What are Alternate Dispute Resolution and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act?
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) includes various methods of settling a dispute without getting into the intricacies of the court. It is a method where parties try to resolve their disputes privately in front of a third-person expert. The decision is binding on the parties, like the decision of the court. It includes methods like arbitration, mediation, conciliation, and negotiation. These work on the principles of justice, legal aid, and speedy trial as given under Article 39A of the Constitution of India. Even Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides settling disputes by way of ADR. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is an Indian legislation that governs domestic and international arbitration and conciliation proceedings in India. The Act was enacted to provide a legal framework for the fair and efficient resolution of disputes through arbitration and conciliation, thereby promoting alternative dispute resolution methods.
It cannot be ruled out that the arbitration regime in India has seen several amendments in the recent past, and the legislature has actively taken steps to tighten the said regime. However, it has been felt that there is more room for improvement in the current arbitration regime which needs reforms for more effective and efficient functioning.
Perhaps, in this context, the Ministry of Law and Justice has constituted an expert committee consisting of eminent lawmakers, legal luminaries, representatives from ministries and bodies like Niti Ayog, and commerce-related councils. The committee is expected to examine the working of arbitration in India and suggest reforms for better functioning of the current arbitration regime.
What are the consolidated Terms of Reference for the working of the Expert Committee?
- To Evaluate and analyze the operation of the extant arbitration ecosystem in the country, which includes the working of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, highlighting its strengths, weaknesses, and challenges vis-à-vis other important foreign jurisdictions.
- For recommending the framework of a model arbitration system that is efficient, effective, economical, and caters to the requirements of the users.
- To Devise a strategy for developing a competitive environment in the arbitration services market for domestic and international parties that can sub-serve the interests of the users, particularly for building the regime of cost-effective arbitration through the arbitration professionals.
- To recommend statutory means to minimize recourse to judicial authorities or the courts in arbitration-centric dispute resolution mechanisms, principles for the determination of costs of arbitration, fees of arbitrators, and a charter of duties for the guidance of arbitral tribunal, parties, and arbitral institutions.
- For suggesting administrative mechanism or the SOP for minimizing routine challenges to arbitral awards by the Government in disputes involving them and examining the feasibility of enacting separate laws for domestic arbitration and international arbitration and for enforcement of certain foreign awards.
