EFFECTIVENESS OF ARBITRATION AS AN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN BANGLADESH

The structured legal system of Bangladesh is costly and takes a long time to complete. As a result, poor citizens in rural areas can seldom seek justice through the formal judicial process. The costs of hiring a lawyer, the time and money expended in court, and the amount of talent, schooling, and experience needed to litigate all act as roadblocks to justice. As a result, poor people prefer or have no choice but to use conventional justice systems such as Shalish. However, Shalish is a very informal type of local judicial practice that heavily influences rural society’s power structure. With time, people with special interests and musclemen dominate the informal justice system at the village level. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) had arisen in the Indian subcontinent to improve the village justice system's condition. For the past 35 years, the state-led rural justice system, such as Shalish and village court, has played an essential role in resolving petty rural litigation, but at a sluggish and informal pace. In the evolving landscape of rustic political influence, this age-old court is having difficulty dispensing justice to the countryside citizens. The study looked at the existing rural informal justice systems in Bangladesh, especially the Union Parishad-led ADR, and argued that, if adequately enabled and revamped, this justice system could be a desirable alternative to the formal system of justice for people living in rural areas. The study aimed to recognize the obstacles that the Union Parishad faces in dispensing justice, both directly and indirectly (UP).


INTRODUCTION
Traditional justice systems are the most critical problem of dispute resolution in developing countries around the world.
It is estimated that the informal justice system in many developed countries deals with many conflicts (Chirayath et al., 2005). For the villagers, it acts as a formal guardian (Singer, 2018). Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) that allows parties to settle disagreements outside of the courtroom. It is a localized version of a standard conflict settlement mechanism. It is a method of resolving disputes between individuals, families, lineages, and neighbors over property, illegal activities, illegitimate relationships, non-cooperation, and other issues in rural society (Mohiuddin, 1999). traditional Shalish in a way that reflects the people's spirit and ambition. However, it appears that reaching an equitable settlement between the opposing parties would be difficult due to ongoing structural-functional issues and a lack of peace and amity within the rural social system. However, one encouraging trend appears to be that several nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have stepped forward in recent years to refashion the conventional Shalish structure (Siddiqui, 1998).
Poor people's preference for Shalish reflects the formal justice system's flaws rather than a reflection of satisfaction with the systems themselves (Woodhouse, 2004). This system has several issues, including corruption and misuse of authority, prejudice in judgment, and non-compliance with international human rights standards, such as discrimination or cruel and degrading punishments, lack of inclusiveness, and transparency. Since the typical Shalish is made up of men, women are especially vulnerable to harsh judgments and penalties (Khair et al., 2002). Traditional Shalish was once thought to be the most efficient means of resolving conflicts.
However, its meaning, importance, and efficacy have all declined in recent years. a) racism, b) corruption, c) gender inequality, d) lack of legal knowledge, e) money and power control, f) shifting social norms are the reasons for shalish's reduced status (Islam, 2011).
Because of difficulties in getting to court, financial problems, literacy issues, and a long-standing unresolved case, poor villagers do not want to file a case informal court. As a result, they tend to resolve the issue in Shalish. In disputes between groups with unequal social or economic standing, however, the dominant party still wins. When it comes to the poor, prejudice is particularly pronounced.
Rather than referring to the legal system, decisions on tradition or faith are often taken based on personal interpretations of texts and cultural norms (Siddiqi, 2003).
Corruption may also infect the process in other respects, such as when a panel member solicits bribes to sway the group's agreement in a particular direction (Golub, 2003). The pressure of the wealthy, the power of money or special favors, the threat of local jihadists, and the dominance of orthodox religious views have all been described as significant bottlenecks in Shalish (Siddiqui, 1998 (Khadiagala, 2001). This process is also favored for several reasons, including its low cost, speed, flexibility, cultural impact, and openness to poor people's concerns about dispute resolution.
According to Woodhouse (2004), people prefer informal conflict resolution because they believe it is less expensive, faster, and simpler to use than the formal legal system. Time, distance, and cost are particularly significant barriers in rural areas. It can take villagers a long time to travel to the district court for interviews.
As a result, the villagers feel at ease resolving their issues through the informal justice system, as informality provides low-cost conflict resolution mechanisms to the vulnerable and uneducated (Depew, 1996

METHODS
The study was conducted from January to October 2020. A research design is a set of conditions for data collection and analysis that seeks to collect relevant data cost-effectively for research purposes (Aminuzzaman, 1991  To assess the effectiveness of the arbitration process/justice system of the local area.
Qualitative and quantitative tools and techniques (average, percentage, correlation), etc.
To find out the community perception of benefits from the arbitration system.

Level of satisfaction
Equal justice, low cost, speedy, dispute resolution, efficiency.
Qualitative and quantitative tools and techniques (average, percentage), etc.
To seek out the potentiality of the arbitration (Shalish) system.

