Community Mediation Program

Rationale of the Program

As the courts have grown more congested and litigation has become more expensive, there has been increasing interest in alternative dispute resolution (ADR) which is faster, less expensive and more private than going to court. A large segment of Nepalese populace is devoid of access to justice due to geographical inaccessibility of courts, huge litigation cost that poor people cannot afford, lengthy court procedure and other formalities that uneducated people seldom understand, and lack of privacy in the formal court proceedings. Hence, the formal justice system is costly, cumbersome, and agonizingly slow, and many view the formal legal system as being owned by legal professionals who control procedures and outcomes. Even today, access to justice remains something that the majority of the Nepali cannot even dream about. Overall, it has been criticized for its failure to adequately recognize the dignity of complainants and defendants, satisfy human needs and provide for direct participation in a meaningful way. As in other developing countries, courts in Nepal confront debilitating delays, perpetual under funding, frequent and long adjournments, delays in issuing initial notices and in passing execution of final orders, and persistent allegations of corruption. All these factors undermine confidence in the judiciary, and restrict access to the formal justice system. Despite the Nepali judiciary's effort to provide justice, it continues to struggle for enhancing the public's access to justice and in tackling the multitude of problems plaguing the courts of Nepal.
Against such a backdrop, CeLRRd has been implementing a system of informal justice called mediation. Mediation focuses on the reconstruction of relationships rather that the retributive punishment of wrongs, and provides an alternative to a costly, encumbered, and slow-moving formal justice system that is seen by many Nepalis as corrupt and under the control of legal professionals.
Supreme Court Report 2064/65 has also revealed the scope of informal justice system. Total number of cases in all tiers of courts is 89939, and the cases are categorized into 26 varieties. 62.54% cases relate to civil matters like familial, transaction and land-related. Moreover, out of 6388 transaction related cases pending in Supreme Court, nearly 11 percent cases have the value less than NRs.1000. All these figures point to the fact that there is a huge prevalence of common cases in the judiciary that if mediated would save time, resources and thus, increase productivity of the court personnel. If mediation is applied to such cases, it helps judiciary concentrate on few serious cases, which in fact would eventually lead to the quality of justice.

Introduction

1. allows the stakeholders to discuss the issues important to them, whether or not those issues have a legal or administrative position in formal justice systems
2. allows stakeholders to participate fully in the resolution process
3. requires stakeholders to be accountable to providing practical solutions to their problems
4. enhances compliance with decisions and respect for the fairness of proceedings among the participants, whether their personal outcome is positive or negative
5. is minimally harmful in cost, and not only democratizes the justice system, but socializes the legal system

CeLRRd's Involvement in Community Mediation

• Base-line surveys in 8 districts for the identification of program locations
• District level orientations in 8 districts for the popularization of community mediation program
• VDC level Orientations for the selection of community mediators in 40 locations of 8 districts
• Revise and update existing community mediation manual, develop awareness raising posters and brochures
• 8 days Trainers' Training (ToT) for human resource development at local level
• 8 days Basic Mediation and Human Rights Trainings to 1080 community people from 40 locations in 8 districts
• Establish 40 new Mediation Centers in 8 districts
• Social marketing of community mediation in every location for the popularization of community mediation program in the respective location
• 124 Practice sharing at district and VDC levels in 40 locations for the effectiveness of the program

Current Program Municipalities and VDCs

• Practice Sharing at VDC level
• Refresher trainings
• Workshop with local stakeholders
• District Network Meetings

Previously Undertaken Locations