Month: June 2018

ADR in Statutory Crimes and Crimes Against the State

Article 159(2) (c) of the Constitution provides firm foundation for ADR by mandating courts and national tribunals to promote “alternative forms of dispute resolution including reconciliation, mediation, arbitration and traditional dispute resolution mechanism”, the Constitution contemplates submission to such ADR mechanisms in the context of judicial proceedings in exercise of judicial authority vested in the Judiciary. However, in their bid to promote ADR, courts are required by sub-article (3) to guarantee the protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Constitution.

The question as to the suitability of ADR in statutory crimes and crimes against the State is largely dependent on our societal values that shape our conception of justice. The extent to which our society is prepared to apply ADR mechanisms in criminal law is dictated by our conventional approach to sanctions in criminal law, which is in turn informed by our conceptions of justice – the choices we make as between redressive, restorative, distributive, preventive, corrective and retributive justice.

Expanding the Legal Framework for the Resolution of Intergovernmental Disputes

My paper titled “The Place of ADR in Intergovernmental Disputes” published online last week was one of the subject of discussion at the momentous meeting between the Senate and members of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Kenya Branch) on 14th June 2018. At the meeting, members of the Institute urged the legislators to consider alternative dispute resolution as a critical feature of legislation in which dispute resolution is contemplated. The Institute highlighted the glaring gap in legislative instruments with regard to the pressing need to incorporate ADR mechanisms and recognize the role of such institutions as the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators…

The Place of ADR in Intergovernmental Disputes

1. Introduction   The Constitution of Kenya, 2010 establishes a devolved system of government comprised of the national and forty-seven county governments. According to article 6(2) of the Constitution, The governments at the national and county levels are distinct and inter-dependent. They are mandated to conduct their mutual relations on the basis of consultation and …

The Place of ADR in Intergovernmental Disputes Read More »

Five Mistakes Entrepreneurs Make and How to Avoid Them

When most people, including corporations, invest capital in a business venture, their focus is almost invariably on the prospect of profitable returns, returns and returns. Hardly will you ever hear investors mention goodwill and healthy business relationships in their priority list. Yet these are the most valuable assets in any business undertaking. Loss of goodwill …

Five Mistakes Entrepreneurs Make and How to Avoid Them Read More »

A Fusion of Mandated and Voluntary Mediation

The debate as to whether court-mandated mediation offends the right of access to justice by litigation is never-ending; at least not soon. The reality of the matter, though, is that it is inoffensive, and works to the best interest of the parties. Besides being party-controlled, it is efficient, expeditious and cost-effective. I believe that the Italian model discussed in the article below helps to rest the unnecessary debate that emerges merely as academic and intended to leave legal counsel in control of the judicial process where the money is. But how about the real interests of their clients? Does it really matter? Maybe, maybe not. At least not where the profession is concerned. So what is paramount: the elegance of legal practice in litigation or the real benefits of dispute resolution? Decide for yourselves.

Scroll to Top