IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rfh/bbejor/v12y2023i4p577-585.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Alternative Dispute Resolution in Criminal Cases: Challenges and Possibilities in Pakistani Legal framework

Author

Listed:
  • Nasir Majeed

    (Assistant Professor, School of Law, University of Gujrat, Pakistan)

  • Amjad Hilal

    (Assistant Professor, Department of Law and Shariah, University of Swat, Pakistan)

  • Tabinda Rani

    (Lecturer, Department of Law, Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan)

Abstract

The present study had two objectives; to analyze the challenges in introducing Alternative Dispute Resolution (hereinafter ADR) in criminal matters and to explore the possibilities of disposing of the criminal cases through ADR. After deploying doctrinal research methodology the present study found that the poor quality of decision-making non-protection of the public rights hinderance in development of law disregarding the victim advantageous position of the prosecution compromising the constitutional rights of accused lack of well defied rule for ADR and the difference in procedure are the major challenges for alternative dispute resolution in criminal matters. The study also found that criminal cases may be disposed of through ADR in case of private complaint first-time offender simple imprisonment petty offences or by introducing special law and courts or where compounding or compromising of offences is legally allowed. The study further found that the ADR in criminal cases has been and is practiced by way of mediation and plea bargaining. The study recommends that the legislature should introduce appropriate and apposite amendments to accommodate the ADR in criminal justice system of Pakistan.

Suggested Citation

  • Nasir Majeed & Amjad Hilal & Tabinda Rani, 2023. "Alternative Dispute Resolution in Criminal Cases: Challenges and Possibilities in Pakistani Legal framework," Bulletin of Business and Economics (BBE), Research Foundation for Humanity (RFH), vol. 12(4), pages 577-585.
    • Handle: RePEc:rfh:bbejor:v:12:y:2023:i:4:p:577-585
    DOI: https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bbejournal.com/BBE/article/view/671/852
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://bbejournal.com/BBE/article/view/671
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00175?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shavell, Steven, 1995. "Alternative Dispute Resolution: An Economic Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(1), pages 1-28, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Benito Arruñada, 2023. "La protección administrativa de las relaciones financieras," Fedea Economy Notes 2023-11, FEDEA.
    2. Marselli, Riccardo & McCannon, Bryan C. & Vannini, Marco, 2015. "Bargaining in the shadow of arbitration," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 356-368.
    3. Gary Bolton & Kevin Breuer & Ben Greiner & Axel Ockenfels, 2023. "Fixing feedback revision rules in online markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 247-256, April.
    4. Benson Bruce L., 2000. "Jurisdictional Choice in International Trade: Implications for Lex Cybernatoria," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 3-32, March.
    5. Peter Van Wijck & Ben Van Velthoven, 2000. "An Economic Analysis of the American and the Continental Rule for Allocating Legal Costs," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 115-125, March.
    6. Hay, Jonathan R. & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1996. "Toward a theory of legal reform," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 559-567, April.
    7. Nathalie Chappe, 2001. "L'analyse économique d'un mode de résolution des litiges : l'arbitrage," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 15(4), pages 187-208.
    8. Berlemann, Michael & Christmann, Robin, 2019. "Determinants of in-court settlements: empirical evidence from a German trial court," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-162, February.
    9. Bruce Benson, 1999. "To Arbitrate or To Litigate: That Is the Question," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 91-151, September.
    10. M. J. Schmidt-Kessen & R. Nogueira & M. Cantero Gamito, 2020. "Success or Failure?—Effectiveness of Consumer ODR Platforms in Brazil and in the EU," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 659-686, September.
    11. Bruce L. Benson, 1999. "Polycentric Law Versus Monopolized Law : Implications from International Trade for the Potential Success of Emerging Markets," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 15(Fall 1999), pages 36-66.
    12. Salvador Gil‐Pareja & Rafael Llorca‐Vivero & Jordi Paniagua, 2020. "Trade law and trade flows," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 681-704, March.
    13. Halla, Martin, 2007. "Divorce and the Excess Burden of Lawyers," IZA Discussion Papers 2962, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Doornik, Katherine, 2014. "A rationale for mediation and its optimal use," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-10.
    15. Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe & Deffains, Bruno & Lovat, Bruno, 2011. "The dynamics of the legal system," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 95-107.
    16. Garey Ramey & Joel Watson, 2002. "Contractual Intermediaries," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 362-384, October.
    17. Aldashev, Gani & Chaara, Imane & Platteau, Jean-Philippe & Wahhaj, Zaki, 2012. "Using the law to change the custom," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 182-200.
    18. Edward Stringham & Todd Zywicki, 2011. "Rivalry and superior dispatch: an analysis of competing courts in medieval and early modern England," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 497-524, June.
    19. Arruñada Benito & Andonova Veneta, 2008. "Judges' Cognition and Market Order," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 665-692, December.
    20. Salvador Barberà & Danilo Coelho, 2022. "Compromising on compromise rules," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 53(1), pages 95-112, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rfh:bbejor:v:12:y:2023:i:4:p:577-585. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Dr. Muhammad Irfan Chani (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rffhlpk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.