Alternative Dispute Resolution

Not published yet

አለም ዐቀፍ፣ የግልግል የዕርቅና የሽምግልና ተግባራት መሠረታዊ አላማ፣ ከተለያዩ  ሀገራት ዜጐች ወይም ኩባንያዎች ጋር የንግድ ግንኙነት በመሠረቱ ወገኖች መካከል የሚያጋጥም የንግድ አለመግባባትን ከመደበኛው የፍርድ ሂደት ወይም ሥነ-ሥርዓት ውጪ በገላጋዮች፣ በአስታራቂዎች ወይም በሽምጋዮች እንደተዋዋይ ወገኖች ፍላጐት ለመፍታት ጥረት የሚደረግበት አለም ዓቀፋዊ ይዘት ያለውን አሠራር ለማስፈን ነው፡፡

ግልግሉ፣ አስታራቂነቱ ወይም ሽምግልናው ውጤት እንዲኖረው፣ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች  አስቀድሞ ተቀባይነት ያገኘ በፅሁፍ የተደረገ ስምምነት ወይም ልማዳዊ አሠራር ሊኖር ይገባል፡፡ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች አስቀድመው ባልተስማሙበት አኳኋን የሚደረግ የግልግል፣ የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና  አሰራር፣ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ሙሉ ፈቃድ ካልሆነና በፅሁፍ፣ ጥያቄው ካልቀረበላቸው በቀር ይህንን ተግባር ለማከናወን የተመሠረቱ ተቋማት ጉዳዩን ሊያዩት አይችሉም፡፡ በመሆኑም በዓለም አቀፍ ደረጃ ተቀባይነት ያለው የግልግልም ሆነ የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና አሠራር ከሚጠይቃቸው አስገዳጅ ቅድመ ሁኔታዎች መካከል በተዋዋይ ወገኖች የውል ስምምነት ውስጥ የተካተተ ወይም በልዩ የመገናኛ ዘዴዎች አማካኝነት የተደረገ የጽሁፍ ስምምነት መኖር አንዱ እና ተቀዳሚው ጉዳይ እንደሆነ ተደርጐ በአለም አቀፍ የግልግል፣ የዕርቅና የሽምግልና ህግጋት ተደንግጐ ይገኛል፡፡

በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ስምምነት መሠረት የሚሠጥ የግልግል ውሳኔበህግ በተገለጸ ክልከላ ካልሆነ በቀር፤ ምንጊዜም ቢሆን ተፈፃሚነት አለው፡፡ ስለሆነም፣ አለም ዐቀፍ የግልግል፣ የዕርቅና የሽምግልና አሠራር በአለም ዐቀፍ ንግድ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ስምምነት መሠረት የሚቋቋም ወይም በስምምነቱ መሠረት የሚፈጠር፣ የንግድ አለመግባባቶች የሚፈቱበት ስርዓት ነዉ ተብሎ ሊገለጽ ይችላል፡፡ በአጠቃላይ አገላለፅ፣ የተዋዋይ ወገኖች ስምምነት ውጤት ሆኖ ተዋዋዮቹ ያለ-መግባባት ቢኖር ጉዳዩን ወደ መደበኛ ፍርድ ቤት መውሰድ ሳያስፈልግ እነርሱ በመረጡት መንገድ በግልግል፣ በዕርቅ ወይም በሽምግልና ለመፍታት በውላቸው ምስረታ ወቅት አስቀድመው የሚያደርጉት ውል ሲሆን የፍርድ ቤትን አሰራር የሚያስቀር አማራጭ ስምምነት ነው፡፡ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች በዚህ ስምምነታቸው ውስጥ በአደረጉት የተለየ ውል መሠረት ጉዳዩ እንደአስፈላጊነቱ በገላጋዮች በአስታራቂዎች ወይም በሸምጋዮች አማካኝነት እንዲያልቅ ከመወሰን በተጨማሪ ግልግሉ… በየትኛው ሕግ ወይም ደንብ መሠረት መታየት እንዳለበት አስቀድመው መወሰን ይችላሉ፡፡ በተመሳሳይ ሁኔታም ገላጋይ ተቋማትን ወይም ግለሰቦችን አስቀድሞ መምረጥና በዕነዚህ ተቋማት የሚሰጥ ውሳኔ የመጨረሻ እንዲሆን ሊስማሙ ይችላሉ፡፡

የዚህ ምዕራፍ ተቀዳሚ አላማም ዓለም አቀፍ የግልግል የዕርቅና፣ የሽምግልና አሰራርን በማመልከት ጉዳዩን የሚመለከቱ ሕጐችንና ደንቦችን በማስተዋወቅ የግልግል የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና አለም አቀፋዊ  አህጐራዊ እና ብሄራዊ ሕግጋትን መሠረት በማድረግ የተቋቋሙ የግልግል ተቋማትን ለአብነት ያህል በመጥቀስ በሀገራችን የግልግል ስርአት የሚዘረጋበትን አሰራር በሚመለከት የተወሰነ የመግባቢያ ሀሳብ ለመፈንጠቅ ነው በጥናቱ የተካተቱት ተቃማትና ህግጋት፤ ከአላቸው ዓለም አቀፋዊ አህጉራዊና ብሄራዊ ተቀባይነት ወይም ተፈፃሚነት አንፃር ለጥናቱ ጠቀሜታ ይኖራቸዋል የተባሉት ዕንጂ በጉዳዩ አግባብነት ያላቸው ማዕከላትንና ሕግጋትን በአጠቃላይ ለመዳሰስ የፅሁፍ አላማ አይደለም፡፡ ስለሆነም ከዓለም አቀፍ፤ ከአህጉራዊና ከብሄራዊ የግልግል ተቋማትና ህግጋት መካከል አብነት ሆነው ያገለገሉትን እና በማገልገል ላይ ያሉትን ብቻ በመምረጥ ስለጉዳዮ ጠቅላላ ዕይታ እንዲኖር በማሰብ ቀጥሎ በሚቀርቡ ንዑሳን ክፍሎች ለማካተት  ተሞክሮአል፡፡

አጠቃላይ  

የአማራጭ አለመግባባት መፍቻ ሰርአት ጽንሠ ሃሳብ አለመግባባቶችን በፍርድ ቤቶች አማካኝነት ከመፍታት ይልቅ እንደ ድርድር፣ እርቅ፣ ሽምግልና ወይም ግልግል እና የመሳሰሉት ሌሎች መሰል ማህበረሰባዊ እሴቶችን በመጠቀም በግለሰቦች ፣ በመንግስታት ወይም በድርጅቶች መካከል የሚያጋጥሙ ቅራኔዎችን መፍታት ይቻላል በሚል መርህ ላይ የተመሰረተ ነዉ፡፡ በመሆኑም፣በዚህ አጭር ጽሁፍ ላይ ትኩረት የሚሰጣቸው ቃላት እና ሀረጎች ማለትም ‹ድርድር›፣ ‹ዕርቅ›፣ ‹ሽምግልና›፣ ‹ግልግል› ጥቅም ላይ እንዲዉሉ የተደረጉ ሲሆን አንባቢዉ አንዱ ከሌላዉ ቃል ያለዉን ልዩነት መረዳት ይችል ዘንድ ለቃላቱ የተሰጠዉን ፍቺ ከዚህ ቀጥሎ ለማቅረብ ይሞከራል፡፡

“ድርድር” /Negotiation/

የ“ድርድር” /Negotiation/ ዋነኛ ዓላማ አለመግባባቶችን በንግግር ወይም በውይይት መፍታት ላይ ያለመ የማግባቢያ ዘዴ መሆኑ ነው፡፡ ድርድሩ ለግል ወይም ለጋራ ጥቅም ወይም የተለያዩ ፍላጐቶችን ለማርካት ታቅዶ ተደራዳሪዎች ራሳቸው በሚገኙበት ወይም በወኪሎቻቸው በሚወከሉበት የድርድር መድረክ ይከናወናል፡፡

“ድርድር” በንግድ ወይም ለትርፍ ባልተቋቋሙ ድርጅቶች እንዲሁም በመንግስት መ/ቤቶች መካከል ከሚያጋጥሙ አለመግባባቶች አንስቶ የግል አለመግባባትን  በሰላም በመፍታት ጭምር ጥቅም ላይ ሲውል የቆየ የአማራጭ ቅራኔ አፈታት ስርዓት ሲሆን በተደራዳሪዎች ላይ የሚያስከትለው አስገዳጅ ተፈፃሚነት  የለውም፡፡  

የድርድር ተቀዳሚ  አላማ ተቃራኒ ሃሣቦችን በአንድ ጠረጴዛ ዙሪያ በማቅረብ ማወያየት ወይም ማነጋገር ሲሆን ተደራዳሪ ወገኖች እንደአስፈላጊነቱ የሚጋብዙት  አደራዳሪ ሊኖር ይችላል፡፡ ነገር ግን ተጋባዡ አደራዳሪ ምንም አይነት አስገዳጅ ሀሣብ መስጠት አይችልም፡፡ ተደራዳሪዎቹ ራሳቸው ባመነጩት መደራደሪያ ሃሣብ መሠረት ድርድሩ ይከናወናል፡፡ ስምምነት ላይ እንዲደርሱ ጥረት በማድረግ፣ድርድሩ ከተሳካ የመግባቢያ ሠነድ ተዘጋጅቶ እንዲፈርሙበት ይደረጋል፡፡ ሰነዱ ተደራዳሪዎቹ በሚስማሙበት ቦታ ይቀመጣል፣ የሃሣብ መግለጫ  እንደሆነ ተደርጐም ይቆጠራል፡፡ አንዳንድ ግዜም እንደ ተዋዋዮቹ ፈቃድ የድርድር ስምምነት ውጤት ሆኖ ይፀድቃል፡፡ ድርድሩ ባልተሳካ ጊዜ ግን ተደራዳሪዎቹ  በመረጡት ሌላ የማግባቢያ ስርዓት አለመግባባት የተፈጠረበት ጉዳይ እንዲታይ ይደረጋል፡:በልማድ እንደሚያጋጥመው ነገሮችን በድርድር መፍታት ካልተቻለ በሽምግልና ወይም በዕርቅ ለመፍታት ሙከራ ይደረጋል፡፡

“ሽምግልና” /Mediation/

በሕግ አነጋገር አማራጭ የቅራኔ መፍቻ ስርዓት ነው ተብሎ የሚታወቅ በሁለት ወይም ከዚያ በላይ በሆኑ ወገኖች የሚያጋጥሙ አለመግባባቶች የሚፈቱበት ስርዓት ነው፡፡ ከድርድር የሚለይበት አንዱና ዋነኛው ነጥብ በጉዳዩ ላይ ቀጥተኛ ተሣትፎ የሚኖረው  ሶስተኛ ወገን /ሸምጋይ/ በመኖሩና ተቋማዊ በመሆኑ ነው፡፡ የሶስተኛው ወገን ሚና  ለግልግል ሁኔታዎችን በማመቻቸት ላይ ያተኮረ ሲሆን እንደ አስፈላጊነቱ ግን ተደራዳሪዎቹ ራሣቸው ባመኑበት መደራደሪያ ሃሣብ ተቀራርበው እንዲነጋገሩ የተቻለውን ያህል ጥረት ያደርጋል&፡ ፍትሀዊ የማግባቢያ ሃሣብ ያቀርባል፤ ውይይቱን በመምራት እና በመሸምገል ድርድሩ አቅጣጫ እንዲይዝ ያደርጋል፡፡“ሽምግልና”፣በድርድር ሂደት የማይስተዋሉ እንደ አደረጃጀት /Structure/፤የጊዜ ሰሌዳ ተለዋዋጭነት /Filexibility/ ባህሪያት እንዲሁም የሚመራባቸዉ ደንቦች አሉት ፡፡ ስለሆነም ተሸማጋዮቹ በሽምጋዩ አደረጃጀት በተያዘላቸው የጊዜ ሰሌዳ እና በተወሰነ የአሰራር ደንብ መሠረት አለመግባባቶቻቸውን እንዲፈቱ ይደረጋል፡፡  “ሽምግልና” እንደ መርህ የአስገዳጅነት ውጤት ባይኖረውም፣ አንዳንድ ጊዜ ግን ባለጉዳዮች አለመግባባቶቻቸውን በሽምግልና ለመጨረስ ያደረጉት ውል ካለ በውሉ መሠረት በሽምጋዮች የሚቀርበው የማግባቢያ  ሃሳብ ውሳኔ  ሆኖ  የሚወሰድበት  አጋጣሚ አለ፡፡ ሽምግልና  ውጤት  ካላስገኘ  በቀጣይነት  አለመግባባትን   ለመፍታት ጥቅም ላይ የሚውለው ዘዴ ዕርቅ ይሆናል፡፡

“ዕርቅ”፣ /Concilation/፡-  

ተዋዋይ ወገኖች በወቅቱ ወይም ገና ለወደፊቱ በሚያፈሯቸው ጥቅሞች ላይ አለመግባባት ቢያጋጥም አለመግባባቱን በሶስተኛ ወገን ሙያዊ ወይም የቴክኒክ  ዕገዛ ለመፍታት በሚያደርጉት  ስምምነት መሠረት የሚከናወን ሌላው አማራጭ የቅራኔ አፈታት ስልት ነው፡፡ አስታራቂው፣ አለመግባባቱን ለመፍታት ባለጉዳዮችን በተናጠል በማነጋገር የማስታረቂያ ሰነድ ማቅረብ ይጠበቅበታል፡፡ ከሽምግልና ፣”ዕርቅ”  የሚለይበት አንዱ መሠረታዊ ነጥብ አስታራቂው ሁለቱንም ባለጉዳዮች ግንባር ለግንባር እንዲያገናኝ የማይጠበቅበት መሆኑ ነው፡፡ ነገር ግን እያንዳንዱን ተዋዋይ በእያንዳንዱ ጉዳይ ላይ በተናጠል ማነጋገር እና  የደረሰበትን ለባለጉዳዮቹ መግለፅ  እንዲሁም በሚያገኘው ግብዓት አለመግባባቱን መፍታት  የሚያስችል የዕርቅ ሃሣብ (proposal) በፅሁፍ አዘጋጅቶ በማቅረብ ላይ የተመሠረተ ግዴታ አለበት፡፡አስታራቂው በሚያቀርበው ሰነድ ላይ ባለጉዳዮቹ ከተስማሙ በሰነዱ ላይ እንዲፈራረሙበት ይደረጋል፡፡ ስለሆነም በሰነዱ ላይ የሰፈሩትን ግዴታዎች  እንዲፈፅሙ ይገደዳሉ፡፡ በዚህ ረገድ፣ በተለይም የዕርቅ ተግባር በውጤት ሲታይ አስገዳጅ ተፈፃሚነትን  ስለሚያስከትል  አስቀድመን ከተመለከትናቸው ከድርድር እና ከሽምግልና የተሻለ ዉጤታማ ነዉ፡፡ በአንፃሩም ደግሞ በግልግል ዳኝነት እንደሚታየው  የፍ/ቤቶችን አሰራር ስለማይከተል እና የዕርቅ ሰነዱ በተዋዋዮች ተቀባይነት ከማግኘቱ በፊት የሚደረግለት ህጋዊ ጥበቃ  ስለማይኖር፣ “ዕርቅ”  ከግልግል  ያነሰ ተቀባይነት አለው ተብሎ ይገመታል፡፡  

