Dispute Resolution in Pluralistic Societies

The Conciliation and Arbitration Boards in Canada (CAB) held 40-hour training sessions for all its members in February and March of this year in Toronto and Vancouver, respectively.

As part of the mediation training week, CAB hosted two educational events in Toronto and Vancouver that brought together judiciary, academia, the legal community, members of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) community, civil society, and leadership of the Ismaili Community, including members of the Conciliation and Arbitration Boards in Canada. The objectives of these two events were to share the multiple voices around the issues of dispute resolution in pluralistic societies, and to give CAB members and its other external partners an on-the-ground reality of how to enhance the various platforms available to foster access to justice in Canada.

In Toronto, a panel presentation entitled “Dispute Resolution in Pluralistic Societies” featured Professor Anna Korteweg and Ms Shalini Konanur, and was moderated by Professor Zulfikar Hirji.

Professor Anna Korteweg from the University of Toronto co-edited the book, Debating Sharia: Islam, Gender, Politics, and Family Law Arbitration. Professor Korteweg’s current research focuses on citizenship, constructions of national belonging in public and parliamentary debates, and immigrant integration. As Executive Director of the South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario (SALCO), Shalini Konanur leads a community legal clinic funded by Legal Aid Ontario that provides legal advice and representation to low-income South Asians in the Greater Toronto Area. Professor Zulfikar Hirji is currently an Associate Professor at York University in the Department of Anthropology where he teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in Islam and Muslim societies.

The panel members gave thought-provoking presentations regarding faith-based arbitration and provided the audience with their uncensored opinions regarding the debate on incorporating sharia law that the legal community and society addressed in 2005. The presentations provided a depth of understanding and educated guests on the themes in the debate. Konanur’s research was derived from her fieldwork and shed light on practical issues. In the panel debate following the presentations, Professor Hirji stimulated a healthy and controversial discussion. His thought-provoking questions struck at the core of issues under discussion.

In Vancouver, the panel presentation focused on “Access to Justice in Pluralistic Societies.” The panelists comprised of Professor Michelle LeBaron, the Director of the Program on Dispute Resolution at the University of British Columbia, and David Merner, the Executive Director of the Dispute Resolution Office at British

Columbia’s Ministry of Attorney General. The discussion was moderated by Aiyaz Alibhai, a lawyer and a member on the National CAB.

The issue of access to justice is being extensively debated by Federal and Provincial Governments, the Judiciary, and other stakeholders.

The focal point of Professor LeBaron’s remarks was consistent with her academic research and scholarly writing regarding the link between conflict and culture. She stated that in the diversity of culture and the energy of conflict, we can find bridges that connect us across the differences of our lived experiences. Furthermore, she noted that the search for meaning is a central human need. In order for the dispute resolution system to be meaningful and bring about social change, it must be understandable by participants and they must be able to engage in the process. In her view, the current system tends to abstract the conflict and render the parties as mere spectators in their own conflict. She further stated that the dispute resolution system must adapt and take into account the particular experiences of the parties and give them control over the process and not treat them as a means toward an outcome to be delivered by others.

David Merner discussed the new Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) implemented by the Government of British Columbia. Noting that the demand for justice services is rising, he highlighted that a significant number of people with serious problems cannot get access to the courts. Merner stated that the new CRT builds on the past experiences with the Small Claims Court Pilot Project and will incorporate simplified trials and mediation right into the justice process. In his view, dispute resolution is about communication and the Internet is an excellent tool for this process. He concluded that ODR was focused on resolution of disputes with less formality, more collaboratively, and more quickly by avoiding adversarial framing of disputes. Alibhai took the occasion of moderating the discussion to comment that within the CAB system successful outcomes have resulted from focusing on the individual circumstances of the parties and on the ethics of empathy, empowerment, and self-reliance. The conciliation and mediation process is intended to empower participants so that they can take ownership over their disputes and craft mutually agreeable durable solutions.

Both events were a successful example of an opportunity to enhance our understanding of pluralism, including legal pluralism. The events demonstrated openness and passionate dialogue and the experiences of diverse audiences, including academia, government, and those engaged on the ground.

Photo: Akber Dewji