kalanauri.com

Facebook Twitter Youtube Linkedin
Menu
Contact Us

Critical Appraisal of the Punjab Alternate Dispute Resolution Act 2019: Comparative Perspectives and Reform Proposals

Mian Zafar Iqbal Kalanauri

Advocate Supreme Court Pakistan, Arbitrator Fellow CIArb, Barrister                                                 Mediator CEDAR, IMI, CMC, U.S.A., Master Trainer Mediation CEDAR, Legal Educator Reformist of Judicial System and Legal Education, White Collar Crime Investigator   

kalanauri.com     +923004511823    

Index of Contents (Publication-Ready)

  1. Abstract
  2. Introduction
    1. ADR in Global Context
    1. Punjab ADR Act 2019: Objectives & Scope
  3. Overview of the Punjab ADR Framework
    1. Scope & Timelines
    1. Institutional Arrangements
    1. Punjab ADR Rules 2020
    1. 2023 & 2025 Amendments
  4. Critical Weaknesses
    1. Lack of Mandatory ADR
    1. Ambiguities in Accreditation & Oversight
    1. Limited Confidentiality & Enforcement
    1. Narrow Criminal ADR Scope
    1. Implementation Deficit
  5. Comparative Insights
    1. Singapore, UK, India, Turkey
    1. Lessons for Pakistan
  6. Suggested Reforms
    1. Mandatory ADR in Select Disputes
    1. Enhanced Accreditation & Oversight
    1. Expanding Criminal ADR
    1. Judicial Incentives & Sanctions
    1. Capacity Building & Awareness
  7. Independent ADR Accreditation Authority (IAAP)
    1. Proposed Legal Structure
    1. Functions, Composition & Enforcement
  8. Expanded Scope Beyond Court-Annexed ADR
    1. Pre-litigation ADR
    1. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)
    1. Community Mediation
  9. Step-by-Step Implementation Roadmap
    1. Executive Notifications
    1. Legislative Amendments
    1. Rules & Capacity Building
  10. Sample Legal Text (Proposed Amendments)
  11. Conclusion
  12. References & Further Reading


Critical Appraisal of the Punjab Alternate Dispute Resolution Act 2019: Comparative Perspectives and Reform Proposals

Mian Zafar Iqbal Kalanauri

Advocate Supreme Court Pakistan, Arbitrator Fellow CIArb, Barrister                                                 Mediator CEDAR, IMI, CMC, U.S.A., Master Trainer Mediation CEDAR, Legal Educator Reformist of Judicial System and Legal Education, White Collar Crime Investigator            

Abstract

The Punjab Alternate Dispute Resolution Act 2019 (Act XVII of 2019) represents a significant step toward institutionalizing mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and other consensual dispute resolution mechanisms within Pakistan’s largest province. Despite subsequent amendments in 2023 and 2025, and the issuance of the Punjab ADR Rules 2020, the Act continues to face structural and procedural deficiencies limiting its effectiveness. This article critically examines the law, identifies key drawbacks, and proposes reforms in light of international best practices from jurisdictions such as Singapore, India, and the United Kingdom.

Executive Summary

The Punjab Alternate Dispute Resolution Act 2019 marked a bold legislative effort to integrate mediation, conciliation, and arbitration within the province’s justice system. Despite subsequent 2023 and 2025 amendments and the Punjab ADR Rules 2020, the Act remains hampered by:

  • Voluntary nature & limited scope – unlike Singapore’s mandatory court-annexed ADR, Punjab’s system remains optional, curbing uptake.
  • Weak accreditation & oversight – no robust criteria, CPD requirements, or public registry of ADR providers.
  • Ambiguities in confidentiality & enforcement – lacking mediator privilege and direct enforceability of settlements under international conventions.
  • Narrow criminal ADR framework – confined to compoundable offences, missing restorative justice potential.
  • Implementation gaps – inadequate trained mediators, poor public awareness, and underfunded ADR centres.

Comparative insights from Singapore, the UK, India, and Turkey show that mandatory mediation in selected disputes, strong cost sanctions for ADR refusal, and independent accreditation authorities are critical for success.

Key reforms proposed include:

  • Mandatory ADR for family, commercial & small-value disputes before litigation
  • Creation of an Independent ADR Accreditation Authority (IAAP) with robust CPD & licensing standards
  • Integration with the Singapore Convention on Mediation for global enforceability
  • Expansion of ADR beyond court referrals, covering community mediation, ODR, and victim-offender mediation
  • Judicial incentives & cost sanctions to promote ADR participation

By adopting these reforms, Punjab can transition from a voluntary ADR model to a mandatory, structured, and sustainable ADR ecosystem aligned with international best practices.

1. Introduction

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has gained global prominence as a mechanism to alleviate judicial backlog, enhance access to justice, and promote amicable settlements. Punjab’s adoption of the ADR Act 2019 aims to embed structured ADR within its judicial process. The law covers both civiland criminalmatters, introduces institutional accreditation, and imposes time-bound procedures. However, as experience since 2019 demonstrates, the Act remains constrained by limited enforcement, lack of robust procedural rules, and unclear integration with court processes.

