PETALING JAYA: The proposed setting up of the Malaysia Mediation Centre (MMC) should be embraced as part of the nation’s broader justice system, say lawyers.
Former Malaysian Bar president Salim Bashir said the proposal should be viewed as a coordinated effort to raise awareness and to monitor the availability, visibility and benefits of mediations in the country.
“Mediation is a process to facilitate parties in dispute to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution without a need to go through court trials.
“Mediation, being part of a mechanism of an alternative dispute resolution, should be welcomed as a central pillar in resolving disputes in the justice system,” he said when contacted.
Salim stressed that mediators here must meet international standards and equip themselves with comprehensive training to mirror the quality, skill and standards of international mediators.
He noted that courts here have already begun encouraging mediation at the pre-trial stage.
Currently, he said pre-trial mediation is facilitated under the 2016 Practice Direction and the Rules of Court 2012.
He added that mediation can be judge-led or handled by accredited mediators from the Asian International Arbitration Centre and the Bar Council International Mediation Centre.
Settlement agreements reached are recorded as consent judgments, he said.
He also noted that a clearer legal framework could further strengthen mediation by mandating the process as a prerequisite to filing a suit.
“Currently, the agreement for mediation is not made by legislatures or the courts, but by the parties themselves through mediation clauses commonly reflected in some commercial contracts,” he added.
On Saturday, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said the MMC is being mulled under the Legal Aid Department to strengthen out-of-court dispute resolutions, reduce case backlogs and lower legal costs for the public.
Senior lawyer Datuk Seri Dr Jahaberdeen Mohamed Yunoos described the proposal as positive but said its success would depend on implementation.
“A mediation centre can significantly improve access to justice, especially for those who cannot afford long court battles.
“Mediation is faster, cheaper and less formal, so it allows people with genuine grievances to resolve disputes without being shut out by cost or complexity,” he said, adding that it can also help ease court backlogs for certain types of cases.
He cited small commercial disputes, tenancy matters, family issues, and neighbourhood and workplace disputes, as being well suited for mediation.
Jahaberdeen stressed that there must be independence, proper accreditation of mediators, and safeguards to ensure that weaker parties in mediation cases are not pressured into unfair settlements merely to clear backlogs.
Association of Women Lawyers’ vice-president Denise Lim cautioned against confusing mediation with legal advice.
“It is important to clarify that mediators do not provide legal advice.
“Their role is to remain neutral and facilitate communication between parties.
“Any suggestion that mediation improves access to legal advice may therefore be misleading,” she said.
Strengthening legal aid would be more effective in assisting the financially vulnerable, particularly women, she noted.
“If the objective is to improve access to legal advice, particularly for women in family-related matters, it would be simply more efficient to strengthen legal aid services,” Lim said.
