ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - The Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan held the 8th Judicial Conference in the Supreme Court of Pakistan in 2018, a landmark event that brought together legal luminaries and experts to deliberate on critical issues facing the judiciary.

The conference focused on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methodologies, deterring factors, strategies for delay reduction, and expeditious disposal of the backlog of cases. The Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan issued recommendations to the government known as the ‘Islamabad Declaration 2018.’

Chief Justice of Pakistan, Main Saqib Nisar, extended an invitation to Mian Sheraz Javaid, who delivered a lecture in a panel headed by Mr. Justice Gulzar Ahmad as the panel chair. Mian Sheraz's lecture centered on the methodologies and mechanisms of ADR regarding the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). He explored three themes: regional economic integration and effective dispute resolution mechanisms in the context of CPEC; ADR methodologies and deterring factors; and strategies for delay reduction and expeditious disposal of the backlog of cases.

He emphasized the changing ADR scenario in Pakistan, highlighting how ADR is fast gaining policy traction. With the promotion of investment, Pakistan's legal system must provide immediate redressal of grievances for commercial parties. Sheraz noted the significant changes in the ADR landscape over the past decade, with the enactment of the Recognition and Enforcement (Arbitration Agreement and Foreign Arbitral) Act 2011, it seems that the country is ready to adopt the best international practices. However, although ADR acts have been passed both at the federal and provincial level, such as the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017 at federal level and the Punjab Alternate Dispute Resolution Act 2019 and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Alternate Dispute Resolution Act 2020, their implementation still has a long way to go.

Mian Sheraz offered valuable suggestions, including the need for CPEC to have multi-tiered dispute resolution clauses and dispute avoidance mechanisms. By incorporating negotiation, mediation, and arbitration stages, these multi-tiered clauses can ensure that disputes are resolved at the earliest possible stage, saving both time and resources. Dispute avoidance mechanisms, such as regular monitoring and early warning systems, can further minimize the risk of conflicts. For CPEC, adopting these strategies would not only foster a more cooperative relationship between the involved parties but also enhance the project's efficiency and credibility. It would align with international best practices and could set a precedent for future large-scale projects in Pakistan, contributing to a more stable and predictable investment environment.

He also suggested for the creation of an independent ADR centre, which would not offer courses and qualifications, but also provide a platform for dispute resolution practitioners. By holding events and conferences regarding the latest developments in the field, the practitioners of the country would get to engage with the best minds. Lasltly, he emphasized that an ADR-conducive environment would boost the economy by attracting increased investment. International companies would be more willing to conduct business in Pakistan due to efficient ADR mechanisms, positioning Pakistan as a favored seat of arbitration. These recommendations provided by Mian Sheraz were made part of the conference's declaration.

The conference concluded with the key recommendations, and it marked a significant step towards modernizing Pakistan's legal system, reflecting a collective commitment to justice, efficiency, and innovation. The insights and recommendations from Mian Sheraz Javaid and other esteemed participants will undoubtedly shape the future of dispute resolution in Pakistan, fostering a more responsive and robust legal framework. With more than 1.5 million cases pending before various courts of law, the conference set the path for the enactment of updated ADR Acts in Pakistan. It is only a matter of time before ‘The Arbitration Act’ (1940) is replaced by a modern Arbitration Act.