2.     Overview of the Punjab ADR Framework

  • Scope and Application: Applies across Punjab, enabling mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and evaluation for civil and criminal disputes.
    • Timelines: Civil referrals must be resolved within 60 days, extendable to 120 days, while criminal referrals under CrPC Sections 345(1) and 345(2) operate within 60–90 days.
    • Institutional Arrangements: Establishes an Accreditation Authority to regulate ADR providers.
    • Confidentiality & Finality: Settlements endorsed by the court yield decrees immune from appeal (limited exceptions).

Punjab ADR Rules 2020: Operationalize accreditation, ethical standards, fees, and oversight.

Amendments in 2023streamlined timelines, while 2025 amendments strengthened judicial oversight by requiring mediator-judges to be nominated by the Lahore High Court and refining the structure of the Accreditation Authority.

3.     Critical Weaknesses

3.1 Lack of Mandatory ADR Integration

Unlike Singapore’s Mediation Act 2017, which embeds court-connected mediation as a pre-litigation requirement in many cases, Punjab’s ADR regime remains consensual, limiting uptake. Without mandatory referral of suitable disputes, ADR risks being underutilized.

In Singapore, court-annexed ADR is a default process, and parties must justify opting out.1

3.2 Ambiguities in Accreditation and Oversight

Although the Act empowers an Accreditation Authority, detailed criteria for accreditation, continuous monitoring, and disciplinary procedures remain underdeveloped. The 2020 Rules outline basic eligibility but lack a robust quality assurance framework.

  • No public directory of accredited mediators/arbitrators.
  • No minimum continuous professional development (CPD) requirements, unlike the UK’s Civil Mediation Council Standards.2

3.3 Limited Confidentiality and Enforcement Provisions

While settlements enjoy finality, the Act does not address:

  • How mediation communications are protected (e.g., privilege).
  • Enforcement of ADR outcomes beyond court-decreed settlements, unlike the Singapore Convention on Mediation 2019.3

3.4 Narrow Criminal ADR Scope

Referrals under CrPC Section 345 are limited to compoundable offences and depend on consent. In contrast, India’s Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill 2018 promotes plea bargaining and victim-offender mediation for a wider set of offences.

3.5 Implementation Deficit

  • Despite the 2020 Rules, operational capacity remains weak due to lack of trained mediators, insufficient ADR centers, and limited awareness among litigants.
  • Post-2025 amendments, detailed fee schedules and procedural forms remain unpublished in the Gazette.

4. Comparative Insights

JurisdictionADR ModelKey FeaturesLessons for Pakistan
SingaporeCourt-annexed mediation & Singapore International Mediation CentreMandatory mediation in selected cases; strong confidentiality & enforceabilityIntroduce pre-litigation ADR mandate
UK (England & Wales)Civil Procedure Rules Part 26Costs sanctions for unreasonable refusal of ADRPenalize parties refusing ADR without valid reason
India (Mediation Bill 2023)Institutional mediation & community mediationMandatory mediation before certain civil cases; Mediator accreditation boardEstablish state-wide ADR centers & accreditation registry
TurkeyMandatory employment mediationPre-condition before litigation in labour disputesPilot ADR as pre-condition for selected categories

4.     Suggested Reforms

  • Mandatory ADR in Select Disputes
  • Make mediation a pre-condition for commercial, family, and small-value civil disputes before filing a lawsuit.
  • Adopt a multi-door courthouse model.
    • Enhanced Accreditation Mechanism
  • Establish a public mediator directory.
  • Introduce CPD requirements and periodic re-accreditation aligned with UNCITRAL Mediation Rules.4
  • Confidentiality & Enforcement Clarity

Amend the Act to explicitly provide mediator privilegeand enforceability of settlements under the Singapore Convention framework.

  • Expand Criminal ADR Scope

Integrate victim-offender mediationand restorative justice for selected non-compoundable offences, as piloted in India.

  • Judicial Incentives & Sanctions

Authorize courts to impose cost sanctionson parties unreasonably refusing ADR (similar to UK CPR Part 26).

  • Capacity Building & Awareness
  • Fund provincial mediation centers in all districts.
  • Conduct judicial and bar training on ADR procedures.
  • Immediately establish an Accreditation Authority for ADR providers in a way that goes beyond the current Punjab ADR Act 2019 (even with its 2023 & 2025 amendments) and creates a comprehensive regulatory regime-not just a narrow court-annexed model.

6. Why an Accreditation Authority is Critical

  • The Punjab ADR Act mentions an Accreditation Authority but lacks robust criteria for accreditation, continuous monitoring, disciplinary procedures, or a public directory.
    • No CPD (continuous professional development) requirements exist (unlike UK Civil Mediation Council standards).
    • There is no structured oversight comparable to Singapore or India.

To make ADR effective beyond court referrals, the Accreditation Authority must be independent, mandatory, and empowered to regulate ADR as an industry.

