Mediation in Bosnia and Herzegovina: A Second ApplicationSome have argued that mediation and ADR are inappropriate for emerging judiciaries like BiH.100 The three main criticisms are (1) there is a lack of public trust in the legal system and that would carry over to a mediation program; (2) there is no credible threat of effective enforcement of the mediated settlement; and (3) mediation is an American export that is culturally inappropriate for societies like post-communist Europe. The first concern arises from the fact that most post-communist judiciaries lack the requisite perception of procedural and substantive fairness. As a result, a mediation regime might suffer from the same distrust.101 However, the lack of public trust in the traditional judiciary and its personnel is actually one reason why people might turn to (non court-annexed, perhaps) mediation. Future mediators are more likely to be attorneys and expert lay persons, not sitting judges and thus, they will not carry the corruption stigma of those employed by the courts. There is no evidence that mistrust towards the traditional judiciary migrates to independent ADR institutions. To the contrary, a USAID ADR study found that mediation can be an appropriate alternative forum when the civil court system is discredited.102 The second concern is that these countries lack an effective enforcement mechanism for mediation settlements. Parties are less likely to agree to a mediated settlement if they cannot enforce the obligations contained in their mediated agreement.103 This is a significant concern, given the BiH judiciary’s inefficiencies.104 However, mediated settlements will now receive priority treatment under the new law and will be enforceable like a judgment.105 Thus, the settlement agreement enforcement process will be significantly streamlined. In addition, the relatively high legal expenses involved in defending an enforcement action should have some deterrence effect on potential agreement breachers. Finally, there are international programs currently working on improving the effectiveness of the enforcement divisions of the BiH courts.106 If these programs improve enforcement, mediation stands a better chance at success in BiH. Yet, regardless of enforcement efficacy, resort to court assistance might be less of a problem than is sometimes believed. Most international ADR institutions and programs report very high award compliance rates without national court assistance107 and there is no reason to believe that local BiH-mediated settlements would be significantly different.108 The final concern relates to the theory that American-style ADR exports are culturally inappropriate for BiH. One commentator has argued that “non-talking societies” like Eastern Europe will be less amenable to exportation and assimilation of mediation than “talking societies” like the United States and Latin America.109 While culture does matter and one must be sensitive to these issues, the evidence shows that legal exports (if that is the appropriate term) can flourish in a multitude of places.110 And mediation appears to be spreading throughout Central and Eastern Europe.111 Even the European Commission recommends the development of mediation mechanisms for BiH.112 Perhaps the best example of a nontalking society’s adoption of mediation is Slovenia’s Ljubljana District Court Mediation Program, which has successfully mediated a wide variety of cases.113
100. One commentator
has labeled international assistance providers “arbitration conquistadores”
for their ADR zeal. James M. Cooper, Essay: Access to Justice 1.1, 30
CAL. W. INT’L. L.J. 429, 432 (2000). back Peter V. Baugher,
President |