Reducing the Price of Justice: Alternative Dispute Resolution in Bangladesh 

The cornerstone of the rule of law is equal access to justice, and the Constitution of Bangladesh proclaims equal protection and equality before the law, but the reality often falls short of this ideal. Exorbitant costs, legal complexities, gender bias, corruption, and lengthy proceedings are barriers to access. They make justice expensive, requiring money, time, and connections. For the poorest elements of Bangladeshi society, the impoverished and the marginalized, justice from the courts is simply unobtainable.  

Justice and the rule of law are not privileges to be purchased; they should be rights guaranteed by the state, irrespective of one’s means or social standing. Justice should also be timely: as William Gladstone declared, “Justice delayed is justice denied.” This sentiment has a hollow ring in Bangladesh, however, where the backlog in the courts has reached a staggering 4.2 million cases. Bangladesh has just one judge for every 94,444 citizens, far short of neighboring countries. India has one judge for every 47,619 people, and Pakistan for every 50,000 people. A recent report from the Supreme Court revealed that nearly 789,181 cases (463,235 civil and 325,943 criminal) have languished in the courts for more than five years. Shockingly, some cases have been pending for over two decades.  

But into this dark tableau there shines a ray of hope, in the form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR).  

Much of the backlog that the legal system is struggling with consists of minor and negotiable disputes. Local administrative bodies such as municipal governments and Union Parishads (councils) hold jurisdiction over many of these conflicts. Resolving them at the local level would substantially alleviate the time and financial strain experienced by individuals and ease the burden on the courts.  

Informal mediation at the community level, in fact, has a long history in Bangladesh and is recognized in various laws, including the 1898 Code of Criminal Procedure, the 1908 Code of Civil Procedure, the 1985 Family Courts Act, the 2015 Legal Aid (Legal Advice and Alternative Dispute Resolution) Regulation, and the 2016 Village Court Rules. These mediation practices often suffer from inadequate oversight and poorly trained personnel, however, leading to complaints of injustice and abuse of power.  

In addition to purely informal mediation, there are some formal structures for ADR established by the 2004 Conciliation of Dispute (Municipal Areas) Board Act and the Village Court Act of 2006. These acts empower local elected representatives to adjudicate disputes within their communities using a blend of formal and informal mechanisms. Surveys of public opinion have found a strong preference for this option. In the Justice Audit Survey of 2018, for example, an overwhelming majority of respondents, 87 percent, favored informal justice systems or ADR facilitated by local elected officials and community leaders, while just 9 percent preferred the courts and just 4 percent would go to the police.  

The Asia Foundation, through its South Asia Governance Fund (SAGF), has partnered with the Madaripur Legal Aid Association (MLAA) to promote and support ADR in semi-urban and rural areas, with an emphasis on impoverished and marginalized communities. This partnership encompasses various strategies, including the establishment of community-based associations known as Legal Protection Groups (LPGs), which assist marginalized communities, particularly women, in seeking timely justice. We also offer capacity building for legal services providers, conduct public awareness-raising campaigns for ADR, and advocate for government legal reforms. 

A recent success story exemplifies the effectiveness of ADR. Sabina, a poor woman from a marginalized community in Rajoir, Madaripur, was being mentally and physically abused by her husband, Abu Sayeed, who demanded a bigger dowry. Sabina’s family was eventually forced to sell land to meet Abu’s demand for one million Bangladeshi takas. But Abu then emigrated to Italy as a laborer, abandoning his wife to further abuse by her in-laws.  

Sabina filed a case in family court, which was ultimately referred to the mayor of Rajoir for mediation. While the courts in Bangladesh can direct mayors to conduct investigations, the process can take as long as five years due to staff shortages, but with SAGF and MLAA support, Sabina’s case was concluded within two months. The mayor launched an inquiry, facilitated by the MLAA and the local Legal Protection Group. Mediation sessions, overseen by the mayor and community leaders, resulted in a divorce settlement. Abu Sayeed’s family was ordered to return the dowry and pay maintenance to Sabina, a total of 1,350,000 takas, which were paid to her family in the presence of community leaders.  

In field experiences over the past two years, The Asia Foundation and the MLAA have observed that individuals often turn to their local representatives to seek justice. However, existing legislation supporting ADR, particularly the Conciliation of Dispute (Municipal Areas) Board Act, 2004, has significant limitations. The Act allows for the settlement of disputes involving sums no greater than 25,000 Bangladeshi takas, which is inadequate for contemporary conflicts. The Act lacks clear procedures, creating uncertainty about the mayor’s neutrality or authority. It neglects to specify timelines for proceedings, and it lacks provisions for absent applicants, provisions for false filings, and standardized forms and applications. Many disputes consequently remain unresolved, forcing individuals back to the courts with their high costs and lengthy delays. 

In an effort to alleviate the obstacles and frustrations faced by rural populations seeking justice, the government has amended the Village Court Act three times, but jurisdictional inconsistencies among various organs of local government continue to hamper ADR. 

The Asia Foundation and the MLAA have collaborated with the Municipal Association of Bangladesh to identify gaps in existing laws and barriers to the wider use of ADR. Through stakeholder meetings and workshops, this tripartite team has developed suggestions to revamp the law. Key among them are raising the financial limit on disputes to one million takas, streamlining the implementation of judgements, addressing concerns about mayoral authority and neutrality, expediting rulemaking, and assigning city police to support Municipal Board activities. 

We believe that reforming the law and expanding its jurisdiction, along with other necessary reforms, will save time and money for litigants and lighten the burden on the courts by resolving disputes at the local level. Promoting awareness and building the capacity of ADR mechanisms nationwide will ultimately strengthen the rule of law and help the justice system reduce its backlog of cases. In a society of laws, justice must be timely, accessible, and affordable for all. 

The Asia Foundation’s South Asia Governance Fund, supported by the Department of State, makes small grants to address critical governance challenges in the region.  

Asinur Reza is a program coordinator with The Asia Foundation’s South Asia Governance Fund, and Mohammad Ibrahim Mia is an attorney and coordinator of the MLAA’s Promoting the Rule of Law through Strengthening Formal and Informal Justice Systems project, both based in Bangladesh. They can be reached at [email protected] and [email protected], respectively. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the authors, not those of The Asia Foundation or the Madaripur Legal Aid Association.