ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has called for embracing a pro-mediation approach across the judiciary, particularly at the earliest stages of litigation.
In a detailed four-page order authored by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, the top court stressed the importance of sensitising judges and lawyers to identify cases appropriate for mediation and to ensure their timely referral.
“Judges and lawyers must be sensitised to identify cases fit for mediation and facilitate their referral in a timely manner. Litigants, likewise, should be encouraged to consider mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution as a first resort, rather than a last recourse,” the order states.
The directive came during the hearing of a family dispute that the court, on March 15, referred to mediation. Sara Tarrar, an advocate of the high court and an accredited mediator notified by the Law and Justice Division under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, was appointed as the mediator.
According to the order, both parties actively participated in the mediation process and ultimately reached a settlement. Tarrar submitted her report, along with a copy of the settlement agreement dated May 5, 2025, which was officially recorded by the court.
Counsel for both sides requested that a decree be issued in line with the agreed settlement.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, heard the matter. The case involved a challenge to a family court decision that had increased monthly maintenance for each daughter from Rs30,000 to Rs150,000, in addition to educational expenses. The father had contested the order in appellate courts, where his case was dismissed. He later approached the SC in June 2021.
After remaining pending for more than three and a half years, the bench finally referred the matter to mediation, leading to a successful resolution.
In its order, the SC underlined that mediation was “not merely an alternative to litigation; it is a paradigm shift in dispute resolution, built on the principles of collaboration, confidentiality, and party autonomy”.
Unlike traditional litigation, the order said, mediation empowers parties to shape the outcomes of their disputes through neutral facilitation rather than adversarial judgment.
“It offers a nonadversarial framework that empowers parties to shape the outcome of their own disputes, guided by a neutral facilitator rather than a judicial determination.” The order highlighted several advantages of mediation, including cost-effectiveness, speed, reduced burden on the judiciary and greater privacy for the disputing parties. Its informal setting fosters open dialogue and solution-focused negotiation.
“The flexibility of the process allows parties to explore creative, interest-based solutions that a court of law may not be empowered to grant,” the order notes. “These benefits were remarkably evident in the present case. What years of litigation could not resolve, mediation achieved within weeks.”
The court observed that earlier recourse to mediation often results in substantial savings of time and cost, reduces emotional tolls and helps restore relationships.
The order cited the statutory framework established under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, and further supported by various provincial legislations.
In addition, the ADR Mediation Accreditation (Eligibility) Rules, 2023 and Mediation Practice Direction (Civil) Rules, 2023, have consolidated mediation’s place in the judicial landscape as a mainstream tool for dispute resolution.
