Mediate, Don’t Litigate: CJI DY Chandrachud’s Message to Union Govt to ‘Declog’ Courts

“The Attorney-General for India made two announcements. I was delighted to hear them, but I was waiting for the third announcement, which never came. Because of my position, I am now out of running as a shadow attorney general, but I can make the third announcement, nonetheless, which is that the motto of the union government and its agencies should be ‘Mediate, don't litigate’.”

Justice Chandrachud was delivering the presidential address at the inauguration of the National Conference on Mediation on the topic ‘Mediation: At the Dawn of a Golden Age’. The event was organised by the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, known as ‘Samadhan’, under the aegis of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and the Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee (MCPC) of the top court. Also in attendance were Supreme Court judges Sanjay Kishan Kaul, PS Narasimha, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Rajesh Bindal, Chief Justice of Delhi High Court Satish Chandra Sharma and other judges of the high court, and the Attorney-General for India R Venkataramani.

“The processes of dialogue, negotiation, compromise and consensus building form the bedrock of the making of the Indian Constitution. Similarly, mediation is a process that involves resolving disagreements by facilitating an open dialogue, mutual understanding and bringing together stakeholders with differing viewpoints,” Justice Chandrachud said, explaining that constitution drafting and mediation may seem unrelated, but actually share ‘normative’ goals. He added, “In both cases, the goal is to create a framework that is inclusive and reflective of the values and aspirations of the people involved.”

While extolling the virtues of mediation, the chief justice said that mediation had an important message for all citizens, particularly in today’s fraught time. He asked, “Are we losing the ability to talk to each other across the spectrum? Are we losing our ability to engage in reasoned dialogue? And is it not necessary, therefore, that we pick up something from mediation which is, being good listeners, understanding the others’ point of view, and not only insisting that the dogma which we espouse is the only dogma which is relevant to the times?

The ‘transformative’ characteristic of mediation was that it put the decision-making authority in the hands of ordinary people, empowering those who are involved in disputes to determine not only the outcomes of their disputes, but also the criteria and standards by which those outcomes are evaluated,” Justice Chandrachud said. Being the least formal of dispute resolution mechanisms, he further said, mediation had the potential to provide timely and affordable justice to all and reduce the burden of the burgeoning judicial caseload. He also said, “In jurisdictions like India where we hold values such as trust, community, social harmony, and good relations on a high pedestal, mediation’s ability to envisage an alternative conception of justice which is more personalised, inclusive, and democratic, cannot be understated.” He added:

“Seen in this light, mediation holds the potential to change the way we understand justice itself, from an adversarial formal process tailored towards a zero-sum outcome to a more collaborative, interest-based process focused on enabling parties to move forward constructively. So, mediation, in other words, is much more than a movement to de-clog the courts.”

The chief justice also said that when the government, which is the largest litigant, opted for mediation over litigation, it sent a message that “in the framework of the law, the government was not an adversarial opponent to our citizens.” He emphasised, “The government must adopt the robes of a friend, partner, and a problem solver, be it in terms of business, of communities or families.”