“ግልግል”/Arbitration/፡-

ተዋዋይ ወገኖች አለመግባባቶቻቸውን በግልግል ዳኝነት በሚሰጥ ውሳኔ ለመፍታት ተስማምተው ጉዳዮቻቸውን ከፍ/ቤት አሠራር ውጭ እንዲታይላቸው ለግልግል አካላት የሚያቀርቡበት ስልት ነው፡፡ አስቀድመን ካየናቸው የቅራኔ አፈታት ዘዴዎች የላቀ ተቀባይነት ያለው፣ በግልግል የሚሰጥ ዳኝነት መሆኑ ይታወቃል፡፡ “ግልግል”፣ ተመራጭ ከሚሆንባቸው ምክንያቶች መካከል በባለጉዳዮች ዘንድ ተፈፃሚነት ሊኖረው የሚችል ውሳኔ መስጠት የሚያስችል ስርዓት ከመሆኑም በተጨማሪ በአሠራሩ ከፍ/ቤቶች ሥራ አካሄድ ጋር ተመሳሳይነት ያለዉ የህግ ስርአት  በመሆኑ ነዉ፡፡

በግልግል ዳኝነት ስራ አካሄድ፡ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች በሚደረግ ስምምነት መሰረት የሚመረጡ        ገላጋይ ዳኞች የሚሰየሙበት የግልግል ችሎት መኖር፤ የአመልካች እና ተጠሪ እንደአስፈላጊነቱ መቅረብ፤ እንደገላጋይ ዳኞቹ ፍላጐት ማስረጃዎችን መመርመር፤ ምስክሮችን መስማት፤ ሙያዊ ማብራሪያ መቀበል እንዲሁም ጊዜያዊ የዕግድ ትዕዛዞችን ወይም ብይኖችን መስጠት፤ ወይም በፍ/ቤቶች በኩል ማሰጠት እና በመጨረሻም አለመግባባቱ የተመሰረተበትን ጉዳይ መርምሮ የግልግል ዳኝነት ዉሳኔ በተወሰነ የግዜ ገደብ ዉስጥ መስጠት የተለመዱ ተግባራት ናቸው፡፡

በዚህ ክፍል የተመለከቱት ቃላት ፍቺ፣ ከጽሁፉ ይዘት አኳያ የተሰጠ እንጂ የቃላቱን ጽንሰ ሐሣብ ሙሉ በሙሉ የሚያብራራ ባለመሆኑ ጉዳዩን የሚመለከቱ ሌሎች ጽሁፎችን መመልከቱ ጠቃሚ ይሆናል፡፡   

ይህ በእንዲህ እንዳለ፣ ቀጥሎ በሚቀርበዉ ጽሁፍ ቃላቱን እንደአስፈላጊነቱ በተለዋዋጭነት ጥቅም ላይ ለማዋል ተሞክሮአል፡፡ በተለይም፣ አለመግባባቶችን ከመደበኛ ፍርድ ቤት አሰራር ዉጭ ለመፍታት በአመዛኙ ጥቅም ላይ ዉሎ የሚገኘዉ አለምአቀፋዊ አሰራር ‹ግልግል› (Arbitration) በመሆኑ የጽሁፉ ትኩረት ግልግል በሚለው ጽንሰ ሃሳብ ላይ እንዲመሰረት ሆኗል፡፡ ስለሆነም፣በዚህ አጭር ፅሁፍ ዉስጥ ‹ግልግል› በሚል አገላለጽ የተሰጠ ማብራሪያ እንደ አስፈላጊነቱ፣በዕርቅና በሽምግልና ተግባራት ላይም ተፈፃሚነት ሊኖረዉ እንደሚችል ማስታወሱ ተገቢ ይሆናል፡፡

ስለ ዓለም አቀፍ ግልግል፣ ዕርቅና ሽምግልና አፈፃፀም

የዓለም አቀፍ የግልግል የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና አሠራር ዋና መገለጫ ነዉ ተብሎ የሚነገረዉ መሰረታዊ ጉዳይ፣ ክንውኑ የሚመራው በተዋዋይ ወገኖች አስቀድሞ በጽሁፍ  በተደረገ ወይም አለመግባባቱ ከተከሰተ በኃላ ጉዳዩን በግልግል፤ በእርቅ ወይም በሽምግልና ለመፍታት በሚደረግ  የውል ስምምነት ላይ የተመሰረተ  ከመሆኑ አንጻር የሚነገረዉ  አብይ ቁም ነገር ነዉ፡፡ የተዋዋይ ወገኖች የተሟላና በነጻነት የሚሰጥ ፈቃደኝነት ወይም ስምምነት ለግልግል፣ ለእርቅ ፣ወይም ለሽምግልና ሥራ አፈጻጸም እንደ መሠረታዊ ቅድመ ሁኔታ ተደርጎ ይወሰዳል፡፡ የገላጋይ፤ አስታራቂ ወይም አሸማጋይ ተቋማት ማንነትም ሆነ የገላጋዮችን ቁጥር አስቀድሞ በውል መወሰን ተገቢ ይሆናል፡፡ ገላጋዮችን በመምረጥ ረገድ እንደተዋዋይ ወገኖች ፍላጐት ከሁለት የታወቁ ዓለም አቀፋዊ  አሠራሮች  አንዱን መምረጥ ይቻላል፡፡ ይኼውም፡- 1ኛው አሠራር ለዚሁ አላማ በተቋቋሙ ዓለም አቀፋዊ የግልግል ተቋማት አማካኝነት የግልግል ተግባሩ እንዲከናወን አለመግባባት የተፈጠረበትን ጉዳይ ለተቋማቱ ማቅረብ ሲሆን፣ ሌላዉ  አማራጭ ደግሞ ተዋዋዮቹ በሚያደርጉት የጋራ ስምምነት ለጊዜው ለዚሁ ተግባር ሲባል በሚያቋቁሟቸው ጊዜያዊ ገላጋዮች አማካኝነት አለመግባባቱ እንዳስፈላጊነቱ  በግልግል ፣ በእርቅ ወይም በሸምግልና እንዲያልቅ የሚደረግ  አሰራር  ነዉ፡፡

የግልግል፣ የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና ስርዓት ተመራጭነት እንዲኖረው ከሚያደርጉት ነገሮች መካከል አንዱና ዋነኛው ጉዳይም ተዋዋይ ወገኖች በመረጡት ገላጋይ አስታራቂ ወይም ሽማግሌ የሚታዩበት  የተጠቀሰው አይነት አሰራር መከተሉን ነው፡፡ ይህ አይነቱ አሰራር  ደግሞ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች ራሳቸው ፈቅደው ባላቋቋሟቸውና በማያውቋቸው መደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች በሚሰጥ ውሳኔ እንዳይገደዱ ስለሚያደርግ  ተመራጭነቱ የጐላ ይሆናል ፡፡ በዚህ ረገድ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች ተቋማቱን መምረጥ ብቻ ሳይሆን ገላጋይ ዳኞችን፤አሰታራቂዎችን ወይም ሸምጋዮችን የመሰየም፣ ዳኞቹ፣ አሰታራቂዎቹ ወይም ሸምጋዮቹ የሚሰሩባቸዉ ተቋማት፣ ሊጠቀሙባቸዉ የሚገቧቸውንም ህጐች የመምረጥ ዕድል ስለሚሰጣቸው በመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች በሚሰራበት ብሄራዊ ህግ መሰረት እንዲዳኙ አይገደዱም ፡፡

እነዚህ ጉዳዮች በአንድ ላይ ተጣምረው በገላጋዮች የሚሰጡ ውሳኔዎች በተዋዋይ  ወገኖች ዘንድ የታመኑ  እንዲሆኑና ተቀባይነት እንዲኖራቸው ይረዳሉ፡፡

በዘመናችን በመካሄድ ላይ ባለው ዘርፈ- ብዙ የንግድ እንቅስቃሴ በተለይ፤ የግልግል፤ የእርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና አሠራር ተቀባይነት እያገኘ መጥቷል፡፡ ንግድ በባህሪው የተለያዩ ወገኖችን ተሳትፎ የሚጠይቅ እንደመሆኑና የተለያዩ ዜግነት ያላቸው ግለሰቦች ወይም የንግድ ኩባንያዎች የሚገናኙበት ኢኮኖሚያዊ  እንቅስቃሴ በመሆኑ፣ በንግድ ሂደት የሚያጋጥሙ አለመግባባቶችን የሚዳኝ ወይም የሚሸመግል ገለልተኛ አካል እንዲኖርና በሚሰጥ የግልግል ወይም የሸምግልና ውሳኔ ለመገዛት ቅድመ ስምምነት ማድረግ በብዙዎች ዘንድ ተቀባይነት ያገኘ የውዴታ ግዴታ ነው፡፡ይህንን አለምአቀፋዊ ፍላጎት ለማሳካት እንዲሁም የንግዱን ህብረተሰብ ኢኮኖሚያዊ ትስስር ከዘመናዊዉ ነባራዊ የንግድ እንቅስቃሴ አንጻር ለመምራት እንዲቻል፣ እንደ አሸን እየተበራከቱ የመጡ ዓለም አቀፋዊ  የንግድ ግንኙነቶች ከመኖራቸው ጐን ለጐን ቁጥራቸው የበዛ ዓለም አቀፋዊ፣አህጉራዊ እና ብሄራዊ የግልግል እና የሽምግልና አገልግሎት የሚሰጡ ተቋማት ወይም አካላት ተመስርተው ተገቢውን አገልግሎት በመስጠት ላይ ይገኛሉ፡፡

የግልግል፣ የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና ሥርዓት በዓለም አቀፋዊ እና በብሄራዊ ኢኮኖሚያዊ የስራ መስክ እንዲሁም የንግድ ግንኙነት  ተመራጭ የሚሆንባቸው ምክንያቶች  አያሌ  ቢሆኑም  ግንባር ቀደም ከሆኑት መካከል የሚከተሉት ይጠቀሳሉ፡-

አለም አቀፋዊም ሆነ ብሄራዊ  የንግድ ግንኙነት በአቅርቦት እና ፍላጎት (supply and demand) ላይ የተመሰረተ ከመሆኑ በቀር የተጠቃሚዎችን ማንነት ወይም ማህበራዊ አቋም ግምት ዉስጥ ያስገባ አይደለም፡፡አንዱ ወገን ምርቱን ወይም አገልግሎቱን በፍላጎት ለሚቀበለዉ  አሽቀድሞ ለሚያዉቀዉ ወይም ለማያዉቀዉ ሁለተኛ ወገን ያቀርባል፤ እንዲሁም ሌላዉ ወገን በፍላጎቱ መጠን የቀረበለትን ምርት ወይም አገልግሎት ይረከባል፡፡ ስለሆነም ግንኙነቱ የተለያየ ዜግነት ያላቸው ግለሰቦች ወይም ኩባንያዎች የሚሳተፉበት  ከመሆኑ አኳያ ይህንን የሚገዛ ወይም የሚመራ አንድ ወጥ መንግስታዊ አካል ወይም አስተዳደር አይኖርም፡፡ በመሆኑም፣ ተዋዋይ የንግዱ ህብረተሰብ አባላት በዜግነት ሳይወሰኑ አለመግባባቶቻቸውን ሊፈቱበት የሚችሉ ገለልተኛ ፍርድ ቤት በሌለበት ሁኔታ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ፈቃድ የሚመሠረት ገለልተኛ አካል መኖር አስፈላጊ ይሆናል፡፡   ይህንን ፍላጐት ሊያሟላ የሚችል  አካል ደግሞ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ፈቃድ እና የጋራ ቁጥጥር የሚመሠረት የግልግል፣የእርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና  አካል በመሆኑ  ስርዓቱን ተመራጭ ያደርገዋል፡፡

በንግድ ግንኙነት ተሳትፎ የሚኖራቸዉ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች የተለያየ አገር ዜጐች  ሊሆኑ ስለሚችሉ፣ ለየትኛውም አገር ፍ/ቤት ውሳኔ ተገዥ እንዲሆኑ አይገደዱም፡፡ ስለሆነም በዜግነት ጉዳይ ገደብ በማይኖረው ገለልተኛ የግልግል ስርአት ከመደበኛ ፍ/ቤት ስርአት ውጪ የንግድ አለመግባባታቸውን ስለሚፈታላቸው የግልግል ሥርዓት ተመራጭ ሆኖ ተገኝቷል፡፡

በሌሎች አገሮች የሚሰጥ የፍርድ ውሳኔ በየትኛውም አገር ተፈፃሚነት እንዲኖረው የሚያስገድድ አለም ዓቀፍ ስምምነት ወይም ሕግ የለም፡፡ በአንፃሩ ግን በየትኛውም አገር የሚሰጥ የግልግል ዳኝነት በውጭ አባል አገራት ዕውቅና እንዲያገኝ እና እንዲፈፀም የሚያስገድድ እ.ኤ.አ በ1958 ዓ.ም በተባበሩት መንግስታት ድርጅት የወጣ የኒዉዮርክ ስምምነት ስላለ፣ በስምምነቱ መሠረት በግልግል የተሠጠን ዳኝነት የዜግነት ገደብ ሳይኖርበት ስምምነቱን ባፀደቁ የውጭ ሀገራት ማስፈፀም ይቻላል፡፡

