NATIONAL 5 (Spotlight Weekly)]

For Quicker Justice

Two-day long seminar on alternative dispute settlement calls for amendment in the Arbitration Act

By A CORRESPONDENT

At a time when many countries are developing methods of alternative dispute settlement, Nepal is yet to fully implement the existing Arbitration Law.

Although Nepal Arbitration Act 1998 was introduced to encourage quick settlement of disputes, the process through the arbitration has not been as effective as expected.

"It is more justifiable to settle the disputes through brief and informal procedures rather than through complex and formal procedure," said Keshav Prasad Upadhyaya, Chief Justice of Supreme Court, addressing the inaugural session of the seminar.

Organized by International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the seminar discussed different modalities of the alternative dispute settlements including the existing Arbitration Act. "One of the aims of the seminar is to promote the alternative dispute settlement," said senior advocate and President of International Commission of Jurists Madhu Sharma. "Nepal has a long history of dispute settlement through negotiations."

ICJ seminar : Justice made easy

As informal process of dispute settlement is getting popular in the world, Nepal also needs to follow it. "Arbitration system needs to be implemented in the area of dispute settlement," said Sharma.

The seminar was participated by judges from various courts, senior advocates and junior lawyers. Four papers were presented during the seminar.

Chaired by Supreme Court Justice Laxman Aryal, two papers by advocate I.C. Sharma and Sudhir Shrestha were presented in the first day's meeting on Arbitration Act.

Presenting his paper advocate Sudhir Shrestha highlighted the major drawbacks of the Act requiring immediate amendment to avoid the problems that would arise in future under the present provisions. The act has uncontextually borrowed the definition of arbitral awards from the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1950 and other international convention.

"The act has been drafted with a negative attitude towards courts. The courts are generally not deprived to issues conservatory and interim of interlocutory orders in the matters of arbitration," said Shrestha in his paper.

Commenting on the paper, advocate N.D. Sharma defended the Arbitration Act stressing the need to first see the outcome of the act. "The process has begun and there is a need to see to its implementation," said Sharma.

Presenting paper on Arbitration and its execution, advocate Ishwori Chandra Sharma highlighted evolution of arbitration in Nepal and the world. "The arbitration act is necessary to cope with the global tradition," said Sharma. Presenting his opinion, advocate Bal Ram K.C pointed out the loopholes in the act.

Chaired by senior advocate Moti Kazi Sthapit, the second discussion session was full of debate. "The Arbitration Act is one of the best act prepared with the advice from all sectors," said Madhav Poudel, Chief of Judicial Training Center.

In the second day justice of the Supreme Court Top Bahadur Singh presented the alternative approach for the dispute settlement. "We have to encourage alternative approach for dispute settlement," said justice Singh in his paper.

Commenting on the paper presented by justice Singh, senior advocate Ganesh Raj Sharma explained the long Nepalese tradition of settling disputes and stressed the need to continue with the system before making any kind of amendment.

Advocate Bharat Raj Upreti presented the paper highlighting the weaknesses of arbitration act and the existing situation. The two day seminar concluded after adopting resolution which was presented by the Spokesman of the Supreme Court Kashi Raj Dahal.