The Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms in Reducing Court Backlogs

Abstract

The growing backlog of cases in courts is a major concern for justice delivery systems around the world. It threatens the constitutional guarantee of prompt justice and damages public trust in the judicial system. When it comes to reducing judicial caseloads, promoting efficiency, and providing quicker, cost-effective dispute settlement, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms like negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and conciliation have shown to be viable options. the efficiency of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes in reducing court backlogs, looking specifically at the Indian setting while also incorporating lessons learned from other governments. Judgmental statements that have promoted alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a crucial component of access to justice are examined, along with the legislative framework offered by the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and current mediation initiatives. Since ADR is based on mutual consent, research shows that it not only speeds up the resolution process but also encourages peaceful settlements, keeps relationships intact, and increases compliance with decisions. But there are obstacles, such as a lack of knowledge, an insufficient system, an absence of qualified mediators, and an unwillingness on the part of both parties and attorneys to accept alternatives to litigation. It finds that in order to make ADR a more effective tool to supplement traditional litigation, a multi-faceted approach is needed, including changes to legislation, backing from the judiciary, education for professionals, and public awareness campaigns.