Embrace ADR mechanism---Amegatcher (pg 16)
A LEGAL practitioner and lecturer at the Ghana School of Law, Nene Abayeteye Amegatcher, has urged Ghanaians to embrace the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanism as a means of increasing the pace of adjudication and reducing the backlog of cases at the courts.
He said even though litigation had been found to be a preferred method of dispute resolution than armed conflict and the use of violence, evidence available over the years indicated that litigation had not been able to address the needs of society.
Mr Amegatcher who was speaking at a seminar on ADR in Accra on the theme: “Court-Connected ADR: Access to Justice Made Simpler for All”, said surveys and research on the Ghanaian legal system like that of other developing countries revealed that litigation was characterised by constant delays.
The seminar, which was under the auspices of the Ghana Judicial Service, was aimed at bringing the ADR process closer to the doorsteps of all Ghanaians.
Participants were drawn from bodies including the Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU), traditional councils within the Greater-Accra, religious bodies, the Greater Accra Market Women Association, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and the Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS).
Mr Amegatcher stated that even though litigation was the only proven method of dispute resolution, it had resulted in overburdening the courts and hampered the work of judges.
He noted that the advanced countries had realised that building more courthouses and appointment of judges alone had not solved the problem of delays and congestion in courts.
He observed that the ADR was the new product that the legal profession all over the world was marketing as a complement to enhance the justice system and make it more responsive by providing additional resources and
strategies. There is, therefore, the need to relieve the burden associated with litigation.
The court-connected ADR which was introduced in 2005 is guided by the concept that when litigation is initiated, the fundamental objective is to help the disputing parties to resolve their differences by other equally desirable means without trial.
The process covers such cases as family disputes, land, divorce, child maintenance, debt recovery and criminal cases not involving felony.
Mr Amegatcher said the net effect of litigation could be sometimes very costly, both in financial and emotional terms to the parties and sometimes their family members. Adding '' the high cost of litigation
means it is only the rich who can afford it or the very poor who may benefit from legal aid who can readily have access to the courts''
He noted that besides helping to decongest the courts, the ADR process had advantages that included voluntary compliance with agreements by parties in conflict, promotion of transparency against perception of bribery of judges and the abuse of the court process by lawyers.
He advised traditional rulers to register their mediated cases at the law courts to make such judgements legally binding.
He said the demands of the various sectors of the economy meant that the justice system was relegated to the background so far as funding was concerned, leading to infrastructure and other logistical problems which affected justice delivery.
He noted that ''the consequences of inadequate funding of access to justice come at a great cost to society.''
The Chairman for the occasion and a Court of Appeal Judge, Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau, in his remarks stated that evidence on the ground showed that the process had been useful in resolving a number of cases
which otherwise would have been ''sitting in the courts.''
He said the process was a means of restoring confidence in the judicial system since when people lose confidence in the courts, they took the law into their own hands, adding '' considering the number of cases the courts have to deal with each day and the structures available, there is the need to devise alternative strategies that make conflict resolution simple and efficient.”
He said any country that assured investors of speedy dispute resolution mechanisms would have investors trooping in, as against those with prolonged dispute resolution status.
He said when passed, the ADR Bill, which was now in parliament would ensure that the burden on judges were reduced as it could help them to concentrate on more contentious cases and write better researched and sound judgements and also ease the backlog of cases at the various court.
He stated that conflict had always been part of humanity and that it was its resolution that ensured the prevalence of sanity in the society.
Mr Justice Marful-Sau called on the participants to be apostles of the ADR in order to make its advantages known to all strata of the Ghanaian society.
Some participants who spoke with the Daily Graphic expressed optimism that the seminar would go a long way towards helping to ensure sanity in the judicial system and some level of respect for the decisions of traditional rulers.
The National Coordinator of the ADR, Mr Alex Nartey, told the Daily Graphic that 150 people had been trained so far and attached to selected courts nation-wide even though about a 1,000 mediators and
arbitrators was the optimal number needed.
