#onlinearbitration&mediation

Arbitration, mediation, or consultation exemplify Alternative Conflict Resolution (ADR) procedures; to resolve conflicts without resorting to litigation. ADR methods are typically less expensive and quicker. They are becoming more common in cases that would otherwise go to court, such as high- profile labor disputes, divorce actions, and personal injury proceedings.

One of the key reasons that parties can favor ADR procedures to adversarial litigation is that, unlike adversarial litigation, ADR procedures are always constructive and allow the parties to consider each other's roles. ADR also encourages the sides to come up with more imaginative options that a judge would not be able to enforce legally.

Advantages of ADR in women related disputes.

Time Efficient

The idea that it typically takes much less time to achieve a final settlement than if the lawsuit went to trial is one of the advantages. An individual who is an authority in the subject area may even arbitrate or mediate the parties' conflict. In a typical trial containing complex and technical problems that few people outside of the related industry understand, a significant amount of time must be spent preparing the judge and jury only so they can make an educated decision. However, if the arbitrator has an experience in the subject area, much less time will be wasted on this, and the parties will be able to move on to the substantive problems of the case even faster.

Money Efficient

It often usually (but not always) costs considerably less money. This considerable time commitment often transforms into a significant financial investment. All parties may be forced to call specialist experts, who may demand exorbitant payments for their time

Autonomy- Furthermore, in the case of arbitration, the parties have much more autonomy in deciding which laws will be applicable to their dispute.

ADRs are being used in a growing number of situations, and the public has selected them for their simple and cost-effective advantages. Online Dispute Resolution and Gram Nyaylayas are two recent inventions in the field of alternative dispute resolution. These alternatives will expand ADR's reach in India. Mediation is expected to become the most effective in the coming years, as it promises a quicker resolution.

Mediation aids with recognizing the point at which the conflict occurred and the ways in which each side wishes it to be settled in some jurisdictions.Online Dispute Resolution and Gram Nyaylayas are two recent inventions in the field of

alternative dispute resolution

.

Disadvantages of ADR in women related disputes

It is often claimed that informal justice systems do not adequately protect women's rights. In various countries, the community leaders involved in informal dispute resolution are overwhelmingly older males, prompting criticism that “social hierarchies and inequalities are often reflected and reinforced” in dispute resolution systems.

This is especially troublesome if the emphasis on compromise and agreement leads to pressure on weaker parties (in this case, vulnerable women) to accept settlements that do not actually serve their best interests or may prevent them from acquiring their full legal rights.

While an increasing number of studies show that this is often the case, it is critical to understand the particulars of how different systems operate in different situations – especially for those considering whether or not to support various types of reforms aimed at helping the most vulnerable.

According to the Mediation Boards Act of 1987 and subsequent amendments, 8 women and men are legally obligated to use these processes to resolve a wide range of civil and criminal disputes, including assault, family disputes (including domestic violence), and more. primarily physical and often sexual violence), land and property disputes, and commercial transaction disputes, and to try to reach voluntary agreements before the cases are brought to a formal court of law.

Mediators seek to get to the "root cause" of the dispute and try to promote a mutually agreeable settlement that respects the interests of all disputing parties, according to the interest-based mediation procedure used by mediation boards. In contrast to rights, needs, or power-based approaches to conflict resolution, this method aims to be non-adversarial and collaborative.

The Potential for Gender Bias Power in Mediation

The parties to the mediation must start from equal positions of authority in order for the mediation to be successful. Economic, intellectual, physical, mental, and procedural power are all forms of power. However, many women are stuck in power imbalanced relationships, whether they are family, work-related, or contractual. Mediation in the face of these power imbalances calls into question the claim that mediation allows parties more control and self-determination than conventional lawsuits. The effect of power imbalances on mediation has received the most attention in the context of intimate relationships. The relationship between an abused woman and her abuser, for example, revolves around themes.

of power and control. The abuser uses a variety of tactics to create and maintain control over his victim throughout their relationship, ranging from isolation and mental and financial abuse to intimidation, coercion, threats, and physical violence. Furthermore, the abuser will regularly blame the victim for his abuse, leading her to think that if she conforms to his expectations, the abuse will cease. In an abusive relationship, the abuser has all of the power: legal, psychological, physical, and mental. It's impossible to expect him to give up that authority during the mediation process. As her abuser glares at her from across the table, the abused woman's concern for her physical safety may prevent her from feeling comfortable mediating.

The victim may feel pressured to settle or negotiate, believing that if she lowers her demands, the abuse (this time, the abuse associated with the mediation process) will stop. The abuser may change his demands repeatedly during negotiations to show the victim that he still has the authority to shape the agreement, and thus her life, according to his wishes. And here the objective of mediation gets fully destroyed.

When there is a fear of getting attacked in the process of mediation then what is the significance of it.When the victim needs to compromise out of fear then what is the use of this so-called mediation process.When the victim doesn’t get the chance to mediate fairly, then how can be this process useful. This is denying the

human and natural rights of women

Conclusion

Instead, the aim of mediation is to find areas of agreement between the parties; indignation is seen as unnecessary when the goal is to reach a consensus. However, the start of mediation may be the first time the woman in the mediation has been able to express her displeasure at her husband, her boss, or her adversary. When conventional societal prohibitions on female anger are combined with mediation's devaluation of anger, it's possible that mediators could silence women who are expressing these feelings for the first time, preventing women from achieving their goals through mediation.

Judges are responsible for ensuring that women are treated equally in mediation. First, judges, like all system actors, must be aware of the possibility of gender bias not only in their own courts, but also in the systems to which they refer female litigants. It is critical to receive training on women's issues, particularly the difficulties that mediation can cause for some women.