Mediation is evolving as a powerful mechanism for conflict resolution, bridging divides with creativity and fostering harmonious solutions — It is a testament to the potential of dialogue over confrontation — Mediation (and other mechanisms of ADR) can be philosophically framed as essential tools to ensure access to justice in a country where millions of cases are pending — This approach aligns with a broader understanding of justice as being not only about achieving outcomes but also about the process itself being fair, efficient, and accessible — Traditional court system is adversarial and often resource-intensive, leading to delays and alienation of marginalized groups — Mediation embodies a collaborative model of justice that prioritizes dialogue and empowerment, ensuring parties are active participants in resolving their disputes — The sheer volume of pending cases often renders justice delayed, and as the saying goes, “Justice delayed is justice denied.” — Mediation offers a timely and context-sensitive resolution that addresses the substance of disputes without being bogged down by procedural complexities — Philosophically, mediation reflects the relational nature of human beings — It prioritizes restoring relationships, preserving dignity, and finding mutually beneficial solutions over the zero-sum outcomes of litigation — Mediation accommodates the cultural, social, and economic diversity of disputing parties — It aligns with justice as capability-enhancing, allowing parties to exercise their agency and reach solutions that reflect their lived realities — Mediation bridges modern legal systems with indigenous practices, thereby strengthening communal harmony while maintaining legal validity. [PLR 2025 SC 1 = PLD 2025 SC 1 = 2024 SCP 391]

Mediation must be increasingly seen as a right of the parties within the litigation process — Access to justice includes the right to have disputes resolved in a timely and efficient manner — Mediation, as a faster and cost-effective alternative, satisfies this fundamental aspect of justice — Mediation respects the autonomy of the parties by giving them control over the process and outcome, unlike litigation, where outcomes are imposed by judges — Litigants have the right to avoid the adversarial consequences of litigation, such as financial strain, emotional distress, and reputational harm — Mediation provides a non-confrontational environment that mitigates these risks — Procedural justice emphasizes the fairness of the process, and mediation upholds this by ensuring participation, neutrality, and respect – core elements of a fair process — In contexts where economic inequalities limit access to legal representation, mediation ensures that the justice system remains accessible to the underprivileged — Many societies have strong traditions of community-led dispute resolution — Mediation builds on these traditions, ensuring justice remains culturally relevant — “Mediation is at the heart of access to justice — Courts must embrace it as an essential tool for efficient and humane dispute resolution.” — Mediation is not merely an alternative to litigation but a complementary and necessary component of the justice system. [PLR 2025 SC 1 = PLD 2025 SC 1 = 2024 SCP 391]

The reasons which make mediation a compelling choice for an appropriate avenue to resolve disputes efficiently and effectively, inter alia, include: (i) Cost-effectiveness; mediation incurs lower legal fees and expenses due to shorter and less formal processes; (ii) Time efficiency; resolutions can often be reached much faster through mediation than through court proceedings, which can take years to conclude, (iii) Flexibility; the procedures in mediation are flexible, allowing parties to tailor the specific processes to their specific needs, including choosing their mediator and deciding the rules for the proceedings, (iv) Confidentiality; unlike trials in courts which are generally public, mediation processes are private — This confidentiality can be crucial for preserving personal relationships, protecting trade secrets or avoiding negative publicity, (v) Preservation of relationships; mediation encourages cooperation and communication, which can help maintain or even improve relationships between parties, a key consideration in business context or family disputes, (vi) Control over the outcome; parties have more control over the resolution as they are directly involved in negotiating the settlement, (vii) Expertise; parties have choose an expert in the field relevant to their dispute to act as the mediator, which can lead to more informed decisions and (viii) Reduced hostility; mediation tends to be less adversarial than court litigation, which can reduce tensions and hostility between parties. [PLR 2025 SC 1 = PLD 2025 SC 1 = 2024 SCP 391]

The courts should not only encourage “mediating more and litigating less” but also exhibit a pro-mediation bias which connotes a pre-disposition within the legal system for resolution of disputes through mediation rather than through litigation or other forms of dispute resolution — Such bias does not favor one party over another but rather prioritizes mediation as the preferred method of dispute resolution — It is grounded in the belief that settlements are generally more efficient and satisfactory for all parties involved compared to outcomes determined by a court — Mediation offers the best chance of a solution where both parties leave with dignity and satisfaction, as opposed to the all-or-nothing results of litigation. [PLR 2025 SC 1 = PLD 2025 SC 1 = 2024 SCP 391]