7. Proposed Structure of an Independent Accreditation Authority (IAA)

  • Legal Basis
  • Constitute the Independent ADR Accreditation Authority of Punjab (IAAP) via an amendment to the ADR Act.
  • Place it under joint oversight of the Lahore High Court & Law Department to ensure credibility and independence.
    • Composition
    • Chairperson (Retired Supreme Court or High Court Judge)
    • 2 ADR Experts (from CIArb/IMI/UNCITRAL panels)
    • 1 Government Law Dept. Representative
    • 1 Civil Society/Academia Representative
    • Registrar/Secretary (Executive Head)
    • Functions
  • Accreditation & Licensing
  • Certify mediators, arbitrators, and ADR institutions.
  • Maintain a public registry of accredited professionals.
  • Training & CPD
  • Mandate annual CPD hours for mediators (like CMC UK standards).Quality Assurance
  • Audit ADR centers.
  • Issue ethical codes & disciplinary action.
    • Policy & Research
  • Issue annual reports on ADR trends.
  • Recommend reforms based on global best practices.
    • Enforcement

    Empowered to suspend or revoke accreditation for non-compliance.

  • Funding

Independent ADR Fund financed by accreditation fees, government grants, and donor support.

  • Expanded Scope – Beyond Court-Annexed ADR

Instead of restricting ADR to court-referred cases, the Authority should regulate:

  • Pre-litigation ADR
  • Mandatory for commercial, family, employment, and small-value claims.
  • Inspired by Singapore’s Mediation Act 2017 & Turkey’s mandatory employment mediation.
    • Private & Institutional ADR
    • Accreditation of all ADR service providers, including private mediation centers.
  • Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)

Develop standards for digital mediation/arbitration platforms.

  1. Community Mediation

Recognize and regulate community-based mediation boards.

  1. Criminal ADR

Broaden beyond compoundable offences—include victim-offender mediation.

  1. Key Reforms to the Punjab ADR Act

Integrate international best practices:

  1. Singapore Convention on Mediation 2019 → Make mediated settlement agreements directly enforceable.
    1. UK CPR Part 26 → Courts can impose cost sanctions for refusal of ADR.
    1. India’s Mediation Bill 2023 → Create a statewide network of ADR centers.
    1. UNCITRAL Mediation Rules → Align accreditation & practice standards.
  2. Step-by-Step Implementation Roadmap
    1. Immediate Executive Notification

Constitute an interim Accreditation Authority Task Force under the Punjab Law Department.

  1. Legislative Amendment (within 6 months)

Amend ADR Act to:

  • Expand Authority’s powers
  • Make ADR mandatory for select disputes
  • Recognize pre-litigation ADR agreements
  1. Rules & Standards (within 9 months)
    1. Draft detailed Accreditation & Practice Rules (similar to UK CMC standards).
    1. Launch Provincial ADR Registry (within 12 months)
    1. Publish an online directory of accredited mediators & institutions.
    1. Capacity Building (continuous)
    1. Partner with CIArb, IMI, UNCITRAL, Singapore Mediation Centre for trainer certification.

14 Proposed Legal Text (Sample Amendment)

Section 12A – Independent ADR Accreditation Authority

(1) The Government shall establish the Independent ADR Accreditation Authority of Punjab (IAAP), which shall regulate the accreditation, licensing, training, and oversight of mediators, arbitrators, conciliators, and ADR institutions operating in Punjab.

(2) No person or institution shall provide ADR services without valid accreditation issued by IAAP.

(3) The IAAP shall maintain a publicly accessible register of accredited ADR professionals.

(4) Accredited persons shall comply with ethical codes, continuous professional development (CPD), and quality assurance standards prescribed by IAAP.

(5) IAAP may suspend or revoke accreditation for breach of professional standards or misconduct, after due process.

6. Conclusion

The Punjab ADR Act 2019 was a positive first step toward reducing judicial backlog and promoting amicable settlements. However, its impact has been limited by structural, procedural, and institutional shortcomings. The 2023 and 2025 amendments improved timelines and judicial oversight, but global lessons clearly show that ADR thrives when:

It is mandatory in suitable cases, Supported by an independent accreditation authority, Enforceable under international conventions, Backed by robust awareness, training, and digital integration.

For ADR in Punjab to become transformative, the province must move beyond court-annexed models and regulate ADR as an industry, integrating pre-litigation mediation, ODR platforms, and community mediation frameworks.

This reform roadmap would reduce litigation costs, enhance justice delivery, and align Punjab with global ADR leaders like Singapore and the UK.

References

  1. Singapore Mediation Act 2017 (Act 1 of 2017).
  2. Civil Mediation Council (UK), ‘Accreditation Standards and Requirements’ (CMC, 2022).
  3. United Nations, ‘Singapore Convention on Mediation’, adopted 7 August 2019 (UN Doc A/RES/73/198).
  4. UNCITRAL, ‘Model Law on International Commercial Mediation and International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation’ (2018).
  5. Punjab Alternate Dispute Resolution Act, 2019 (Act XVII of 2019), as amended in 2023 & 2025.
  6. Punjab ADR Rules 2020, Notification No. 5-5/2020/2161 (30 April 2020).
  7. Indian Mediation Bill 2023, Lok Sabha, Ministry of Law & Justice.
  8. http://punjablaws.gov.pk/laws/2739.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *