In the Indian context, Alternative Dispute Resolution “ADR” as a method of dispute resolution may trace its evolution to certain drawbacks in the judicial system of the country. To overcome the shortcomings of the judicial process the aggrieved parties now days tend to go for ADR process. ADR process may generally be categorized as negotiation, conciliation/mediation or arbitration systems. Though there are legal aid programmes and many other facilities are said to be available to economically disadvantaged litigants, it is a fact there is no easy access to the legal system and it is not easy to get justice. Without fundamental systemic changes, any alternative system, however promising the results may seem, is bound to be viewed with suspicion.
Like any other system, ADR system also has its own merits and demerits. Though it has demerits, its merits are stronger. That is why ADR is always recommendable.
Following are the merits of the system.
- ADR is not a mere mechanical process of dispute resolution
- ADR is not just legal aid philosophy
- ADR promotes rule of law in the society
- ADR encourages the participation of people in the process of dispute resolution
- ADR creates legal awareness and respect for the rights of others
- ADR promotes self-reliant development
The philosophy of ADR is to motivate people to resolve their disputes amicably and for this purpose, it is necessary to examine ADR’s main trends and underlying objectives. One of the motivations of ADR is the principle of “Cooperative problem solving” which bring within its fold theories and strategies of negotiation, including in particular problems – solving theories of negotiation. Another benefit of ADR is a reduction of costs apart from the avoidance of delay in litigation. The experience abroad shows that it has found increasing favour in many countries and particularly in the U.S.A.