THEORETICAL CONCEPT OF ADR ACCORDING TO CULTURE, TRADITION, RELIGION AND CUSTOMS IN THE LIGHT OF UN AND PAKISTANI LAWS

Abstract

This article examines the theoretical foundations of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) through the lenses of culture, tradition, religion, and customary practices, with particular emphasis on United Nations instruments and the legal framework of Pakistan. ADR mechanisms—such as arbitration, mediation, conciliation, and negotiation—have historically existed outside formal judicial systems, deeply embedded in social norms and religious doctrines aimed at preserving harmony and justice. Drawing upon theories of legal pluralism, social contract, and distributive justice, the study situates ADR as a complementary system rather than a substitute for formal litigation. The paper explores culturally rooted practices including Jirga, Panchayat, Sulh, and Musalihati Anjuman, critically evaluating their effectiveness and human rights implications within Pakistan’s socio-legal context. It further analyzes religious perspectives on ADR, particularly Islamic jurisprudence, alongside comparative insights from Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. At the national level, Pakistan’s ADR framework is assessed through statutes such as the Arbitration Act 1940, the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 2017, and the Family Courts Act 1964. Internationally, the study reviews key instruments including the UNCITRAL Model Law, the New York Convention 1958, and the Singapore Convention on Mediation. By integrating cultural legitimacy with legal enforceability, the article argues that ADR enhances access to justice, reduces judicial backlog, and aligns dispute resolution with societal values. However, it also highlights challenges related to enforcement, power imbalances, and procedural fairness. The study concludes that a balanced, rights-compliant integration of ADR into national and international legal systems is essential for its sustainable effectiveness.