
SC calls for mediation first in litigation
The Supreme Court has called for embracing a pro-mediation approach across the judiciary, particularly at the earliest stages of litigation.
In a detailed four-page order authored by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, the top court stressed the importance of sensitising judges and lawyers to identify cases appropriate for mediation and to ensure their timely referral.
"Judges and lawyers must be sensitised to identify cases fit for mediation and facilitate their referral in a timely manner. Litigants, likewise, should be encouraged to consider mediation and other methods of alternative dispute resolution as a first resort, rather than a last recourse," the order states.
The directive came during the hearing of a family dispute that the court, on March 15, referred to mediation. Sara Tarrar, an advocate of the high court and an accredited mediator notified by the Law and Justice Division under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, was appointed as the mediator.
According to the order, both parties actively participated in the mediation process and ultimately reached a settlement. Tarrar submitted her report, along with a copy of the settlement agreement dated May 5, 2025, which was officially recorded by the court.
Counsel for both sides requested that a decree be issued in line with the agreed settlement.
A three-member bench of the apex court, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, heard the matter. The case involved a challenge to a family court decision that had increased monthly maintenance for each daughter from Rs30,000 to Rs150,000, in addition to educational expenses. The father had contested the order in appellate courts, where his case was dismissed. He later approached the SC in June 2021.
After remaining pending for more than three and a half years, the bench finally referred the matter to mediation, leading to a successful resolution.
In its order, the SC underlined that mediation was "not merely an alternative to litigation; it is a paradigm shift in dispute resolution, built on the principles of collaboration, confidentiality, and party autonomy".
Unlike traditional litigation, the order said, mediation empowers parties to shape the outcomes of their disputes through neutral facilitation rather than adversarial judgment.
"It offers a nonadversarial framework that empowers parties to shape the outcome of their own disputes, guided by a neutral facilitator rather than a judicial determination." The order highlighted several advantages of mediation, including cost-effectiveness, speed, reduced burden on the judiciary and greater privacy for the disputing parties. Its informal setting fosters open dialogue and solution-focused negotiation.
"The flexibility of the process allows parties to explore creative, interest-based solutions that a court of law may not be empowered to grant," the order notes. "These benefits were remarkably evident in the present case. What years of litigation could not resolve, mediation achieved within weeks."
The court observed that earlier recourse to mediation often results in substantial savings of time and cost, reduces emotional tolls and helps restore relationships.
The order cited the statutory framework established under the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2017, and further supported by various provincial legislations.
In addition, the ADR Mediation Accreditation (Eligibility) Rules, 2023 and Mediation Practice Direction (Civil) Rules, 2023, have consolidated mediation's place in the judicial landscape as a mainstream tool for dispute resolution.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Express Tribune
4 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Fazlur Rehman's stance on child marriage bill sparks online criticism
Listen to article Maulana Fazlur Rehman's announcement to protest against the child marriage bill has sparked widespread discussion online. President Asif Ali Zardari on Friday signed the Islamabad Capital Territory Child Marriage Restraint Bill into law, setting the minimum age for marriage at 18 years. The new legislation criminalises the solemnisation of marriages where either the boy or girl is underage. In response, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman on Saturday announced a nationwide protest against the government's proposed legislation aimed at restricting child marriages, arguing that the bill contradicts Islamic teachings and threatens Pakistan's religious identity. Many users criticised the move, questioning why such a stance was being taken on an issue concerning child protection. Numerous users criticised religious leaders for opposing a law aimed at protecting minors. One user remarked that these groups have never protested against child abuse but are enraged by the child marriage bill. READ MORE: NA passes bill criminalising child marriage Photo: ScreenGrab Photo: ScreenGrab Others emphasised the importance of confronting religious conservatives who are using religion to justify child marriages, warning that failure to resist would only embolden such views further. Several voices on social media called for organised counter-protests by the rational and progressive segments of society to stand up against the protesters opposing the bill. Photo: ScreenGrab Users argued that defending children's rights should be a non-negotiable priority and expressed strong support for the new law, highlighting that early marriage often leads to severe health, psychological, and social consequences for children, especially girls. READ MORE: Child marriages plague impoverished girls Under the new law that banned the underage marriage of boys and girls alike, violators face up to one year in prison and a fine of Rs100,000, while a man over 18 marrying an underage girl may face rigorous imprisonment of up to three years. Courts are also empowered to intervene and protect the identities of those reporting such cases. Despite the bill's clear intent to safeguard children from exploitation, it has faced fierce opposition from religious political parties and the Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) . The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) strongly criticised the CII for raising objections to the recently passed Islamabad Capital Territory Child Marriage Restraint Bill, calling the move a serious attempt to hinder vital child protection legislation. READ MORE: CII takes exception to child marriage bill Speaking at a press conference in Peshawar, Fazl claimed the proposed law is being influenced by foreign agendas. 'Pakistan's identity is Islam, and that identity is under threat,' he said, warning that the bill undermines the country's core values. Fazl accused the government of drafting the legislation based on demands from international bodies like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the United Nations (UN), rather than adhering to Islamic principles. 'The UN's stance is being used to pass laws against early-age marriages. The President is also refusing to sign the religious seminaries bill,' he added. The JUI-F leader criticised the proposed law as violating the Quran and Sunnah, asserting that such moves weaken democratic processes and inadvertently strengthen extremist narratives. 'Democracy is losing its case, and such actions are empowering the narratives of armed groups,' Fazl warned.


