The document discusses alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a way to resolve legal disputes without going through lengthy court proceedings. It notes that ADR methods like negotiation, mediation, and arbitration can help address disputes more quickly. However, it also argues that ADR poses a threat to achieving true justice if it allows the more powerful party to manipulate the weaker one into an unfair settlement out of fear rather than making a fair decision. While ADR can help expedite resolving cases, parties should ensure disputes are settled through equality and not because of threats, which would obscure justice.
The document discusses alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a way to resolve legal disputes without going through lengthy court proceedings. It notes that ADR methods like negotiation, mediation, and arbitration can help address disputes more quickly. However, it also argues that ADR poses a threat to achieving true justice if it allows the more powerful party to manipulate the weaker one into an unfair settlement out of fear rather than making a fair decision. While ADR can help expedite resolving cases, parties should ensure disputes are settled through equality and not because of threats, which would obscure justice.
The document discusses alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a way to resolve legal disputes without going through lengthy court proceedings. It notes that ADR methods like negotiation, mediation, and arbitration can help address disputes more quickly. However, it also argues that ADR poses a threat to achieving true justice if it allows the more powerful party to manipulate the weaker one into an unfair settlement out of fear rather than making a fair decision. While ADR can help expedite resolving cases, parties should ensure disputes are settled through equality and not because of threats, which would obscure justice.
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
GRAY BLANKET OF JUSTICE
BY: ROSANNA P. ROMANCA
A "no" uttered from the deepest conviction is better than a "yes"
merely uttered to please, or, what is worse, to avoid trouble. -Mahatma Gandhi
The current judicial system of the Philippines shows that a lot of
cases are filing up in the courts waiting for the decision which would define the attainment of justice for the victor. In the current status quo where the ratio of our judicial warriors with the population craving for the resolution of various legal problems is imbalance, an apparent solution to address such a dilemma should be put in place. Some legal disputes and misunderstandings can now be resolved without the necessity of going to the courts. Conflicts of interests that may lead the parties to a higher level of hatred can be fixed through the process of negotiation. The latter is a well-accepted and highly appreciated method of addressing various controversies. On the other hand, there are some conflicts and disputes that cannot be taken out with a mere negotiation between the parties. In this regard, the process of mediation or arbitration will come to play.
Negotiation as a matter of resolving a conflict is simple. Say for
instance, a taxi driver has damaged the property of another person due to his driving negligence, instead of going to the court with the aid of a legal counsel, the person whose property was damaged can simply negotiate with the taxi driver for him to be compensated with the amount of damage that the former has caused to the property. In mediation, an independent third party will sit in between the parties to help settle the problem. The mediator however, shall not make the decision, instead he can give advice as to what is the best resolution for the matter in dispute. Arbitration is a process wherein the parties involved will present their arguments and facts to the arbitrator. The decision rendered by the latter in this process is binding among the parties.
Alternative dispute resolution is an advantageous process in
addressing various legal claims and conflicts. In this side of settling the complications of the parties, the lengthy, cumbersome, financially and emotionally draining litigations in court can be avoided. The persons convoluted in a particular problem will be able to finish it off without actually going to the real war. It is indeed a practical way of gaining justice. In the strictest sense of looking into the substance of things, it is crystal clear that practicability cannot always be equated to the attainment of a real solution.
1|Page IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS IN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The process of resolving serious legal disputes outside the providence
of the courts poses a threat to the attainment of justice. It may be just a small matter to deal with but still it is a wound that will cause a pain through the corners of our judicial system. According to Martin Luther King, Jr., injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. How did alternative dispute resolution could hurt the essence of true justice? The answer is simple. In the process, different techniques can be employed by the more powerful and intelligent party to bring the weaker one to agree and to settle things in accordance with the former's whims and benefits. Though one can argue that it is not a matter to be talked about because the said weaker party has been given an equal opportunity to think and to discern regarding the resolution of the matter in question. However, we cannot deny the fact that a decision rooted from the fear of a further possible problem is not a thing of justice. Machinations, manipulations, and betrayals are not elusive but rather are highly possible things that may keep on repeating in the process of trying to settle legal disputes alternatively.
Finding a solution to a matter that needs to be in order should be
taken with great prudence. One must weigh the risks and benefits in taking up a particular action. Alternative dispute resolution is indeed a big help in expediting the process of settling many legal disputes and its role as a catalyst of securing order in the overcrowded sala of our judicial system cannot be denied. Parties who wants to settle things off the court should not forget the fact that vigilance and self-actualization is a key. Disputes should be settled with equality and not out of fear and threats for such will make the process as nothing but a mere gray blanket covering the true essence of justice.