ስለሆነም፣ በግዛት ወሰን እንዲሁም በዜግነት ሊሰጥ እና ሊፈፀም ከሚገባ የመደበኛ ፍ/ቤት ውሳኔ ይልቅ የግዛትም ሆነ የዜግነት ገደብ የማይደረግበት የግልግል ሥራ ተመራጭነት ይኖረዋል ፡፡

ተዋዋይ ወገኖች በሌላው ተዋዋይ ወገን ብሄራዊ ፍ/ቤት በሚሰጥ ውሳኔ ላይ ሙሉ እምነት የላቸውም፡፡ በፍ/ቤቶቹ ነፃ ዳኝነት ላይ ይጠራጠራሉ፡፡ ከዚህም በተጨማሪ መደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች ጉዳዮችን የሚያዩት በብሄራዊ ሕግ አውጪ አካላት በወጡ ሕጐች መሠረት   ስለሚሆን፣ የተዋዋይ ወገኖችን ፍላጐት ወይም የሕግ ምርጫ ተግባራዊ ለማድረግ ይሳናቸዋል፡፡ በአንጻሩ ግን የግልግል ተቋማት የየትኛውም አገር የግዛት ወሰን የማይገድባቸው ከመሆናቸውም ሌላ ፈቃድ ያገኙበትና ተመዝግበዉ የሚሰሩበት አገር ቢኖርም፣ በግለሰብ ደረጃ ሲታይ የዉጭ ሀገር ዜጎች ሊሆኑ ይችላሉ፡፡ ስለሆነም ለዜጐቻቸው ያዳላሉ ወይም በመንግስት ተፅእኖ ይደረግባቸዋል የሚልን ግምት በማስቀረት በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ምርጫ በተለያዩ ህጐች መሠረት ጉዳዮችን የማየት አሠራርን ስለሚከተሉ ሕጐችን በመምረጥ ረገድ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች የሚሳተፉበት ዕድል  ይኖራል፡፡

ስለሆነም የግልግል ስርዓት፡ ከአድልዎ የፀዳ፣ እምነት የሚጣልበት፣ በተዋዋዮች ፈቃድ መሠረት የሚመራ፣በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ፍላጎት ወይም ፈቃድ የተመረጡ  ገለልተኛና ነፃ ገላጋይ ዳኞች ፣አስታራቂዎች ወይም ሸምጋዮች በሚሰየሙበት አካል ጉዳዩ የሚታይ በመሆኑና  በተለያዩ ሕጐች መሠረት ውሳኔ  ወይም ዳኝነት የሚሰጥበት በመሆኑ ዓለም አቀፉዊና ብሄራዊ የንግድ እንቅስቃሴን ለማጐልበት እና የንግዱን ህብረተሰብ ፍላጐት ለማርካት ተመራጭነት አለው ተብሎ በብዙዎች  ዘንድ  ተቀባይነት እያገኘ በመምጣት ላይ ይገኛል፡ በመሆኑም ይህንን አለማቀፋዊ የግልግል ስርዓት  የሚመሩና የሚተገብሩ ልዩ ልዩ  ዓለም አቀፋዊ ስምምነቶች፣ ቃል ኪዳኖችና  ውሎች እንዲሁም ብሄራዊ የግልግል፣ የእርቅ/የሽምግልና ህግጋት እና ደንቦች መኖራቸዉ ይታወቃል፡፡     

የግልግል ወይም የሽምግልና አገልግሎት የሚሰጡ ተቋማት ቁጥር እንደመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች የተወሰነ አይደለም፡፡ አገልግሎቱን በሚፈልጉ ወገኖች ስምምነት  በጊዜያዊነት እንደ አስፈላጊነቱ  ሊቋቋሙ ይችላሉ፡፡ ስለሆነም ከመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች ይልቅ  የግልግል አካላት ተደራሽነት የተሻለ ሆኖ ይገኛል፡፡

በመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች የሚታዮ ጉዳዮች ከተጀመሩበት ጊዜ አንስቶ ውሳኔ  እስኪሰጥባቸው  ያለው የጊዜ ምጣኔ  ገደብ የለውም፡፡ በፍ/ቤቶች የፍርድ አካሄድ  የሚወሰን ነው፡፡ ነገር ግን በግልግል  የሚታዮ ጉዳዮች በምን ያህል ጊዜ ማለቅ እንደሚገባቸው  ተዋዋይ ወገኖች መወሰን ስለሚችሉ የግልግል ወይም የሽምግልና  አሠራር ጊዜ  ቆጣቢ ነው፡፡

በመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች ስለሚመደቡ ዳኞች ቁጥር እና  ብቃት ተገልጋዮች የሚወስኑበት ዕድል የላቸውም ፡፡ ይሁን እንጂ በግልግል ወይም በሽምግልና ጉዳዮችን ስለሚያዩ  ዳኞች የሙያ ብቃትንና ቁጥርን የመወሰን መብት የተዋዋይ ወገኖች በመሆኑ በግልግል የሚሰጥ ውሳኔ በዳኞች የአቅም ማነስ ወይም አናሳ ቁጥር ለሚመጣ የውሳኔ ጥራት ማነስ ተገልጋዮች አይጋለጡም፡፡

ከቦታ አኳያ ሲታይ መደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች ቋሚ የማስቻያ ቦታ ስላላቸው በተለየ አሰራር ካልሆነ በቀር ከቦታ፣ ቦታ ተዛውረው እንዲያስችሉ በተገልጋዮች አይገደዱም፡፡ በግልግል ወይም በሽምግልና በሚቀርቡላቸው ጉዳዮች ላይ ውሳኔ እንዲሰጡ ጥያቄው የቀረበላቸው ተቋማት ወይም ግለሰቦች ግን የግልግል ወይም የሽምግልና አገልግሎት የሚሰጡበት ቦታ ተዋዋይ ወገኖች በሚያደርጉት የቅድመ ውል ሊወሰን ይችላል፡፡ በመሆኑም አገልግሎቱ በየትኛውም ቦታ እንደተዋዋይ ወገኖች ፍላጐት ሊሰጥ ስለሚችል አገልግሎት አሰጣጡ ተመራጭ ይሆናል፡፡

መደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች የሚያስችሉበት ቋንቋ፣የትርጉም አገልግሎት የሚሰጥበት ሁኔታ ከመኖሩና ይህም አስቀድሞ በህግ የተወሰነ ከመሆኑ በስተቀር የተዋዋይ  ወገኖችን ፍላጎት  የሚያስተናግድ አይደለም፡፡በአንፃሩ ግን በግልግል ወይም በሽምግልና አገልግሎት  ስራ ላይ የሚውለው ቋንቋ በተዋዋይ  ወገኖች ምርጫ ሊወሰን የሚችል እንጂ በአስገዳጅነት ጥቅም ላይ የሚውል አይሆንም፡፡ በዚህም ረገድ ቢሆን፣ የግልግል ሥርዓት ተመራጭ የሚሆንበት አጋጣሚ አለ፡፡  

በመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች የሚሰጥ ውሳኔ የተራዘመ ጊዜ ሊወስድ ስለሚችል ወጪ ቆጣቢ ነዉ ለማለት አይቻልም፡፡ ነገር ግን በግልግል ወይም በሽምግልና አንድ ጉዳይ ታይቶ ውሣኔ  ለመስጠት የሚወስደው ጊዜ አስቀድሞ በአግልግሎት ሰጪ ተቋማት የግልግል ደንብ ወይም በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ስምምነት የሚወሰን  አጭር ጊዜ ስለሚሆን  ወጪ ቆጣቢ ነው፤የባለጉዳዮችንም  መመላለሰ ያስቀራል፡፡

በእነዚህና በሌሎች መሰል ምክንያቶች፣ በተለይ ድንበር ዘለል በሆኑ የንግድ እንቅስቃሴዎች ተሳትፎ ያላቸዉ ባለጉዳዮች ፣ጉዳያቸው በመደበኛ ፍ/ቤቶች ከሚታይላቸው ይልቅ በግልግል፣አስታራቂ ወይም በአሸማጋይ ተቋማት ታይቶ እንዲወሰንላቸው ይመርጣሉ፡፡ ስለሆነም በብዙ የዓለም ሀገሮች፣ ብሄራዊና ዓለም አቀፋዊ የግልግል ወይም ሽምግልና ተቋማት ተቋቁመው የሚገኙ ሲሆን ሁሉም ሀገሮች ሊባል በሚችል መጠን፣ ይነስም ይብዛ የግልግል፣የእርቅ እና የሽምግልና ህጐች አሏቸው፡፡ እንዲሁም፣ በአለም አቀፍ ደረጃ የግልግል የዕርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና ሥርዓቶች የሚመሩባቸው መሠረታዊ ዓለምአቀፋዊ የግልግልና የእርቅ ማሣያ ህጐች  አሉ፡፡ በዋናነትም፣ የተባበሩት መንግስታት ድርጅት የአለም አቀፍ የንግድ ህግ ኮሚሽን (UNCITRAL) አለም አቀፍ የንግድ ግልግልና እርቅ ሞዴል ህጎች ተጠቃሾች ናቸዉ፡፡

የግልግል (ARBITRATION) መገለጫ ባህሪያት

የገበያ ኢኮኖሚ በከፍተኛ ፍጥነት በማደግ ላይ በሚገኝበት በአሁኑ ወቅት፣ በተለያዩ  ማህበራዊ ግንኙነቶች በተለይም ከንግድ እንቅስቃሴ ጋር ተያይዞ ሊያጋጥም የሚችል  አለመግባባትን በአጭር ጊዜ ውስጥ በአነስተኛ ወጪ እና ውጤታማ በሆነ አሰራር ለመፍታት  የሚያስችል የግልግል ስርዓት መዘርጋት ወይም ማደራጀት የማይታለፍ ወቅታዊ ግዴታ መሆኑ አያጠያይቅም፡፡ አለመግባባቶች በግልግል በሚፈቱበት  አጋጣሚ፣  በንግድም ሆነ በሌላ ጉዳይ ግንኙነት ያላቸው የስራ ተጓዳኞች /Partners/  በመካከላቸው የነበረው የተረጋጋ  ኢኮኖሚያዊ እንቅስቃሴ ወይም ግንኙነት በነበረበት የሚቀጥልበት  ዕድል እንደሚኖር በተግባር የተረጋገጠ ጉዳይ ነው፡፡ ከዚህ  አንፃር ተጠቃሽ የሚሆነው ምክንያት፣ ግልግሉ የሚካሄደው በግል እና መደበኛ ባልሆነ የቅራኔ አፈታት ዘዴ በመሆኑ ነው፡፡

“ግልግል”፣ በተለይ እያንዳንዱ  የንግድ  ተጓዳኝ የሸሪኩን ሀገር ሕግ  ሊያውቅ በማይችልበት ዓለም አቀፍ የንግድ ልውውጥ ጠቀሜታው የጐላ ነው፡፡ ምክንያቱም የግልግል ዳኝነት የሚከናወነው፣ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ምርጫ በሚወሰን ሕግ ዕንጂ ሀገሮች ዜጐቻቸውን በሚያስተዳድሩባቸው ሕጐች መሠረት አይደለምና ነዉ፡፡ የግልግል ዳኝነት፣ ከዚህም በተጨማሪ፣ ባለጉዳዩች በአንድ ሀገር ፍ/ቤቶች ገለልተኝነት  እና ነፃነት ላይ ሊኖራቸው የሚችልን  ጥርጣሬ ለማስወገድ ጉዳዩ ባለጉዳዩቹ ራሳቸው በመረጧቸው ገለልተኛ ገላጋይ ዳኞች ስለሚታይ፣ ግልግል ተመራጭነት አለው፡፡ የግልግል ዳኝነት ከሚያስገኛቸው ጠቀሜታዎች አንዳንዶቹን እንደሚከተለው እንመለከታለን፡፡

የግልግል ዳኝነት ከተወሰኑ ህጋዊ ሁኔታዎች በቀር ውሳኔው እንደተሰጠ ይግባኝ ሳይባልበት ስለሚፈፀም እና የመጨረሻ በመሆኑ፤

የግልግል ዳኝነት በግል ፍላጐት በሚወሰን፣ለህዝብ ግልጽ ባልሆነ ችሎት ስለሚከናወን የግለሰቦች ሚስጥራዊነት እንዲጠበቅ ሁኔታው የተመቻቸ በመሆኑ፤

ባለጉዳዮች አለመግባባቱ ስለተከሰተበት ጉዳይ የጠለቀ ዕውቀት ያላቸውን  ባለሙያዎች በገላጋይነት የሚሰይሙበትን ዕድል ስለሚፈጥር፤

አስፈላጊነት የሌላቸው እና የባለጉዳዮችን የግል ህይወት የሚነኩ ማጣራቶች እንዲደረጉ የማያስገድድ  እና  ያላስፈላጊ  ወጪ  በአጭር  ጊዜ የሚከናወን በመሆኑ፤ እንዲሁም የባለጉዳዮችን የንግድ ግንኙነትና የስራ ሚስጥር ተጠብቆ እንዲቆይ ስለሚያስችል፣…

ግልግል ከማንኛውም  የፍ/ቤቶች አሰራር የሚመረጥበት  አጋጣሚ አለ፡፡

ከላይ ከተመለከቱት መሠረታዊ ምክንያቶች አንፃር የግልግል ዳኝነት ሥራ አካሄድ ጠቀሜታው የጐላ ቢሆንም፣ ለግልግል የሚቀርቡ እና የማይቀርቡ ጉዳዮች ስለ መኖራቸው፣ በተዋዋይ ወገኖች ስምምነት ወይም በህግ የሚገለጽበት አሰራር መኖሩን ያስታውሷል፡፡ ይሁን እንጂ በተለይ ዓለም አቀፍ የንግድ ግንኙነትን በሚመለከት የሚያጋጥሙ አለመግባባቶች በአመዛኙ በግልግል ታይተው እንዲወሰኑ  ይደረጋል፡፡