Business Recorder
14 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Rs10bn defamation case against IK put off
LAHORE: A sessions court adjourned the proceedings in the Rs 10 billion defamation case of Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif after the lawyer of former PTI chairman Imran Khan did not conclude cross-examination of Shehbaz Sharif. Earlier Shahbaz Sharif and his counsel appeared before the court through via a video link. Responding to the questions of Imran Khan, the prime minister clarified that he considers himself a public servant which is why he used the term 'public service' in first paragraph of his affidavit. He rejected the allegation that every word of his affidavit was false or that the affidavit itself was untrue. He also rejected an allegation that the charges leveled against Imran Khan in his affidavit were false. PM Shehbaz also told the court that he did not remember if the Supreme Court issued its verdict in the Panama Papers case on April 20, 2017. To another query of the defendant's counsel, he said it was incorrect to suggest that he filed the defamation suit against the PTI former chairman after the Supreme Court's decision in the Panama Papers case. Shehbaz also rejected a claim that he did not attach a receipt of sending a legal notice to the defendant before filing the suit. He stated that it was also untrue that no notice was served to the defendant prior to filing the suit. In his defamation suit filed in 2017, Shehbaz said Imran Khan leveled baseless allegations on him. He sought a decree for recovery of Rs10 billion as compensation from the defendant for publication of defamatory content. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025


Business Recorder
14 hours ago
- Business Recorder
IHC tax bench's order: All SOE references be routed thru ADRC
ISLAMABAD: The special tax division bench of the Islamabad High Court has ordered that all tax references filed by state-owned enterprises shall be referred to the Alternate Dispute Resolution Committee under Section 134A of the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001. The state-owned enterprises contended that those tax reference applications which were instituted prior to the enactment of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024 ought to be adjudicated by the Court in accordance with the procedure applicable at the time of filing of the tax reference application. However, the counsel for the Commissioner, Osama Shahid (Advocate) placed reliance upon a recent judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan wherein a case filed in the year 2023 (i.e., prior to the enactment of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024) was referred to the mandatory alternate dispute resolution committee under Section 134A of the Ordinance. In light of the Supreme Court's judgment, the Islamabad High Court referred to matters to alternate dispute resolution committee. Tax dispute: IHC grants conditional relief to SOE Earlier, the Islamabad Bench of the ATIR had referred several appeals filed by and against state-owned enterprises to the alternate dispute resolution committee. The Commissioner Inland Revenue (Appeals), Islamabad has also refused to adjudicate any appeal filed by a state-owned enterprise in light of the Supreme Court's judgment. It appears that the only recourse available to a state-owned enterprise in case of a tax dispute is the alternate dispute resolution mechanism provided under Section 134A of the Ordinance regardless of whether the dispute initiated prior to or after the enactment of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024. It is pertinent to note that several state-owned enterprises have also assailed the vires of the Tax Laws Amendment Act, 2024 before the Islamabad High Court by filing writ petitions which are currently sub judice. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025