He said the only restraint was the financial difficulties which prevented the recruitment and training of more arbitrators and mediators.
He said even though litigation had been found to be a preferred method of dispute resolution than armed conflict and the use of violence, evidence available over the years indicated that litigation had not been able to address the needs of society.
Mr Amegatcher who was speaking at a seminar on ADR in Accra on the theme: “Court-Connected ADR: Access to Justice Made Simpler for All”, said surveys and research on the Ghanaian legal system like that of other developing countries revealed that litigation was characterised by constant delays.
The seminar, which was under the auspices of the Ghana Judicial Service, was aimed at bringing the ADR process closer to the doorsteps of all Ghanaians.
Participants were drawn from bodies including the Ghana Private Road Transport Union (GPRTU), traditional councils within the Greater-Accra, religious bodies, the Greater Accra Market Women Association, the Commission on Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) and the Customs, Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS).
Mr Amegatcher stated that even though litigation was the only proven method of dispute resolution, it had resulted in overburdening the courts and hampered the work of judges.
He noted that the advanced countries had realised that building more courthouses and appointment of judges alone had not solved the problem of delays and congestion in courts.
He observed that the ADR was the new product that the legal profession all over the world was marketing as a complement to enhance the justice system and make it more responsive by providing additional resources and
strategies. There is, therefore, the need to relieve the burden associated with litigation.
The court-connected ADR which was introduced in 2005 is guided by the concept that when litigation is initiated, the fundamental objective is to help the disputing parties to resolve their differences by other equally desirable means without trial.
The process covers such cases as family disputes, land, divorce, child maintenance, debt recovery and criminal cases not involving felony.
Mr Amegatcher said the net effect of litigation could be sometimes very costly, both in financial and emotional terms to the parties and sometimes their family members. Adding '' the high cost of litigation
means it is only the rich who can afford it or the very poor who may benefit from legal aid who can readily have access to the courts''
He noted that besides helping to decongest the courts, the ADR process had advantages that included voluntary compliance with agreements by parties in conflict, promotion of transparency against perception of bribery of judges and the abuse of the court process by lawyers.
He advised traditional rulers to register their mediated cases at the law courts to make such judgements legally binding.
He said the demands of the various sectors of the economy meant that the justice system was relegated to the background so far as funding was concerned, leading to infrastructure and other logistical problems which affected justice delivery.
He noted that ''the consequences of inadequate funding of access to justice come at a great cost to society.''
The Chairman for the occasion and a Court of Appeal Judge, Mr Justice Samuel Marful-Sau, in his remarks stated that evidence on the ground showed that the process had been useful in resolving a number of cases
which otherwise would have been ''sitting in the courts.''
He said the process was a means of restoring confidence in the judicial system since when people lose confidence in the courts, they took the law into their own hands, adding '' considering the number of cases the courts have to deal with each day and the structures available, there is the need to devise alternative strategies that make conflict resolution simple and efficient.”
He said any country that assured investors of speedy dispute resolution mechanisms would have investors trooping in, as against those with prolonged dispute resolution status.
He said when passed, the ADR Bill, which was now in parliament would ensure that the burden on judges were reduced as it could help them to concentrate on more contentious cases and write better researched and sound judgements and also ease the backlog of cases at the various court.
He stated that conflict had always been part of humanity and that it was its resolution that ensured the prevalence of sanity in the society.
Mr Justice Marful-Sau called on the participants to be apostles of the ADR in order to make its advantages known to all strata of the Ghanaian society.
Some participants who spoke with the Daily Graphic expressed optimism that the seminar would go a long way towards helping to ensure sanity in the judicial system and some level of respect for the decisions of traditional rulers.
The National Coordinator of the ADR, Mr Alex Nartey, told the Daily Graphic that 150 people had been trained so far and attached to selected courts nation-wide even though about a 1,000 mediators and
arbitrators was the optimal number needed.
He said the only restraint was the financial difficulties which prevented the recruitment and training of more arbitrators and mediators.
Comments
Post a Comment