በግልግል ሂደት ሊወሳ የሚገባው ሌላው ቁም ነገር የግልግል ስምምነት ውል መኖር አስገዳጅነት ነው፡፡ በባለጉዳዮች ነፃ ፈቃድ የተደረገ የግልግል  ስምምነት ውል በሌለበት ሁኔታ  ስለ  ግልግል ዳኝነት ማሰብ አይቻልም፡፡ ለግልግል ዳኝነት መሠረቱ የግልግል ስምምነት ውል መሆኑ ሊሰመርበት የሚገባ ጉዳይ ነው፡፡ የግልግል ስምምነት ውል በሁለት  መንገዶች ሊደረግ ይችላል፡፡ 1ኛው መንገድ፣ ዋናው ውል በሚደረግበት ጊዜ  በውሉ ውስጥ በአንድ በተለየ  አንቀጽ ወይም በተለየ ሰነድ ስምምነቱ ሊሰፍር ይችላል፡፡ በሌላ በኩል ደግሞ አለመግባባቱ በተከሰተበት አጋጣሚ የግልግል ስምምነቱ ውል መዋዋል የሚቻልበት ሁኔታ እንዳለም ይታወቃል፡፡  ስምምነቱ በየትኛውም ደረጃ ቢደረግ  ከዋናው ውል ተነጥሎ ይታያል እንጂ ዋናው ውል ቢፈርስም እንኳን የግልግል ስምምነቱ ውል አይፈርስም፡፡ በግልግል ስምምነቱ በሚወሰነው መሠረት ጉዳዩን ለግልግል ዳኝነት ማቅረብ አስፈላጊ ሆኖ ሲገኝ እንደ ውሉ፣ ለጊዜው በሚቋቋም የግልግል ዳኝነት አካል /ADHOC/ ወይም በግልግል  ተቋም ዳኝነቱ እንዲታይ ይደረጋል፡፡

ነገር ግን የአንዳንድ ሀገሮች የግልግል ህጉች ለግዜው ለሚቋቋም የግልግል  አካል የግልግል ዳኝነት ጥያቄ ለማቅረብ  የተደረገን ስምምነት ህጋዊነት አይቀበሉም፡፡ እንደማሳያም የቻይናን የግልግል ሕግ እዚህ ላይ ማስታወሱ ይበጅ ይሆናል፡፡

ይህ በእንዲህ እንዳለ ለጊዜው በሚቋቋም የግልግል ዳኝነት አካል እና ተቋማዊ  በሆነው የግልግል ስርዓት መካከል የጎላ ልዩነት አለ፡፡ተቋማዊ የሆነዉ የግልግል አካል  የዳበረ አስተዳደራዊ መዋቅር እና የዳበረ የግልግል ደንብ ሲኖረው፣ በአንፃሩ ግን በጊዜያዊነት የሚቋቋመው የግልግል አካል  አገልግሎቱን  ሊሰጥ የሚችልበት መዋቅርም ሆነ የግልግል ደንብ አይኖረውም፡፡ እንዲሁም ጊዜያዊው የግልግል አካል ሙሉ በሙሉ በባለጉዳዮች በሚወሰን  የጊዜ ሰሌዳ እና  በባለጉዳዮቹ በሚመረጥ የግልግል ሕግ መሠረት ጉዳዮችን በዉሉ በሚመለከት አጭር ጊዜ ዉስጥ የመወሰን ግዴታ የሚኖርበት ሲሆን፣ ተቋማዊ  የግልግል  አካል ግን  በተቋሙ የግልግል ደንብ አስቀድሞ በተወሰነ የጊዜ ሰሌዳ መሰረት የግልግል ዳኝነት ስለሚሰጥ ጉዳዩ ሊጓተት ይችላል፡፡ በባለጉዳዮቹም ላይ አላስፈላጊ ወጪ ሊያስከትል የሚችልበት አጋጣሚ ይኖራል፡፡ እነዚህን በመሳሰሉ ነጥቦች  የግልግል አካላቱ የየራሳቸው የሆነ አዎንታዊና አሉታዊ ጐን ይታይባቸዋል፡፡

ከላይ ለመነሻ ያህል የተጠቃቀሱ ነጥቦች ቢኖሩም፣ የግልግል ስምምነት ውል የሚከተሉትን አንኳር ነጥቦች በግልጽ ማመልከት ይጠበቅበታል፡፡

የግልግል ስምምነቱን የተፈፃሚነት ወሰን

በስምምነቱ የሚሸፈኑ ጉዳዮችን ዝርዝር እና አፈፃፀም በግልጽ ማመልከት ይኖርበታል፡፡

የግልግልዳኞችምርጫ

የዳኞች አመራረጥ ሂደት ምን መምሰል እንደሚኖርበት በስምምነቱ መወሰን፣ ይህ ሳይሆን ቢቀር የግልግል ተቋማቱ  ደንቦች በሚያዙት መሠረት ክፍተቱን መሸፈን እንደሚቻል በስምምነቱ ማመልከት፣በግልግል የቀረበው ጉዳይ ዓለም አቀፍ የንግድ  ግልግል ህግን የሚመለከት  በሆነ ጊዜ የግልግል ዳኝነቱ ቢያንስ  ሶስት ዳኞች በሚሠየሙበት ፖነል እንዲካሄድ እና እያንዳንዱ ወገን አንዳንድ ዳኛ የሚመርጥበት እና ሶስተኛው ዳኛ በጋራ ወይም  በግልግል ተቋሙ የሚመረጥበትን       ሥነ-ስርዓትእና ጉዳዩ የተለየ ሙያ ወይም ችሎታ የሚጠይቅ ሲሆን ይህንን ሊያሟላ በሚችል  የግልግል ዳኛ  የግልግል ዳኝነቱ እንዲመራ በስምምነቱ ላይ በግልጽ  ማመልከት ያስፈልጋል፡፡

ለግልግል መሠረት የሚሆነውን ሕግ በስምምነት መምረጥ

ተዋዋይ ወገኖች ግልግሉ የሚመራባቸውን መሠረታዊ እና የስነስርዓት ህጐች በስምምነታቸው ማመልከት፣ይህ ሳይሆን ቢቀር ደግሞ ግልግሉ የሚካሄድበትን ሀገር ሕግጋት ስለሚኖራቸው ተፈፃሚነት መስማማት፣ በዚህ ረገድ፣ ለግልግል የቀረበው  ጉዳይ ግልግሉ በሚደረግበት  ሀገር ሕግ መሠረት ለግልግል የማይቀርብ በህግ የተከለከለ  እንዳይሆን ተገቢውን ጥንቃቄ ለማድረግ ግንዛቤ መውሰድ ያስፈልጋል፡፡

የግልግል ዳኝነቱ የሚካሄድበትን ቦታ በግልጽ ማመልከት

ቦታ በመወሰን ረገድ ግልግሉ የሚካሄድባቸው ሀገሮች ስለውጪ አገሮች የግልግል ዳኝነት ዕውቅና መስጠትና ማስፈፀም በዓለም አቀፍ ደረጃ የተደረገውን የኒውዮርክ ስምምነት ያፀደቁ ሀገሮች ቢሆኑ ይመረጣል፡፡ እንዲሁም የሀገሮቹ የግልግል ሕግ በግልግል ዳኝነት ላይ  ለፍ/ቤቶች  የሚሰጠውን የስልጣን  ክልል ግምት ውስጥ ማስገባት፣ ስለሰዎችና ስለሰነዶች ዝውውር እንዲሁም ሌሎች ምቹ ሁኔታዎች ስለመኖራቸው ግንዛቤ መውሰድና ግልግሉ የሚደረግበትን  ከተማ በስም ለይቶ ማመልከት ያስፈልጋል፡፡

የግልግል ዳኝነቱ የሚካሄድበትን ቋንቋ  መወሰን  

ተዋዋይ ወገኖች አንድ ወይም ከዚያ በላይ ቋንቋ መምረጥና የትርጉም አገልግሎት  የሚሰጥበትን  ሁኔታ በስምምነቱ ላይ በግልጽ  ማመልከት ይኖርባቸዋል፡፡

ግልግሉ የሚካሄድበትን  የግልግል ደንብ  መምረጥ

በዚህ ረገድ የሚመረጠው የግልግል ደንብ ግልግሉ የሚታይበትን ቦታ በመምረጥ፡ ወጪና  ኪሣራን  በመወሰን፣ ስለ ዳኞች አመራረጥ እና ለግልግል ዳኞች  ስለተሰጠው  ስልጣን  ወሰን፣ ዳኝነቱ የሚካሄድበትን  ቋንቋ፣ ተፈፃሚነት  ስለሚኖራቸው ህጐች፣ ባለሙያን ለመጠቀም ስለሚቻልበት ሁኔታ፣ የግልግል ዳኝነቱ የሚጠናቀቅበትን  እና ውሳኔ የሚሰጥበትን  የጊዜ ሰሌዳ፣ በውሳኔ አሰጣጥ ላይ የሌሎች አስተዳደር አካላት ሚና፣ ጊዜያዊ የመፍትሄ ዕርምጃ ስለሚወሰድበት አሰራር፣ እና ባለጉዳዮች ሌላ አማራጮችን ለማቅረብ ያላቸውን ዕድል በተመለከተ ዝርዝር ጉዳዮችን የያዘ የባለጉዳዩችን መብት እና ጥቅም የሚያስከብር ስለመሆኑ ማረጋገጥ፤ ያስፈልጋል፡፡

በንብረት ወይም በማስረጃ ስለሚሰጥ  ጊዜያዊ የዕግድ የመያዣ ትዕዛዝ

ስምምነቱ የዕግድ ትዕዛዝ የሚሰጠው አካል ፍ/ቤት ወይም የግልግል ተቋም ስለ መሆኑ በግልጽ ማመልከት የሚኖርበት ሲሆን የዕግዱ ወይም የመያዣው ትዕዛዝ ለፍ/ቤት እንዲሰጥ ቢደረግ ስለሚኖረው ተመራጭነት በስምምነቱ ላይ ማመልከት ያስፈልጋል፡፡

ኪሣራና ወጪ

የኪሣራን እና የወጪን አከፋፈል በተመለከተ በስምምነቱ ላይ በግልጽ ማመልከት& ኪሣራ እና  ወጪው በጋራ ወይም በዳኝነት  ባለዕዳው ሊሸፈን ስለሚችል ከሁለቱ አማራጮች አንዱን መወሰን ያስፈልጋል፡፡

የግልግል ዳኝነት ውሳኔ ይዘትና ፎርም

ስምምነቱ ውሳኔው በሙሉ ድምጽ ወይም በአብላጫ ጽምጽ እንዲሰጥ እና ስራ ላይ ባሉት ህጉች መሠረት እንዲሆን ማመላከት እንዲሁም ውሳኔው በጽሁፍ ወይም በቃል ብቻ እንዲሆን ማመልከት  ይገባዋል፡፡

የመንግስታት ሚና

የሕግ ማዕቀፍ

የግልግል፣ የእርቅ እና የሽምግልና ተግባራት የነባሩን ህብረተሰብ እድገት ደረጃ በደረጃ ተከትለዉ የመጡ ማህበረሰባዊ እሴቶች መሆናቸዉ አያጠያይቅም፡፡ እነዚህን ማህበረሰባዊ እሴቶች ለማጠናከር የሚቻለዉ መንግስታት ለዘርፉ የሚሰጡት ልዩ ትኩረት ሲኖር ነዉ፡፡

ከእነዚህ አንዱ የግልግል እና መሰል ተግባራት በህግ እንዲመሩ ሁኔታዎችን ማመቻቸት ተጠቃሽነት ይኖረዋል፡፡

ስለሆነም የግልግል የዕርቅና የሽምግልና ጉዳይ ከሚያበረክተዉ የላቀ ማኅበረሰባዊ አገልግሎት አንጻር በማየት እና ዘርፉ ከሚያበረክተዉ ኢኮኖሚያዊ አስተዋፅኦ አኳያ ለእዚህ አቢይ ተልእኮ መሳካት ሲባል ጉዳዩን በአግባቡ ለመምራት የሚያስችሉ ህግጋትን ማዉጣት ወቅታዊ ጉዳይ ከመሆኑም ሌላ እግረ መንገዱን፣  ማህበረሰባዊ እሴትን ከማሳደግ አንጻርም ሊታይ የሚገባው ዋጋ ያለው ቁም ነገር ነዉ፡፡ በዚህ ረገድ የዘመኑን ህብረተሰብ አሰተሳሰብ ከነባሩ ማህበረሰባዊ እሴት ጋር በማቀናጀት ተስማሚ ሆነዉ በአለም አቀፍ ደረጃ ከሚሰራባቸዉ የተባበሩት መንግስታት ድርጅት አለም-ዓቀፍ የንግድ ህግ ኮሚሽን ሞዴል የግልግል ና የእርቅ ህግጋት አንጻር የተቃኙ ዘመናዊ አዳዲስ ህግጋትን ማዉጣት ወይም ነባር ህግጋትን እንደአስፈላጊነቱ ማሻሻል ከመንግስታት የሚጠበቅ ተግባር ይሆናል፡፡

ተቋማትን ማስፋፋት ወይም ማደራጀት

የግልግል፣ የእርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና ጉዳይ በአመዛኙ የግል ተቋማትን ወይም የግለሰቦችን ሚና የሚጠይቅ ቢሆንም ተቋማቱ ከታች እስከ ላይ ባለ የመንግስት መዋቅር ድጋፍ እንዲደረግላቸዉ እና ምቹ ሁኔታ እንዲፈጠርላቸዉ አስፈላጊዉን ሁሉ ማድረግ ይጠበቃል፡፡ እንዲህ ሲሆን በመንግስት በኩል የሚወጡ የግልግል፣የእርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና ህግጋት ተፈፃሚነት ኖሯቸው በዘርፉ እንዲሣካ የሚፈለገው አላማ ግቡ ላይ ለማድረስ ምቹ ሁኔታን ይፈጥራል፡፡

