Does the Use of Ombudsmen, Tribunals and ADR Give the Citizen a Better Essay

Does the Use of Ombudsmen, Tribunals and ADR Give the Citizen a Better Solution for Settling Disputes Than Using the Courts - Essay Example This paper therefore addresses the significance of the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), Ombudsman and Tribunals in justice systems of the world.   Importance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) In some countries, ADR is also referred to as external dispute resolution (EDR). It is found in countries such as Australia and encompasses dispute resolution techniques and processes that act as an enabling means for parties in disagreement to reach an amicable agreement. ADR is therefore an alternative system to a formal litigation. It encompasses resolving civil and communal disputes without involving the judicial process that involves court processes (Anderson1998, pp 113-128), although ADR has been a subject of heavy criticisms, the system has over the recent years gained popularity as well as acceptance among members of the bar and the general public. For example, some established courts now call for some parties to seek the services of ADR, mostly mediation before comm itting the cases to full trial in formal courts. The ever-increasing popularity of ADR may be partly attributed to the piling of cases in formal courts and the general perception that the system is cheaper as opposed to litigation. It is also widely believed that ADR upholds confidentiality. As is the case, the judiciary in some developed nations such as England has endorsed the system as it encourages mediation in settling disputes. ADR involves processes of mediation, negotiation, collaboration and arbitration and at times conciliation which as per now may fully be taken as a form of mediation. The system can satisfactorily be used alongside other legal systems, most notably the Sharia courts that falls within the jurisdictions of the common law as found in countries such as Australia (Anderson1998, pp 113-128), Mediation as one of the vital processes of ADR involves enlisting of a non-partisan third party to assist in the resolution of disputes.  Such a person is expected to pr ovide necessary ways for reaching a compromise. Arbitration on the other hand may be argued to be the most formal as far as the methods are concerned in settling of disputes without necessarily involving the courts.   Arbitration refers to a method where the parties involved in a dispute pass their concerns to an impartial party, who is mandated to come up with an impartial verdict on their behalf.   The judgment  passed is considered final and legally binding to both feuding parties.   The benefit of arbitration is that the agreement to carry it out can be made at any given moment. The involved parties can also strike a compromise on the number of arbitrators to preside over the dispute.   The parties also have the mandate of appointing an experienced expert in the field.   The hearings regarding arbitration can take so many forms paper arbitration, which compels the feuding parties to submit all their concerns to the arbitrator through writing. The arbitrator then stud ies the submissions before making a decision.   Transparency and objectivity is upheld as the parties have the right to request for a hearing that they appear as well as their witnesses if any (Slapper & Kelly 2004, pp 26-43). Is there justice in Tribunals? The establishment of tribunals anywhere in world has raised more eyebrows than praises. This relates to their intentions and goals in addition to statutory