiments that have no room in the adversarial process of litigation or arbitration where the binding verdict necessarily puts one party at a disadvantage. The basic philosophy underlying conflict resolution is “Consensus before adversarial”.

“Training is essential for mediators. Not every good arbitrator is a natural mediator. Mediation should be a professional career option.  Else it will never flourish. It has always taken a backseat, which it shouldn’t. We must focus on supply of well-trained mediators as it will also bring down the case pendency scenario in India,” said Panchu.

“Then it is going to be Appropriate Dispute Resolution instead of Alternate Dispute Resolution,” concluded Panchu.

Prof. (Dr) Ashok R Patil, spoke on “Online Mediation: the Future Technique of Mediation”. He noted that as per the Supreme Court, access to Justice should satisfy four essential elements: (i) Effective adjuratory Mechanism (ii) Reasonable accessible in terms of distance (iii) Must be speedy (iv) Affordable

Online mediation is a better method to achieve justice with these elements.

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) is of two types:  i) Synchronized interaction – like teleconferencing, and ii) Asynchronized – text based chatting.

All three parties have to be present at the same time in the first interaction, which is not so in Asynchronized interaction

An advantage of ODR is that information can be shared online, so that all privacy is ensured.

Also Read: Legal Leadership Conclave on Arbitration & Mediation: the need and the problems

Prof Patil said there is huge scope for ODR in India. Citing a Government of India meeting last year, he said 3 crore pending cases can be solved by online mediation.

Deepak Sharma, Managing Director of North-Starcom MediaVest Group, talked about branding India as an International Mediation hub.

He started by noting that branding India in any way when our methodology and technology is still developing, could only result in failure. “Since the rise of consumerism, the aim of branding is to evoke response and engagement, mapping India on the global platform as an arbitration hub may not be best right now,” held Sharma.

India News

India hits back at Shehbaz Sharif at UN, says terror will have consequences

India hit back at Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s UN speech, with New Delhi warning that terrorism will have consequences.

Published

on

India has responded to Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s remarks at the United Nations, delivering a strong message on terrorism and warning that such actions will have consequences.

The response came after Mr Sharif addressed the UN and raised issues concerning India and Pakistan. New Delhi rejected the narrative presented by the Pakistani prime minister and highlighted the issue of terrorism.

India’s message was delivered by Petal Gehlot, who represented New Delhi in the response to Pakistan.

India warns Pakistan over terrorism

India’s response focused on Pakistan’s record and its approach towards terrorism. New Delhi made clear that terrorism cannot be separated from its consequences and that those responsible cannot expect such actions to go unanswered.

The Indian side also pushed back against the claims and allegations made by Mr Sharif during his UN speech.

The exchange comes amid continuing tensions between India and Pakistan, with terrorism remaining a major point of disagreement between the two countries.

Shehbaz Sharif’s UN remarks

In his address, Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif spoke about India-Pakistan relations and raised several issues concerning New Delhi.

India subsequently exercised its right of reply to respond to Pakistan’s statements at the United Nations.

New Delhi’s response underlined its position that terrorism remains a serious issue in the relationship and that there would be consequences for terrorist actions.

The latest exchange at the UN adds to the continuing diplomatic confrontation between the two neighbouring countries.

Continue Reading

India News

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

India News

Women wrestlers challenge Brij Bhushan’s acquittal in sexual harassment case

Four women wrestlers have challenged the acquittal of former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and co-accused Vinod Tomar in a sexual harassment case.

Published

on

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh

Four women wrestlers have approached a Delhi court challenging the acquittal of former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP leader Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in a sexual harassment case.

The wrestlers have also challenged the acquittal of co-accused Vinod Tomar. The matter is scheduled to be heard by a Special Judge at the Rouse Avenue Courts.

The appeal challenges the order passed by an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on August 3, 2026, when Brij Bhushan and Tomar were acquitted in the case.

Wrestlers challenge court’s reasoning

In their appeal, the wrestlers have argued that the acquittal order is legally unsustainable and that the evidence was not assessed appropriately.

They have also alleged that the order relied on assumptions about how victims of sexual assault and harassment were expected to behave instead of assessing the evidence and circumstances of the complainants.

The challenge seeks judicial scrutiny of the findings that resulted in the acquittal of Brij Bhushan and Tomar.

Brij Bhushan was acquitted in August

The Rouse Avenue court acquitted Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh on August 3 in the sexual harassment case involving women wrestlers. The court’s decision followed consideration of the evidence and statements presented during the proceedings.

The case had emerged after several women wrestlers accused the former WFI chief of sexual harassment. The allegations had led to a major protest by wrestlers in 2023.

The latest appeal means the acquittal is now being challenged before a higher court.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com