አለም አቀፋዊ ስምምነቶችን ማድረግ  

የግልግል፣ የእርቅ ወይም የሽምግልና ጉዳዮችን ለማከናወን በባለጉዳዮች የሚደረግ የዉል ስምምነት መኖር ተቀዳሚ ጉዳይ ነዉ፡፡

ስለሆነም የአንድ አገር መንግስት ከሌሎች የዉጭ አገር መንግስታት ወይም ኩባንያዎች ጋር ያለዉን ኢኮኖሚያዊ ትስስር በአለም አቀፍ ህግ መሰረት ለመምራት እንዲሁም አለመግባባቶች ሲከሰቱ በግልግል፣ በእርቅ ወይም በሽምግልና ለመፍታት የሁለትዮሽ (Bilaterial) ወይም የሦስትዮሽ (multilateral) ስምምነት ማድረግ ወሳኝነት ይኖረዋል፡፡

በዉጭ ሀገር የተሰጠ የግልግል ዳኝነት ዉሳኔዎችን ለማስፈጸም የሚያስችሉ ዓለም-አቀፋዊ ስምምነቶችን ማጽደቅ

በዚህ ረገድ በፅሁፉ ልዩ ልዩ ክፍሎች ለማሰገነዘብ እንደተሞከረዉ የግልግል ጉዳይ ተመራጭ ከሚሆንባቸው አበይት ምክንያቶች መካከል፣ በአንድ ሀገር የተሰጠን የግልግል ዳኝነት ዉሳኔ በሌላ አገር ለማሰፈጸም ያለዉ ብቃት ነዉ፡፡

እንዲህ ሲሆን ግን የግልግል ዳኝነቱ እንዲፈጸም ጥያቄ የሚቀርብበት አገር መንግስት ለጉዳዩ ተገቢነት ያለዉ አ.ኤ.አ. በ1958 በተባበሩት መንግስታት ድርጅት የወጣዉን የኒዉዮርክ ስምምነት ያጸደቀ መሆን አስፈላጊ ይሆናል፡፡       

የተጠቀሰው ስምምነት፣ በውጪ ሀገር የተሰጠን  የግልግል ዳኝነት  ዕውቅና ስለመስጠትና ስለ ማስፈፀም የሚመለከት ስለሆነ፣ የአብዛኛዎቹ ሀገራት መንግስታት በመንግስት ደረጃ  ወይም በዜጐቻቸው እና በውጭ ኩባንያዎች መካከል የሚያጋጥሙ አለመግባባቶችን  በዓለም አቀፍ ደረጃ ለመፍታት እንዲቻል እንዲሁም በየአገሮቻቸው  የሚሰጡ የግልግል ዳኝነት ውሣኔዎችን  አስፈላጊ ሆኖ ሲገኝ  በውጭ ሀገራት ለማስፈፀም  ሲባል  የኒውዮርክ ስምምነቱን በማጽደቅ የስምምነቱ አባል አገራት  ሆነው በዓለም አቀፍ ደረጃ  ይታወቃሉ፡፡

በእነዚህ ሀገሮች ዘንድ በግልግል ዳኝነት  የሚሰጥን ውሣኔ ለመፈፀምም ሆነ ለማስፈፀም  አዳጋች አይሆንም፡፡

ከላይ የተዘረዘሩት ዋና ዋና ነጥቦች በማንኛውም የግልግል ውል ላይ ሊካተቱ የሚገባቸው ከመሆናቸውም በተጨማሪ የእነዚህ ነጥቦች መጓደል ስምምነቱን  የተሟላ እንዳይሆን ያደርገዋል፡፡ ስለሆነም ተዋዋይ ወገኖች የሚያደርጉት የግልግል ስምምነት ውል ከእነዚህ ነጥቦች አኳያ የተቃኘ መሆን ይጠበቅበታል፡፡

Not published yet

Ethiopia’s Approach to International ADR

As part of the world, Ethiopia is under the influence of international practices like that of dispute settlement. The existence of very dynamic idea and technology transfer helped the country to expose itself to the world community. In addition, the movement of citizens from place to place for settlement and investment facilitates the flow of practices which were limited to certain part of the world. If a nation have foreign relation with the citizens of the other in private manner and in the state level, it will be inevitable to be exposed itself to the international dispute settlement mechanisms. Thus, it will be important to consider our nation as part of the international practice in the implementation of ADR as an international dispute settlement method.

Ethiopia exposes itself to the international practice of ADR in different respects. The place of those international documents in Ethiopian legal regime and the relation of the institution of the nation with other international institute will be assessed in the coming section.

Ethiopia and International Documents - As we have discussed in preceding parts Ethiopia is not yet a party to the 1958 Convention to the recognition and the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. This might be considered as one failure of the legal regime in incorporating this very important international document which guarantees the enforcement of an award given in Ethiopian to be enforced elsewhere in other member states. Reciprocally, the convention would have guaranteed the smooth enforceability of an arbitral award given in the other member states of the convention to Ethiopia. Unfortunately, Ethiopia is one among the 51 nation who have not yet approved this convention as of September 2007.

But the New York Convention is not the only document that regulates the reciprocal enforceability of foreign arbitral awards in other states. Other regional and bilateral treaties have also been made in the pats years to facilitate the same. In addition to these agreements between states, national laws also regulate the enforceability of foreign arbitral award in the same way as they regulate the enforcement of foreign court decisions.

The enforcement of foreign arbitral award in Ethiopia, therefore, is regulated by the national law and the bilateral treaty signed so far. The civil procedure code provisions, i.e. Articles 456 – 461, are the important one in this respect guarantying the enforceability of foreign award in Ethiopian jurisdiction subject to the fulfillment of the conditions listed there under. Though, the first few articles speak about the enforcement of foreign decision, Article 461, which exclusively deals about enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, refers back to these sets of provisions which are applicable to the foreign decisions. Thus, for a better understanding of this issue a close reading of Articles 456 – 461 and references to the discussion made under section 3.6 of Chapter Three of this course can be made.

On the other hand, we have made a pace in the incorporation of one of the founding convention of the PCA (Permanent Court of Arbitration), the 1899 Convention on the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. Though, Proclamation 348/2003 ‘A Proclamation to Provide for Ratification of the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes (1899)’ done on June 24, 2003, it has been recorded in the registry of the convention on May 28, 2003. The other founding convention of the PCA done in 1907 didn’t repeal the first one. Of course, the second document has included more detailed provisions in the attainment of its objectives. For example, under Part III, which deals about the International Commission of Inquiry, more detailed provisions have been included for its working procedure. Especially, the commission has been put under the supervision of the International Bureau of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which serves as a registrar. Part IV of it included a new system which was not there under the predecessor Convention. Chapter IV of it established “Arbitration by Summary Procedure” in disputes admitting of a summary procedure. Remember, we are not yet the signatory for this second document.

Question: Why do you think Ethiopia approved the 1899 PCA founding convention and failed to do the 1907 one? Do you think that the 1899 convention is more beneficial to us than the later one?

Ethiopia’s relation with PCA documents does not stop here. She has used the 1992 Permanent Court of Arbitration Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two States in the Ethio – Eritrean boarder dispute. Section 4 paragraph 11 of the Ethio - Eritrean agreement (the Algiers Agreement) which was done in Algiers on the 12th of December 2000 reads as follow;

The Commission shall adopt its own rules of procedure based upon the 1992 Permanent Court of Arbitration Optional Rules for Arbitrating Disputes between Two States. Filing deadlines for the parties’ written submissions shall be simultaneous rather than consecutive. All decisions of the Commission shall be made by a majority of the commissioners.

From the reading of the agreement, especially section 4, we can easily understand that the neutral Boundary Commission which is composed of five members, four of them elected by the two nations two each and the other presiding commissioner by the already nominated four commissioners or in their failure by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, is an arbitration tribunal. This tribunal had the right to make its own rules of procedure, but this right is a qualified one; its rules should make the 1992 PCA Optional Rule for Arbitrating between two States as a bench mark. Any state or institute can use this optional rule with out any accession to it or to the PCA founding conventions.

There is no specific requirement of accession to the UNCITRAL documents since most of them are Model Laws which might help nations to use it as a bench mark or model in developing its own domestic laws or treaties with other nations. These documents can help us in formulating laws or public policies to fill the gap in the existing legal regime regulating the matter.

The other possibility that Ethiopia will have connection with international ADR is the existence of foreign companies working in the nation in different areas; as investors, service delivers, constructors, consultants in different field, NGOs, etc. These relations will substantially depend on the agreement made between the two parties who are not regulated by the same law of a nation. Thus, it is common to include dispute settlement mechanisms and determine the applicable laws which will regulate their relation including disputes of the contracting parties. Since the parties are from two different legal regimes, the international ADR tribunals (especially arbitration) and documents will be the first option for the parties to the contract. This is the other possibility that brings Ethiopia before international tribunals and international documents regulation ADR.

Globalization is trying to create one village composed of different and diversified custom and practice. Technology and commerce is accelerating this mob by making some region of the world dependent on the activities of the other tip of the world. As part of this dynamic interaction of peoples of different nations, dispute settlement mechanisms where parties of any nation could be entertained are becoming very important. Ethiopia has been involved in the international ADR in different respects; approving the 1899 PCA founding convention and referring the Ethio – Eritrea Boarder Commission to use the 1992 PCA Optional Rule for Arbitrating between two States are few examples that are discussed above.

Not published yet

ADR in Africa

Under your Legal History and Traditions course you have discussed the legal system of the Africans. African indigenous customary norms encouraged ‘Compromise’ over litigations before officers. But these days the status seems to have been changed to some other features. Here is an excerpt from George Washington University, National Law Center 2003, Unfinished business: Conflicts, the African Union and the New Partnership for Africa's Development, by Udombana, Nsongurua J. The text reveals the degree of dispute in the continent, the measures being taken to resolve them and attempts of regional institutes (OAU and now AU) on the matter.

THE CURRENT AGENDA FOR DEALING WITH CONFLICTS IN AFRICA

A. The Normative Structure

This section highlights the normative framework of African leaders for dealing with conflict, peace, and security in the continent. Though such normative rhetoric on the problem of conflict abounds in many resolutions and declarations of the OAU, this section focuses on the recent AU Act and the NEPAD, the former a binding treaty, the later a declaration of intent.

1. The AU Act

When African leaders adopted the AU Act (the Act) in 2000, they were "conscious of the fact that the scourge of conflicts in Africa constitutes a major impediment to the socio-economic development of the continent and of the need to promote peace, security and stability as a prerequisite for the implementation of our development and integration agenda."72 Consequently, the Act sets out as some of its objectives to "[p]romote peace, security, and stability on the continent"73 and the establishment of "the necessary conditions which enable the continent to play its rightful role in the global economy and in international negotiations."74 These objectives are supported by principles, including the "establishment of a common defence policy for the African Continent;"75 the "peaceful resolution of conflicts among Member States of the Union through such appropriate means as may be decided upon by the Assembly;"76 and the "prohibition of the use of force or threat to use force among Member States of the Union."77 Other principles are the "peaceful co-existence of Member States and their right to live in peace and security"78 and "the right of Member States to request intervention from the Union in order to restore peace and security."79

One of the functions of the AU Assembly will be to "give directives to the Executive Council on the management of conflicts, war and other emergency situations and the restoration of peace."80 …..

Regrettably, the AU Act did not initially provide any mechanisms for conflict prevention, management, and resolution, though this was one of the goals of the Union. It failed to factor in the "Cairo Declaration," which established the Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution (MCMPR).91 Likewise, it failed to factor in the "Declaration of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity on the Political and Socio-Economic Situation in Africa and the Fundamental Changes Taking Place in the World,"92 in which the OAU rededicated itself "to work together towards the peaceful and speedy resolution of all conflicts."93 It failed to factor in the "Cairo Agenda for Action,"94 in which the OAU pledged to "give the maximum political and financial support to the OAU Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution, for its effective peace-making operations, by involving all segments of the population and mobilizing adequate official and private resources for the OAU Peace Fund."95

The omission was baffling,96 considering the sentiment of the OAU in its 1999 Algiers Declaration that "the OAU Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution [(MCMPR)] is a valuable asset for our continent which must be nurtured and consolidated" and it "symbolises the concrete resolve of our continent to fully assume its responsibilities."97 As an afterthought, the OAU rectified these deficiencies by incorporating the objectives and principles of the Cairo Declaration as "an integral part of the declared objectives and principles of the African Union."98 For example, in accordance with Article 5(2) of the AU Act, the OAU included the Central Organ of the MCMPR as one of the Organs of the AU.99 ……….

B. The Institutional Structure

In the past African leaders created various institutions to manage conflicts. Some of these have been in the form of ad hoc committees and commissions. For example, African leaders established the Ad Hoc Committee on Inter-African Disputes in July 1977 at the 14th Ordinary Session of the OAU Assembly in Libreville. Whatever the benefits of ad hoc arrangements for dealing with conflicts, one of the deficiencies is that such arrangements are remedial rather than proactive.114 The following section, however, deals with three major institutional structures designed by African leaders for the management and resolution of conflicts. The first, which is now defunct but is described below to set the context for the other arrangements, is the OAU Commission of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration. The second is the MCMPR and the third and most recent is the Peace and Security Council.

