Alternative Dispute Resolution Tool Implementation

ADHOC’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) section is supported by Oxfam Novib and the European Union. Technical assistance is provided by Tilberg University. In the period January 2013 – July 2013, ADHOC used the ADR tool to mediate in minor conflicts at the grassroots in 79 cases.

  • 19 cases relating to land conflicts
  • 6 relating to contractual matters
  • 2 cases relating to inheritance
  • 7 cases relating to marriages
  • 2 cases relating to conflicts over money
  • 9 defamation cases
  • 4 cases relating to access to public roads
  • 3 other cases1 case grown tree near

Among the 79 cases, 58 were successfully resolved.

Between the June 15-17 2013, Mr. Robert Porter and Mrs. Corry Van Zeeland, experts from Tilberg University, interviewed 15 beneficiaries of the ADR tool in three provinces- Sihanoukville, Kompong Speu and Kandal. These disputes included disputes within families, contractual disputes and damage to property, amongst other issues.

From the interviews we were able to see that:

  • Most of the interested parties knew ADHOC through sensitization sessions
  • People came to ADHOC as they believe it to be ADHOC because it is perceived as neutral and fair, and ADHOC’s ADR service is free of charge
  • The conflicted parties had tried to solve the conflict at the local level, before they turned to ADHOC
  • The conflicted parties took part in the mediation process voluntarily
  • During the process the conflicted parties were afforded and equal right to speak and air their grievances.
  • Agreements were reached by the parties
  • Previous attempts at mediation did not address the issues clearly
  • When asked how they would address a problem in the future, parties expressed confidence in ADHOC and said they would use the service again.
  • Most of the beneficiaries were pleased with the service ADHOC provided.

19-22 June 2013, experts from Tilberg University met with 23 ADHOC mediators to discuss positive and negative parts of the ADR tool and to see how it can be improved. Discuss the positives and natives points of the tool and find solution how to improve it. ADHOC was pleased to find that there was more positive feedback on the tool than negative, though four areas were identified for improvement.

  • Local authorities attending mediations
  • Dealing with conflicts between multiple interested parties
  • Witness participation
  • Involvement of numerous mediators.

Further improvements will be made to the tool.

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

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