MEMBERS of the legal profession, including Attorney-General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mr. Anil Nandlall, and Chancellor of the Judiciary, Justice Carl Anthony Singh, were present at Friday’s commissioning of a new Mediation Centre in Berbice. The centre is located in the compound of the New Amsterdam High Court.

The new Mediation Centre is intended to provide an alternative to aggrieved persons seeking legal redress in the courts, by having trained mediators help the parties arrive at a compromise and settle their disputes without actually having to go through the formal court system.
The Mediation Centre was the brainchild of Chancellor Carl Singh, who reiterated that Berbicians were known for using Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) such as mediation, as a viable option to resolve disputes; it was against that backdrop that the mediation centre was established in the county. With the commitment from government, who provided the necessary resources, the institution was brought to fruition.
Delivering the feature address was the Attorney General (AG). He explained that the establishment of the Mediation Centre in Berbice was an executive commitment from the government to make resources available to the judiciary, so that it could administer justice fairly, competently and efficiently. The AG said that the tradition at the Berbice bar was to settle matters utilising the ADR mechanism such as mediation, so the opening of the building only marks the formal introduction of mediation in Berbice.
According to Mr. Nandlall, no one can dispute the benefits and values which accrue from mediation. He asserted that in the Caribbean, mediation is formally rooted in the legal system of almost every country. He made reference to the mediation system in Trinidad and Tobago and quoted Chief Justice of the twin-island republic, Ivor Archie, who said, “Since the inception of the Court Annexed Mediation Pilot Project in 2011, and having reviewed the reports on that project with a settlement rate of 60 percent and a customer satisfaction rating of 95 percent, the question in my mind has been, not whether mediation should form part of our judicial system, but rather and quite simply, why was it not done a long time ago.” “Perhaps that is the question that we should pose to ourselves here,” the AG remarked.
He then made reference to Belize Chief Justice Kenneth Benjamin, who, in addressing the 2012 opening of the Supreme Court spoke about the overwhelming volume of cases that reach the court on an annual basis; and said that the mediation system may need to be introduced in order to address the problem. Mr. Nandlall added: “Of course they have since done so in their Rules of Court. The same position obtains in the Eastern Caribbean, in Jamaica, in The Bahamas and in Barbados.”
The AG then mentioned the English legal system, where he made reference to Lord Justice Brook in the case Dunnett v Railtrackplc [2002]1 Week Law Report page 2434,who said: “Skilled mediators are now able to achieve results satisfactory to both parties in many cases, which are quite beyond the power of lawyers and courts to achieve. The court has knowledge of cases where intense feelings have arisen, for instance in relation to clinical negligence claims. “But when the parties are brought together on neutral soil with a skilled mediator to help them resolve their differences, it may very well be that the mediator is able to achieve a result by which the parties shake hands at the end and feel that they have gone away having settled the dispute on terms with which they are happy to live. A mediator may be able to provide solutions which are beyond the power of the court to provide. Occasions are known to the court in claims against the police, which can give rise to as much passion as a claim of this kind where a claimant’s precious horses are killed on a railway line, by which an apology from a very senior officer is all that the claimant is really seeking and the money side of the matter falls away.”
According to the AG in another case, Lord Justice Dyson said: “We recognise that mediation has a number of advantages over the court process. It is usually less expensive than litigation which goes all the way to judgment…mediation provides litigants with a wider range of solutions than those which are available in litigation: for example an apology; an explanation; the continuation of an existing professional or business relationship perhaps on new terms; and an agreement by one party to do something without any existing legal obligation to do so.”
Mr. Nandlall said that the judicial sentiments expressed, highlights the importance of the new mediation facility established in Berbice. “You see the system of justice benefiting from the expediency that mediation brings and you see the important role that the legal profession is expected to play.”
The Attorney-General referred to professionalism needed by lawyers who are often criticised as being impediments to the mediation process, because the mediation process it seems apparently reduces the remuneration packages of attorneys. “If such a myopic and unfortunate view exists in Berbice, I hope that we can change that view, because it is wrong and we are members of a profession to which nobility and honour have been ascribed. Therefore, I wish to remind you of the oath of office that you took, when each of you would’ve been called to the bar, you took an oath to represent the cause of your client and I ask you to remind yourself of that and think of the justice of the cause in which you are intervening,” said the AG.
He continued that lawyers “will be the persons who will be the driving force of the mediation process that will be accommodated at this facility and to the litigants, the process of mediation requires your input.”
The AG recalled that at one point in time mediation was solely a voluntary process, but asserted that the law as of recent has been modified slightly, to empower judges to order parties to mediation in the appropriate cases. He did say however that “The fundamental truth is that mediation largely remains a process that is litigant driven, so while the legal profession will advise you and counsel you to go to mediation, ultimately the decision will be yours whether that process will be successful.”
Addressing the perception that persons might have in wanting to have their matters heard in court as opposed to mediation, the AG highlighted that “Even with all the work that we are doing to reduce the backlog in the system, to increase speed at which the system functions, the reality is that the volume of litigation simply cannot be dealt with,with the speed that you would like it being dealt with. I don’t know of any country that has successfully challenged, successfully overcome that. So sloth in the judiciary system will be with us for a very long time and if it is, that you want to remain in the judicial system for a very long time, then that’s your right, but if you want a quick resolution to your dispute, then I would humbly advise that you seek mechanisms which are alternative to the judicial system and this facility presents you with one of those alternatives.”
Mr. Nandlall expressed hope on behalf of the government that the facility will be utilised to its fullest potential and that in the use of the Mediation Centre “It will be recognised that it is a facility that will benefit you the people of Berbice and that you will take care of it. I also take this opportunity to express the hope, that those who will be in charge of the facility, either administratively or the day-to-day running of it, will ensure that it provides the services to the people of Berbice that it is intended to provide.”
The AG congratulated the judiciary for spearheading the initiative.