1. The OAU Commission of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration

When African countries adopted the OAU Charter in 1963, they created the Commission of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration to accomplish the purposes of the Charter.115 It served as a mechanism for the peaceful settlement of disputes among Member States.116 The Commission was described as the raison d'etre of the OAU,117 given the fact that peaceful resolution of conflicts, both large and small, provided the necessary conditions for orderly progress of Africa as a whole and of the Member States of the OAU in particular.118 It has, however, been asserted that African leaders gave high priority to the Commission because of the border conflicts then occurring between Ethiopia and Somalia and between Algeria and Morocco.119

In 1964, the OAU adopted a Protocol that defined the duties and powers of the Commission.120 The Protocol was made an integral part of the OAU Charter; which is to say that there was no provision for a formal ratification of the Protocol, as the Protocol merely required the approval of the OAU Assembly for it to become an integral part of the OAU Charter.121 This approval was given at the first Assembly at its meeting in Cairo, Egypt, in July 1964. The Assembly had to dispense with the need for a formal ratification of the Protocol in order to avoid undue delay that might stultify efforts to address urgent security problems that were plaguing Member States.122

The Commission was not a judicial body, though it provided three modes of settlement: mediation, conciliation, and arbitration, as enjoined by the U.N. Charter.123 The Protocol did not include any provision on the less formal procedures of 'good offices' and 'negotiation,' as these are hardly distinguishable in practical effect from mediation.124 Mediation and conciliation are non-adjudicatory, informal procedures. Mediation, which is the least formal of the modes of settlement in international practice,125 involves an official third party seeking to reconcile the views and claims of the parties or offering advice or advancing proposals for a possible solution that is, nevertheless, binding.126 The problem with third party mediation is that it can easily transgress the fine line and become intervention, "siding with one party to equalize the power balance, the effect [being] to expand and complicate the conflict by transforming it from an essentially dyadic conflict relationship to a triadic conflict triangle."127

By contrast, conciliation refers to an impartial examination of the subject matter and a search for an acceptable settlement to the dispute. It entails objective evaluation and clarification of the issues in dispute, endeavouring to bring about an agreement between the parties upon mutually acceptable terms.128 The procedures for conciliation within the framework of the Commission were clearly influenced by the notions of formal judicial procedure and usage.129 Where the parties choose this medium, the matter was to be formally brought before the Commission by means of a petition addressed to the President by one or more of the parties to the dispute. Where only one of the parties makes such a request, then it must be indicated in the petition that prior written notice has been given to the other party. Either way, the petition must include a summary of the statement of the grounds of the dispute.130 Upon receipt of the petition, the President of the Commission was to set up a Board of Conciliators,131 which was required to consider all questions submitted to it and to undertake any enquiry or hear any person capable of giving relevant information concerning the disputes.132 In short, the duty of the Conciliators was to "bring about an agreement between the parties upon mutually acceptable terms".133

Arbitration, on the other hand, is a compulsory means of dispute settlement, a judicial method that entails the delivery of a binding decision based on law rendered by a tribunal whose composition is determined by the parties. Submission to arbitration is dependent upon prior agreement of the parties. Thus, under the Protocol, if the parties to a dispute that has been brought before the Commission agree to resort to arbitration, an Arbitral Tribunal was to be established by the Commission.134 Since arbitrators perform essentially judicial functions, the Protocol provided that the intended arbitrators should possess legal qualification.135 The procedure of arbitration has never been used, however, even within the framework of an ad hoc committee. This reluctance was already manifest at the founding conference of the OAU in 1963, in its rejection of a provision in the draft Charter for a Court of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration to be set up by means of a separate treaty.136

It is important to note that this ad hoc Commission, which was vested with the powers of investigation and inquiry with regard to disputes submitted to it,137 never became operational and was subsequently abolished. Technically, the Commission continued to have a formal existence, since its formal abolition required an amendment to the OAU Charter, which was not done. The OAU mandated that the OAU Secretary-General find ways to dispose of all the assets of the Commission.138 Even before its abolition, the OAU restricted the Commission to only interstate conflicts.139 In fact, "[r]arely did the OAU attempt reconciliation," even within the framework of an ad hoc committee.140 While the Commission existed, the OAU starved it for funds.141 It survived on mere handouts from the General Secretariat of the OAU "to enable it [to] operate."142 Experts attributed its non-functionality to Africa's mistrust of formal dispute settlement.143 This argument is logically untenable since "African States have [never] been averse to the establishment of numerous ad hoc bodies under the auspices of the OAU and the involvement of the U.N. to settle their disputes."144

2. The MCMPR

A serious and potentially significant attempt to tackle the problem of conflicts in Africa came in 1992, when the Secretary-General of the OAU submitted to the 56th Ordinary Session of the Council of Ministers and the 28th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the OAU, meeting in Dakar, Senegal, the "Report [of the Secretary-General] on the establishment, within the OAU, of a Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution."145 Following the report, the OAU Assembly adopted a declaration establishing the MCMPR to take over from the redundant and ad hoc Commission of Mediation, Conciliation and Arbitration.146 The focus of the MCMPR would be to streamline the procedures and processes of dealing with conflicts and conflict situations.147 Its establishment was an attempt at putting Humpty-Dumpty together again and giving concrete expression to Africa's commitment to work together towards the peaceful and speedy resolution of all conflicts on the continent.148 The MCMPR was and is intended to bring to the processes of dealing with conflicts in Africa a new institutional dynamism that will enable speedy action to prevent or manage and, ultimately, resolve conflicts when and where they occur.149

The MCMPR is built around a Central Organ, with the Secretary-General and the secretariat comprising its operating arm.150 The Central Organ consists of the Member States of the OAU Summit Bureau, which are elected annually, bearing in mind the principles of equitable regional representation and rotation.151 To ensure continuity, the States of the outgoing chairman and, where known, the incoming chairman will be members of the Central Organ.152 The Central Organ functions at two levels-the level of heads of state and that of ministers and ambassadors who are accredited to the AU or duly authorized representatives.153 The Organ may, however, seek the participation of other Member States in its deliberations, particularly the neighbouring countries. It may also seek, from within the continent, "such military, legal and other forms of expertise as it may require in the performance of its functions."154

The primary objective of the MCMPR is the anticipation and prevention of conflicts. This has the advantage of obviating the need to resort to the complex and resource-demanding peace-keeping operations that the continent often finds difficult to finance.155 However, where conflicts have already occurred, then the MCMPR will embark on peace missions in order to facilitate resolutions of such conflicts and deploy civil or military observer groups for a limited capacity and for a limited duration.156 It is important to observe that the MCMPR is already engaged in these kinds of exercise. Thus, in May 2002, it deployed a "Military Observer Mission" to the Comoros to assist the Comorian authorities in ensuring the security of the archipelago during the electoral process.157 The Central Organ of the MCMPR has, in the past, also reviewed various conflict situations in Africa, including internal conflicts.158

In discharging its mandate, the Central Organ shall coordinate its activities closely with the African regional and sub-regional organizations and shall cooperate, as appropriate, with the neighbouring countries with respect to conflicts which may arise in the different sub-regions of the continent.159 This obviously applies to sub-regional organizations like the Economic Community of West Africa, the Southern African Development Community, and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa.160

The MCMPR places particular stress on the role of the Secretary-General. It empowers him or her to deploy efforts and to take all appropriate initiatives to prevent, manage and resolve conflicts, acting under the authority of the Central Organ.161 To achieve this end, he relies on the human and material resources available at the secretariat. He may also utilize eminent African personalities, in consultation with the authorities of their countries of origin and, where necessary, may make use of other relevant envoys or special representatives as well as dispatch fact-finding missions to conflict areas.162 Meanwhile, the OAU had established a special fund, made up of financial appropriations from the regular budget of the OAU/AU, voluntary contributions from Member States as well as other sources within Africa to fund its operational activities relating to conflict management and resolution.163 Disbursement from the fund is, however, subject to the approval of the Central Organ.164

In all situations, the objectives and principles of the OAU Charter, now AU Act, must guide the MCMPA. In particular, the following principles guide the MCMPA: the sovereign equality and respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Member States, the inalienable right to independent existence, the peaceful settlement of disputes as well as the inviolability of borders inherited, (uti possidetis juris).165 The MCMPA will function on the basis of the consent and the co-operation of the parties to a conflict.166 Regrettably, this adherence to sovereignty and non-intervention might weaken the MCMPR. Many critics have actually called for a revision of these doctrines;167 and it is gratifying that the OAU had mandated its secretary-general, now Chairman of the Commission, to undertake a review of the structures, procedures, and working methods of the Central Organ in order to remove all obstacles to the smooth functioning of the MCMPR.168

Overall, it will be necessary to devise a system for early warning, if the MCMPR is to succeed in its allotted tasks. That is to say that it must develop the capacity for information gathering and analysis in order to provide strategic options for preventive action and/or an informed, appropriate response.169 The MCMPR must also design an appropriate mechanism for dealing with the post-settlement phase, as this is, arguably, the most important part of the conflict resolution process. It is here that the foundations for a genuine culture of peace are laid. As Richard Jackson observed, "[s]tillborn political pacts are much more difficult to resolve than ongoing civil wars, as the parties have hard-won positions to protect and a cadre of armed supporters."170 Consequently, failures of implementation and reconstruction can have devastating consequences and harden the attitudes of 'spoilers.'171 The experiences in such African countries as Angola, Mozambique, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, and DR Congo attest to the veracity of this assertion. The key processes that Africa will need for long-term peace building, therefore, include demobilization for fighters, resettlement for displaced persons, economic reconstruction, rebuilding civil society, and national reconciliation.172

3. The Peace and Security Council

In July 2002, the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the AU, meeting in Durban, South Africa, adopted a Protocol on the establishment of Peace and Security Council (PSC) for Africa.173 The PSC will be a standing decision-making organ for the prevention, management and resolution of conflicts. It shall be a collective security and early-warning arrangement to facilitate timely and efficient response to conflict and crisis situations in Africa.174 The Commission, a Panel of the Wise, a Continental Early Warning System, an African Standby Force, and a Special Fund, will support the PSC.175 Upon its entry into force, the Protocol will replace the Cairo Declaration and will supersede all resolutions and decisions of the OAU relating to the MCMPR in Africa that are in conflict with it.176

The Protocol establishes an operational structure for the effective implementation of the decisions taken by African leaders in the areas of conflict prevention, peace-making, peace support operations and intervention, as well as peace-building and post-conflict reconstruction.177 It stresses the need to forge closer cooperation and partnership between the UN, other international organizations and the AU, in promoting and maintaining peace, security, and stability in Africa.178 The AU is particularly concerned with the impact of the illicit proliferation, circulation, and trafficking of small arms and light weapons in threatening peace and security in Africa and undermining efforts to improve the living standards of African peoples.179 The Protocol also recalls an earlier commitment of African leaders to the Solemn Declaration on the Conference on Security, Stability, Development and Cooperation in Africa.180

The PSC will undoubtedly be the African equivalent of the UN Security Council, except that none of the 15 members will be able to exercise a veto. For example, it will be able to draw on a stand-by force from African armies to intervene if crimes against humanity are being perpetrated. The PSC will be composed of fifteen Members "elected on the basis of equal rights."181 Of this number, ten will be elected for a term of two years while five members will be elected for a term of three years, "in order to ensure continuity."182 A prospective Member State must, however, satisfy certain criteria. These include a commitment to uphold the principles of the AU; contribution to the promotion and maintenance of peace and security in Africa (for this purpose, experience in peace support operations would be an added advantage); capacity and commitment to shoulder the responsibilities entailed in membership; participation in conflict resolution, peace-making, and peacebuilding at regional and continental levels; and willingness and ability to take up responsibility for regional and continental conflict resolution initiatives. Others include contribution to the Peace Fund and/or Special Fund created for specific purpose; respect for constitutional governance, in accordance with the Lome Declaration, as well as the rule of law and human rights; having sufficiently staffed and equipped Permanent Missions at the Headquarters of the Union and the United Nations, to be able to shoulder the responsibilities which go with the membership; and commitment to honor financial obligations to the Union.183

The Protocol sets out the objectives and principles of the PSC. The objectives include the promotion of peace, security and stability in Africa, which is intended to guarantee the protection and preservation of life and property, the well-being of the African people and their environment, as well as the creation of conditions conducive to sustainable development. It also has as its objectives the anticipation and prevention of conflicts. In circumstances where conflicts have occurred, the PSC shall have the responsibility to undertake peace-making and peace-building functions for the resolution of these conflicts; promote and implement peace-building and post-conflict reconstruction activities to consolidate peace and prevent the resurgence of violence; co-ordinate and harmonize continental efforts in the prevention and combating of international terrorism in all its aspects; and develop a common defence policy for the Union, in accordance with the AU Act.184 It will also promote and encourage democratic practices, good governance and the rule of law, protect human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for the sanctity of human life and international humanitarian law, all aimed at preventing conflicts.185

Similarly, the Protocol provides, by way of principles, that the PSC shall be guided by the principles enshrined in the AU Act, the U.N. Charter, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). This includes the peaceful settlement of disputes and conflicts, early responses to contain crisis situations in order to prevent them from developing into full-blown conflicts, respect for the rule of law, fundamental human rights and freedoms, the sanctity of human life, and international humanitarian law.186 Others are interdependence between socio-economic development and the security of peoples and States, respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Member States, non-interference by any Member State in the internal affairs of another, sovereign equality and interdependence of Member States, inalienable right to independent existence, and respect of borders inherited on achievement of independence-uti possidetis juris.187 This has been a common refrain of African leaders since the days of the OAU Charter,188 and probably explains was the OAU was often labelled, rightly or wrongly, as a conservative club of African political oppressors. Remarkably, however, things appear to be changing. Thus, the Protocol, like the AU Act, provides for the right of the AU to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances-namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, in accordance with Article 4(h) of the AU Act-and the right of Member States to request intervention from the Union in order to restore peace and security.189 …….

Overall, it may be said that the establishment of the PSC in a collective Africa is certainly a welcome development, though its power could be a source of both peace and conflict among Africa's stronger nations. Expectedly, competition among countries for the five seats that will chair the PSC will be intense, as they will be able to advance their individual agendas and foster stability-or even instability-on the continent. It is, however, hoped that these leaders not exploit military interventions to advance their own regional and continent-wide agendas.

Not published yet

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is an intergovernmental government that creates a free trade area in North America with the United States, Mexico and Canada. NAFTA's purposes include: eliminating trade barriers, promoting fair competition, increasing investment opportunities, providing protection for intellectual property rights, creating procedures for implementing and enforcing NAFTA, and establishing a forum for further enhancement and expansion of the benefits provided by NAFTA.

NAFTA establishes three new dispute resolution mechanisms: First NAFTA Chapter 20 (Chapter 20) applies to disputes between signatory states. Chapter 20 creates anon-binding process for dealing with most other disputes under the treaty and this process can only be initiated by governments at the federal level. There are several stages to the chapter 20 dispute resolution process including consultation, negotiation and the issuance of report by a five member arbitral panel. Secondly, NAFTA Chapter 19 (Chapter 19) applies to disputes between the signatory states relating to investigations of anti-dumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) investigations. This process may be initiated by private parties. And thirdly, Chapter 11 applies to disputes between signatory states and investors from another signatory state (foreign investors). This is one of the more controversial aspects of NAFTA that allows foreign investors to use binding arbitration against another signatory state that violates the investment provisions of NAFTA. Although NAFTA does not create a private right of action, it encourages alternative dispute resolution methods and the study of the methods' effectiveness to resolve private international disputes.

