Abstract

The British adversarial system of adjudication is a distinct feature of our legal system where the litigation is controlled by the parties. Under this system the battle in the field is brought in a court room where the dispensation of justice culminates to a legal battle fought by the lawyers engaged by the parties. Ultimately one party becomes a winner and the other is put in the position of the defeated. A judge sits merely as an umpire to enforce the rule of law by delivering a judgment in accordance with law. As a result, the winner party leaves the court with a sense of pride and the defeated one with a sense of bitterness, humiliation and frustration. Besides, backlog and delay in the disposal of cases are rooted in our justice delivery system. Dilatory practice at different stages of trial of cases protracts the case life to 15 to 20 years or even more where it should take one to two years. Delay in litigation has become a too! of repression denying the rights and remedies of the litigant parties and thereby acerbating the sufferings of the parties. Justice Iyer rightly says, “Delayed Justice is the means of inflicting injustice through process of law.”2 But Bangladesh is not the only country to face these problems, even the developed countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom suffer from the same, albeit on a lesser scale. The USA, and following its inspiration, several countries, including Australia, Canada, Germany, Holland, Hong Kong, New Zealand, South Africa, Switzerland and the United Kingdom have been using over the last 20 years or so what is popularly known as ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution (hereafter as ADR)’ that encouraged the disputants to arrive at a negotiated understanding with a minimum of outside help.