Chapter 20 establishes the dispute settlement process of conflicts between the parties over the interpretation and application of NAFTA. The process works in multiple stages, giving the disputing parties the opportunity to resolve conflicts in a cooperative manner prior to seeking resolution before a tribunal. The first stage of this process allows NAFTA parties to seek consultations with the other parties in an attempt to arrive at a mutually satisfactory resolution. Pursuant to Article 2006 of NAFTA, the parties have three responsibilities during the consultation phase: (1) to provide the other parties with sufficient information to enable a full examination of how the proposed measure might affect the operation of NAFTA; (2) to protect confidential or proprietary information; and (3) to avoid resolution that adversely affects the interests under NAFTA of any other party.

If the consultations fail to resolve a dispute within the identified statutory period, any of the parties may subsequently request a meeting of the Commission, which Chapter 20 charges with resolving disputes relating to interpretation or application of NAFTA. The Commission must convene shortly after a party has requested its involvement in a dispute, and must attempt to "resolve the dispute promptly." Moreover, in attempting to resolve the dispute, the Commission is permitted to call in technical advisors and make recommendations. It may also have recourse to good offices and have access to conciliation, mediation, or other dispute resolution procedures. If upon the termination of the allocated statutory period (generally thirty days), the parties still have not reached an agreement, any party to the dispute may request that the Commission convene an arbitral panel comprised of five members chosen by the parties from a predetermined roster of eligible panelists. Of the five panelists, the disputing parties must agree on a chairperson; each party then selects two additional panelists who are citizens of the other disputing party.

Upon the convening of a dispute resolution panel, Article 2012 of NAFTA lays out specific Rules of Procedure to which the panel must adhere. These rules guarantee the provision of at least one hearing before the panel, as well as an opportunity to provide initial and rebuttal submissions. Once the panel has heard all arguments and considered all submissions, it must issue an initial report containing: (1) its findings of fact; (2) its determination as to whether the measure at issue is or would be inconsistent with the NAFTA obligations; and (3) recommendations for resolution of the dispute. Thirty days after the issuance of this initial report, the panel must issue a final report. Up on receipt of the final report, the disputing parties must agree on a resolution that conforms with the panel's determinations and recommendations.

Notably, the findings contained in the final report are not binding on the parties. Article 2018 provides that upon receipt of the final report the parties shall agree on a resolution, and provides that such a resolution "normally shall conform to the determinations and recommendations of the panel." Thus, the parties are not required to follow the letter of a given panel's decision.

If the parties cannot come to an agreement, the complaining party still has some recourse. If within thirty days of receiving the final report the parties have not reached agreement on a mutually satisfactory resolution, Article 2019 of NAFTA empowers the complaining party to suspend benefits to the other party of equivalent effect until the parties resolve the dispute. In making its decision, the complaining party should suspend benefits in the same sector or sectors as that affected by the measure in question, unless the party believes that it is impracticable to suspend same-sector benefits. In such an instance, the complaining party may suspend benefits in other sectors. The cat and mouse game does not end there, however, and if the violating party believes that the suspended benefits are "manifestly excessive," it may then request that the Commission establish another panel to assess the claim.

Aside from Chapter 20, both Chapter 11 and Chapter 19 of NAFTA provide mechanisms for dispute resolution for different subject matters. Chapter 11 provides the rules for dispute resolution with respect to investment disputes; Chapter 19 provides the guidelines for disputes relating to anti-dumping or countervailing duties. Chapter 19 disputes are the most prolific; importantly, they do not require the initial procedural steps that the Chapter 20 disputes do, but rather proceed directly to the arbitration stage. As a result, Chapter 19 panels appear to resolve the disputes more effectively than do Chapter 20 panels, perhaps because the parties must deal with disputes at a faster pace.

Private Commercial Disputes under NAFTA - NAFTA does not create a private right of action, however, it promotes alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods and mandates the study of the methods' effectiveness to resolve private international disputes. ADR methods offer many advantages over litigation when resolving international investor disputes. Although American businesses embrace litigation to resolve disputes, many other cultures view litigation as a personal failure. International investors using arbitration may not have to worry about some of the factors that can plague them in international litigation, including: choice of law, forum non convenience, home country bias, foreign judicial procedures, or foreign rules of evidence.


NAFTA mandates that the signatory states create an Advisory Committee on Private Commercial Disputes (Advisory Committee) to study the effectiveness of arbitration and other ADR methods to resolve private international commercial disputes. The Advisory Committee was charged with:


1. compilation, examination, and assessment of existing means for the settlement of private international commercial disputes;


2. identification of sectors and types of businesses that would particularly benefit from the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR);


3. promotion of the use of arbitration and other procedures for the resolution of private international commercial disputes in the NAFTA region, including ways to increase private sector awareness of the benefits of using ADR;


4. facilitation of the use of arbitration and other procedures in the NAFTA region, including the use of model ADR and other contractual clauses;


5. opportunities for expanded cooperation between institutions with an interest or involvement in ADR in the NAFTA region; and


6. issues relating to the enforcement of arbitration agreements and awards, and other litigation issues related to ADR.


The Advisory Committee issued its initial report in November 1996, concluding that "[e]ach NAFTA country has laws and procedures in place to support the use of arbitration, including the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards, at both the federal and state/provincial levels. No new legislation is recommended at the present time." The Advisory Committee observed a growing interest in ADR methods other than arbitration, noting that "[t]he availability, uses and effectiveness of mediation, conciliation and other forms of ADR are being explored further by the [Advisory] Committee." The Advisory Committee included a brochure of the ADR methods available to parties contracting in the NAFTA region and suggested model clauses to include in private contracts. The Advisory Committee further established subcommittees to study various aspects of ADR in the signatory states.

Investor-State Disputes Under Chapter 11--A Controversial Past - Chapter 11 permits foreign investors to invoke binding international arbitration against another signatory state that violates the investment provisions of NAFTA. Although other countries have attempted to secure similar protections under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), currently NAFTA is the only international agreement that provides these protections. Section A of Chapter 11 (section A), designed to deter "illegal takings of U.S. and Canadian businesses by the Mexican government," protects the rights of foreign investors from governmental action by signatory states. Specifically, foreign investors are protected from signatory states' measures. Section A affords four basic protections to foreign investors: parity with investors in the signatory state; freedom from performance requirements; free investment-related funds transfers; and expropriation only in accordance with the international law.


Section B of Chapter 11 (section B) establishes a procedure for binding international arbitration between a signatory state and a foreign investor. The adoption of section B "represents the first time Mexico has entered into an international agreement providing for investor-state arbitration."


Under other multilateral trade regimes, including GATT, companies that suffer damages due to the actions of a foreign government have no right of private action against the host state; their only remedy is to persuade their home state to pursue a trade complaint on their behalf. Where this remedy is unavailable or inadequate (which is almost invariably the case), the investor's only option is to pursue its complaint under the sometimes inhospitable judicial system of the host country.


Section B allows foreign investors to use international arbitration to resolve a dispute when a foreign investor alleges that foreign investors' investment has been damaged by a signatory state's violation of section A. The foreign investor has three years from when the foreign investor acquires knowledge of the alleged section A violation to notify the signatory state of the foreign investor's intent to submit a claim. Before filing a claim, the foreign investor and signatory state (the disputing parties) are required to attempt settlement. If the disputing parties fail to settle, and the foreign investor wants to pursue arbitration, the foreign investor must notify the signatory state within ninety days of submitting the claim. After following these procedures, the foreign investor may submit the claim to arbitration no earlier than six months after the alleged violation. Arbitration fora available to the foreign investor are:


(a) the ICSID Convention [Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States], provided that both the disputing Party and the Party of the investor are parties to the Convention;


(b) the Additional Facility Rules of ICSID, provided that either the disputing Party or the Party of the investor, but not both, is a party to the ICSID Convention; or

(c) the UNCITRAL [United Nations Commission on International Trade Law] Arbitration Rules.

The United States is the only signatory state that is a party to the ICSID Convention; therefore, Chapter 11 disputes by foreign investors cannot be heard under this convention. However, claims brought by American investors or claims against the United States may be brought under the ICSID Additional Facility Rules or UNCITRAL. The Additional Facility Rules are only available for investment disputes between signatory states and foreign investors. Specifically, the Additional Facility Rules apply in the following situations:


(i) conciliation or arbitration proceedings for the settlement of investment disputes arising between parties one of which is not a Contracting State or a national of a Contracting State;

(ii) conciliation or arbitration proceedings between parties at least one of which is a Contracting State or a national of a contracting State for the settlement of disputes that do not directly arise out of an investment; and


(iii) fact-finding proceedings.


While there are other international arbitration fora, the available rules for arbitration under Chapter 11 are limited to the three enumerated in the chapter. The arbitration fora available for each signatory state under Chapter 11 are outlined in Table 1.



Remedies available under Chapter 11 arbitrations include: monetary damages and applicable interest, however, no punitive damages are allowed; restitution of property; and costs in accordance with the selected arbitration rules. According to published arbitration awards, arbitrators have used discretion assessing costs.

Not published yet

ADR in Regional Level

This part is devoted to appreciate in a bit detail about the importance of ADR in regional institutes. Thus, the experience of European Union and North American Nations under NAFTA in the settlement of dispute is taken care of. Lastly, the African approach to ADR is considered though it is only in its infant stage of development. I put it in the last for we got many things that we should learn from the other two.

Europe

Access to justice is at the top of the political agenda in all Member States of the European Union. More and more disputes are being brought to court. As a result, this has brought not only longer waiting periods for disputes to be resolved but has pushed up legal costs to such levels as to often be disproportionate to the value of the dispute.

This is where ADRs come in. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods are extra-judicial procedures used for resolving civil or commercial disputes. These usually involve the collaboration of disputing parties in finding a solution to their dispute with the help of a neutral third-party. As there are numerous types of ADR methods available, they can be applied and adapted to a variety of areas whether civil or commercial in nature.

The advent of the single European market has increased the movement of goods and of people across the European Union. Unfortunately, it also has increased the number of disputes involving nationals of different Member States. These cross-border disputes add another dimension of complexity to already complicated issues. In this context, ADRs are regarded as an important element in the attempt to provide fair and efficient dispute-resolution mechanisms at EU level.

In recent years, the use of ADRs has increased considerably in the European Union. They are being used to resolve disputes between citizens and administrations, within families, working relationships or yet again in commercial relations and consumer disputes.

At the European Council on Justice and Home Affairs that took place in Tampere (Finland) in October 1999, EU leaders drew attention to how much importance they place on the role of ADR in cross-border disputes. In March 2000 at the Lisbon Summit on employment and the information society, EU leaders asked the European Commission and the EU Council of Ministers to reflect upon ways of applying ADR methods to resolve conflicts in the area of e-commerce in view of promoting consumer confidence.

In the field of consumer disputes, ADR has become a special priority of the Commission. As such, it has adopted two recommendations on the subject:

  • one on procedures involving a third party who proposes or imposes a solution (30 March 1998);
  • another on procedures which are restricted to a single attempt to draw conflicting parties together to help them find a common solution (4 April 2001).

Furthermore, a network of national bodies (ECC-NET) was created to facilitate the task of finding extra-judicial solutions to cross-border consumer disputes. The European Commission has established to ADR related organisations:  The European Extra Judicial Network (“EEJ-Net”) and the Financial Services Complaints Network (“FIN-NET”) for matters relating to financial services. The Commission’s Green Paper says: “All political and legislative endeavours, initiatives and debates to date at national, Community and international level have been aimed at preserving the quality of ADRs in terms of accessibility, effectiveness and guarantees of good justice while maintaining their flexibility.”

The Commission has launched in April 2002 a Green Paper on ADR so as to initiate a constructive debate on a certain number of legal issues, which have been raised as regards alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law. The questions in the Green Paper relate to the essence of the various means of alternative dispute resolution such as clauses in contracts, limitation periods, confidentiality, the validity of consent given, the effectiveness of agreements generated by the process, the training of third parties, their accreditation and the rules governing their liability.

The Green Paper talks of certain non-determinative forms of ADR helping to achieve social harmony in that “the parties do not engage in confrontation but rather a process of rapprochement”. Well that is fine in my experience but, in reality, much mediation involves parties who have a considerable enmity towards one another. They may be engaging in the process for a whole variety of reasons - but the desire for non-confrontation and the achievement of rapprochement is often not at the forefront of their minds! They may be engaged in the ADR process because they are adopting a commercial “common sense” approach to the dispute. The dispute may already be subject to litigation with large costs already incurred and perhaps is approaching a lengthy and costly trial. Parties may be there because they have been advised to give the process a chance.

They may be there to elicit information. They may be there to give the impression of being reasonable. Whatever the reason or motivation for parties attending mediations or engaging in other forms of ADR, there is no doubt that it is becoming increasingly popular.

Commission Green Papers are documents intended to stimulate debate and launch a process of consultation at European level on a particular topic (such as social policy, the single currency, and telecommunications). These consultations may then lead to the publication of a White Paper, translating the conclusions of the debate into practical proposals for Community action.

Following this consultation period and based upon the contributions of the debate's participants, the Commission has decided (see the Commission Scoreboard on Justice and Home Affairs COM(2003) 291 final) to launch two initiatives:

  • Work will start in 2003 to develop a European plan for best practice in mediation in 2004 a a European code of conduct has been launched.
  • In 2004 the Commission is planning to present a proposal for a directive to promote mediation.

On 2 July 2004 a conference was held in Brussels to discuss self-regulatory initiatives for mediation in general and to launch the European code of conduct. The conference was attended by some 100 participants. The morning session saw a number of presentations on national experiences of self-regulation. The afternoon session was introduced by Mr Faull, Director General for DG Justice, Freedom and Security of the European Commission, and was followed by a panel debate on the European code of conduct.

The concept of a European code of conduct as a voluntary instrument to improve quality and trust in mediation was supported. It was generally considered that the code should remain an informal document at this stage and that it should not be adopted formally by any of the institutions of the European Union. It will be the responsibility of those individual mediators and organizations that wish to subscribe to the code to also take ownership of the code, including defining implementation mechanisms.

It was agreed that as a next step the code will be made available on the internet together with general information on the code and a first list of mediation organizations who have declared that they subscribe to the code.

As further follow-up the Commission services will consider organising ad hoc meetings with representatives of organisations subscribing to the code to review implementation and content as necessary.

Further large-scale meetings may also be organised on a yearly basis, open for all interested parties, to discuss specific issues of ADR in order to maintain dialogue and encourage exchange of experiences. The next meeting of that type could be held in 2005.

As to access to justice – this is a fundamental right as provided for by Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the right to valid remedies has been decided as being a general principle of community law (Case 222/84 Johnston [1986] ECR 1651) and this is entrenched in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

Unfortunately with litigation and arbitration, access to justice is sometimes restricted due to the inability of a party to pay the costs involved and by reason of the restrictions of legal aid (not available at all in arbitration and frequently not granted or not adequate in civil litigation in the UK). So it has long been said with a certain irony that “Justice like the Ritz Hotel is open to all!” Perhaps ADR is an effective means of addressing that sorry state of affairs.

It is evident that the European Union is taking positive initiatives to facilitate access to justice through ADR. These initiatives are highlighted in the Green Paper on alternative dispute resolution in civil and commercial law presented by the Commission of the European Communities on 19th February 2002. That paper states that ADR is an “integral part of the policies aimed at improving access to justice”.

In some Countries there is State funding for forms of ADR – for instance in France the justice conciliators are not paid by the parties and in Ireland the family mediation service’s operating costs are funded by the Government. In Sweden the office for damage attributable to road traffic has its operating costs covered by motor insurance companies and in the UK the costs of mediation may properly be claimed against the Legal Services Commission on the part of a legally aid party.

In seeking to harmonise legislation in Member States the Council of the EU in a draft directive (COM (2001) 13 final) has said “Legal aid shall be granted in cases where disputes are settled via extra-judicial procedures, if the law makes provision for such procedures or if the parties are ordered by the court to have recourse to them.” (Art 16).

ADR and its increasing deployment is a political priority within the European Union, particularly in relation to the resolution of disputes involving electronic commerce (note for instance the March 2000 Lisbon European Council).

Different member states not surprisingly approach ADR differently. Finland makes conciliation a pre-requisite to court action. In Germany judges are asked to support an amicable resolution through court proceedings. In France Article 21 of the Civil Code states that it is the duty of judges to reconcile the parties. In England the Civil Procedure Rules expressly encourage the use of ADR. Various member states have been testing different ADR procedures.

It suggests that it may be sensible to promote legislation extending the limitation periods to account for the period of mediation. The downside is that sometimes ADR fails to achieve a resolution and occasionally (though it is felt rarely) they fail because one party has not been acting in good faith in the process and may simply have been “buying time”. That represents a not insignificant risk and it might be considered that the automatic extension of limitation periods would be unfair in such circumstances. Furthermore the existence of time pressure is sometimes a positive benefit in ensuring that the ADR process reacts flexibly and speedily to the situation at hand and the very existence of time may occasionally be a real disincentive to settlement being achieved.

Confidentiality is a key to the success of ADR procedures whereas the trend with litigation is for openness (including public hearings). In a commercial context confidentiality as such has its benefits and its downsides. . It allows parties to settle matters outside the glare of publicity which may have adverse consequences on their reputations, goodwill, and even share prices. In fact mediation may take advantage of the leverage of publicity in litigation in the sense that parties will know that if the ADR processes fails, it may mean that everything in the dispute will come out into the open – that itself may be an incentive for the parties to make sure that the ADR process succeeds. On the other hand the existence of confidentiality sometimes encourages parties to take realistic positions, which they perhaps would be less willing to expose in a public area.

The bottom line is that ADR is succeeding in the UK and deserves to succeed across Europe but the word needs to be spread. Plainly there is a very favourable climate for ADR and mediation in particular within the European Union. Member States are taking their own initiatives. The commercial community once it has a sufficient experience of the ADR processes will naturally warm to them and at least see ADR as a sensible option for use before an costly “battle” takes place in litigation or arbitration (or at suitable times during the course of litigation or arbitration but before judgment is delivered). In England there is even a mediation scheme in respect of cases going to the Court of Appeal which have already been determined in the High Court or County Court. A body such as “Euro Expert” is especially well placed to promote the judicious and sensible use of ADR in its members’ home territories and also in cross-border disputes - and I for one encourage such an approach by Euro Expert and the members of its constituent member organizations.

Not published yet

A. Background and Working of ICC

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) was founded in 1919 to serve world business by promoting trade and investment, open markets for goods and services, and the free flow of capital. The organization's international secretariat was established in Paris and the ICC's International Court of Arbitration (ICA) was created in 1923.

The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) is a non-profit, private international organization that works to promote and support global trade and globalization. It serves as an advocate of some world businesses in the global economy, in the interests of economic growth, job creation, and prosperity. As a global business organization, made up of member states, it helps the development of global outlooks on business matters. ICC has direct access to national governments worldwide through its national committees among others.

To attain this objective, ICC has developed a range of activities. The ICC International Court of Arbitration (ICA) is a body which hears and resolves private disputes between parties. Its voluntary rule-writing for business spreads best practice in areas as varied as banking, marketing, anti-corruption and environmental management. Their policy-making and advocacy work keeps national governments, the United Nations system and other global bodies apprised of the views of the world business on some of the most pressing issues of the day.

ICC's first president was Etienne Clémentel. In December 2004 the World Council elected Yong Sung Park as the Chairman of ICC, Marcus Wallenberg as the Vice-Chairman and Jean-Rene Fourtou as the Honorary Chairman. In June 2005, Guy Sebban was elected International Secretariat by the World Council.

Initially representing the private sectors of Belgium, Britain, France, Italy and the United States, it expanded to represent worldwide business organizations in around 140 countries.

World Council, National Committees, and International Secretariat - The ICC World Council is a general assembly of a major intergovernmental organization composed of business executives. National committees name delegates to the Council. Ten direct members may be invited to participate. It usually meets twice a year. The Council elects the Chairman and Vice-Chairman for two-year terms. The Council elects the Executive Board on the Chairman's recommendation.

The Secretary General heads the International Secretariat. The Secretary General works with the national committees to carry out ICC's work programs and is appointed by the World Council. The ICC International Secretariat, is based in Paris and is the operational arm of ICC. It carries out the work programme approved by the World Council, feeding business views into intergovernmental organizations.

The Executive Board is responsible for implementing ICC policy. The Executive Board has between 15 and 30 members of both business leaders and ex-officio members. They serve for three years. They have a one third rotation in membership. The Chairman, his immediate predecessor, and the Vice-Chairman form the Chairmanship.

National Committees represent the ICC in their respective countries. They recommend to the ICC their respective national business concerns in its policy recommendations to governments and international organizations. There are established formal ICC structures in over 90 countries. In countries where there is no national committee, companies and organizations such as chambers of commerce and professional associations can become direct members. ICC has access to national governments through its network of national committees.

Finance Committee, advices the Executive Board on all financial matters. It reviews the financial implications of ICC's activities and supervises the flow of revenues and expenses of the organization. The Chairman is elected by the ICC World Council.

Commissions develop international and national government initiatives in their subject areas. They also develop business positions for submission to international organizations and governments. Commissions are composed of more than 500 business experts from member companies.

B. Dispute Resolution Services

ICC International Court of Arbitration (ICA) continues to provide the most trusted system of commercial arbitration in the world, having received 14000 cases since its inception in 1923. Over the past decade, the Court's workload has considerably expanded.

The Court's membership has also grown and now covers 86 countries. With representatives in North America, Latin and Central America, Africa and the Middle East and Asia, the ICC Court has significantly increased its training activities on all continents and in all major languages used in international trade.

In the world of international commerce, the ICC is perhaps best known for its role in promoting and administering international arbitration as a means to resolve disputes arising under international contracts. It is one of the world's leading institutions in providing international dispute resolution services, together with the American Arbitration Association, the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA), the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC), and the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce.

It is common for international commercial contracts to provide for an agreed means of resolving any disputes that may arise, and the ICC is one of leading institutions for administering international arbitration. The ICC's dispute resolution services also include ADR procedures such as mediation and expert determinations.

With the launch of ICC's BASCAP (Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy) initiative, more than 130 companies and trade associations are now actively engaged in a set of projects designed to defeat the pirates and increase public and political awareness of the economic and social harm caused by this illegal activity. BASCAP is using ICC's global media network and national committee structure to spread the word.

BASCAP was launched in 2004 by the then ICC Chairman, Jean-Rene Fourtou, and its an operational platform established by ICC that connects all business sectors and cuts across all national borders, drawing them together to ensure that their message is clearly heard by governments and the public. BASCAP is prepared for a sustained effort to end this scourge. As the only business organization with a truky global reach, ICC is well placed to take the fight against counterfeiting to the level required for action to be effective.

D. ICC Rules

Since its establishment the ICC has adopted different rules to foster the settlement of disputes by using ADR. The rule that establishes the International Court of Arbitration, i.e. ICC Rule of Arbitration is the most recent one. In addition, it has adopted the ICC Rules of Optional Conciliation which came in to force in January, 1988. The later rule is now substantially being replaced by ICC ADR Rules. The widely used definition of ADR is not fully accepted by the ICC. For instance, ADR has been defined by as “Amicable Dispute Resolution” as contrary to the widely used meaning ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’. In addition, in most of the official ICC documents and its rules, ADR does not include arbitration but only proceedings which do not result in a decision or award of the Neutral which can be enforced at law.

The ICC ADR Rules are the result of discussions between dispute resolution experts and representatives of the business community from 75 countries. Their purpose is to offer business partners a means of resolving disputes amicably, in the way best suited to their needs. A distinctive feature of the Rules is the freedom the parties are given to choose the technique they consider most conducive to settlement. Failing agreement on the method to be adopted, the fallback shall be mediation.

As an amicable method of dispute resolution, ICC ADR should be distinguished from ICC arbitration. They are two alternative means of resolving disputes, although in certain circumstances they may be complementary. For instance, it is possible for parties to provide for ICC arbitration in the event of failure to reach an amicable settlement. Similarly, parties engaged in an arbitration may turn to ICC ADR if their dispute seems to warrant a different, more consensual approach. The two services remain distinct, however, each administered by a separate secretariat based at ICC headquarters in Paris. The ICC ADR Rules, which replace the 1988 ICC Rules of Optional Conciliation, may be used in domestic as well as international contexts.

Let’s have a much closer look at the ICC Arbitration Rule adopted in the year 1998. The arbitration rule composed of different parts that supplement the body of the rule. It has 35 articles, which makes the main body of the rule, followed by three Appendixes.

The rule starts with a standard arbitration clause and standard clause for an ICC pre-arbitration reference procedure and ICC arbitration. As to my own view, it is desired to attain uniformity and common understanding between the disputants as to the valid effect of the proceeding and give full power either to the ICC rule and/or the tribunal as the case may be. Here are these standard clauses, the first being the arbitral clause and the second is the clause for an ICC pre-arbitration reference procedure and ICC arbitration. (www.iccarbitration.org).

“All disputes arising out of or in connection with the present contract shall be finally settled under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by one or more arbitrators appointed in accordance with the said Rules.”

“Any party to this contract shall have the right to have recourse to and shall be bound by the pre-arbitral referee procedure of the International Chamber of Commerce in accordance with its Rules for a Pre-Arbitral Referee Procedure.

All disputes arising out of or in connection with the present contract shall be finally settled under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce by one or more arbitrators appointed in accordance with the said Rules of Arbitration.”

The main body of the rule has 35 Articles under seven different headings. The first part is ‘Introductory Provisions’ composed of the declaration of the existence of the International Court of Arbitration (ICA) and definition of terms. The second part deals with the ‘the Commencement of the Arbitration’ like the effect of the arbitration agreement and the like. The next one is about the “Arbitral Tribunal” followed by the part which defines the ‘Arbitral Proceeding’. In these parts the number, appointment and replacement of arbitrators, and the place, rules, languages and closing of the tribunal has been well defined. The fifth part discusses about the ‘Award’ which, for instance, limits the maximum period when the ward should be given to be six months from the commencement of the tribunal. The last two parts speaks about the ‘Cost’ and ‘Miscellaneous’ matters, where the cost part is supplemented by Appendix III.

The three appendixes supplement the main body of the rule and they are equally persuasive. Appendix I is the ‘Statutes of International Court of Arbitration’ which stipulates the function of the court, its members and their appointment and their roles. Appendix II is entitled as ‘Internal Rule of the ICA’. This part exclusively regulates the confidential nature of courts work, the relationship of the members of the court (the Chairman, Vice-Chairmen, and members and alternate members - collectively designated as members) with panellists (arbitrators) and with the ICC National Committee. For instance, the members of the ICA may not act as arbitrators or as counsel in cases submitted to ICC arbitration. The last one, Appendix III, deals with ‘Arbitration Costs and Fees’ supported by two schedules, i.e. administrative expenses and arbitrator’s fee. The amounts of payment are determined according to the pecuniary interest involved over the matter in a regressive rate. The least payment is $2,500 for the administrative expense and the same mount as arbitrators’ fee for a dispute involving an amount not exceeding $50,000, and the maximum is $88,800 for the administrative expense and 0.01% to 0.056% as arbitrators’ fees for a dispute involving more than $100, 000, 000 pecuniary interests.

ICC has over eight decades of experience in devising rules to govern and facilitate the conduct of international business. These include those designed to resolve the conflicts that inevitably arise in trading relations. The ICC being intergovernmental institute is one of the popular institutes in the field of settling trade disputes. Among the means it uses in the settlement of disputes, ADR is one. It has also arbitration tribunal, International Court of Arbitration- ICA, established by the ICC arbitration Rule. Though, it is hardly possible to compare it, the Addis Chamber of Commerce (AACC) Arbitration Rule resembles the ICC arbitration Rule is some respects, like the existence of the cost and expense schedules. A question can be raised as to the cost effectiveness of ADR by observing the schedule of ICC and AACC arbitration rules.