Ensure transparency
Legal order, maintain strong association, high level of collaboration.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The three crucial terms 'ADR' make up the mechanism of the Alternative Dispute Resolution System. The term "alternative" is one or the other of two items, of two things so that one or the other may be preferred, or offering a choice of two or more things. In everyday language, the term "dispute" refers to a disagreement or quarrel. The term resolution refers to something that has been resolved or is in the process of being resolved between the disputing parties.
Thus, the word 'Resolution' can mean 'to resolve.' It can mean an appropriate solution to a problem or challenge.
According to a study followed by Hossain (2012) (Jaiswal & Mandloi, 2020). A mediator attempts to put the parties closer together and assist them in reaching an understanding on their own (Roberts, 2007). Suppose the parties are unable to reach an agreement. In that case, they must go to arbitration-either before the same arbitrator or a new arbitrator-for a final and binding judgment (Touval & Zartman, 1985 (Costantino & Merchant, 1996, 1996. As a result, the parties usually can choose who will decide on the question. The parties will also address the terms and conditions in which negotiators are used to resolving disputes and the procedures for their selection. Some contracts call for "eternal" arbitrators. According to Folberg & Taylor (1984), mediation is the mechanism by which the parties, with the help of a  (Aminuzzaman, 2000).

In developing countries like
Bangladesh, an effective alternative mechanism is needed to break the current justice deadlock (Islam, 2012). At the grassroots level, Shalish is a viable alternative. Despite its flaws, this informal mechanism is the primary method for http://jurnal.unsyiah.ac.id/GASPOL resolving rural conflict (Alim, 2006 These demographical profiles are given below:
The   In case study-1, participants described how political parties currently influence the Shalish procedures that affect local people. The case is present below:

Case Study-1: Conflict on land-related issues
Sujon, Nayon, and Prodip (Pseudo names) were their brothers. They live in the same village. Sujon said that his cousin has illegally consumed his bamboo and sold 20 medium sizes of bamboo from the disputed land to other persons without his permission. The price of that bamboo was around 5000 tk. When the person cutting down bamboo, Sujon created a barrier and discouraged cutting bamboos from this disputed land. In that moments, Saiful's wife abused Sujon. So there was started a massive quarrel. Then Sujons daughter came there and requested him not to harm her father.
At last, they arrange a political party so that they have threatened him. He had gone to the rural community leaders to proper justice. After five days, Salish sittings in their house for a solution. Finally, Sujon got one part, and his cousin got two elements from the land ownership. The disputed land also settles by negotiations, but the political party provided extra money.  The Shalish meeting is set after the lunch session. Occasionally Shalish meeting is also nominated for Friday or free time (Alim, 2006). Thus none had to lose his work or other activities. Village people are accessible at the afternoon session.
Besides, it commonly takes no additional time, more than two or three sessions. 22% of respondents said very little in response.
Therefore, the minimum cost is used for conduction Shalish and any dispute resolutions are implemented at low cost.
On the other hand, only 5% of respondents said high because some busybody takes money secretly.  The table-7 shows the level of efficiency. In this regard, most of the respondents (46%) mentioned 'little' in rural areas, and both parties were permitted to renounce the Shalish board.
Then both parties are put up with whatever jury decisions they proceed. Another 26% expressed 'very little in response.
According to the respondents, the Shalishkers exploit the impoverished person by using authority. Therefore, a biased decision is not ensuring efficiency.    According to them, women representatives seldom play a role in women-centred disputes as per the respondents' view.
Therefore, women's situations are not measured appropriately.

Figure 5: Types of Settled Dispute by Shalish System
Source: Field Survey, 2020 The    (Kamruzzaman, 2015). The shalish process is very trustable to ordinary people because it saves money and saves time. In a case study-2, participants defined how minor quarrels turn into more significant conflicts that carry serious consequences. Moreover, bribe was an alternative substance in Shalish. Finally, participants described a case (Case study-3) how the Shalish process resolves significant disagreements. The images below provide a good understanding of conflicts.The case study indicated below:

Case Study-2: Reduction of Local Conflicts
Rahman and Kamal (Pseudo names) are neighbors. The goat of Rahman damaged the harvests of Kamal. So, he caught the goat for confined. Rahman's father hearing this news and went to Kamal's home. They said Rahman's father would keep the goat in the local 'Khoar.' Otherwise, they will kill it. Kamal's wife mistreated Rahman's father. At a stage, they meet a quarrel. After sometimes Kamal also reached there. The beating was started among them. Hearing the crying sound, neighbors came to the occurrence place and protested them. After four days, they went to village community leaders to settle down the dispute through Shalish. Salish groups like UP chairman & member, village distinguished people with both parties assembled to solve the issue. After hearing the whole matter from both parties. The Shalish board decided that Kamal will give Rahman 2,000 Tk. as fine. They must seek regret to Rahman's family for their misconduct openly. Finally, the conflict was terminated through local Shalish procedures.

Case Study-3: Gender-based Violence
Rima Begum (Pseudo names) when she was 13 years old, she faced domestic violence. Her neighbor Saiful Islam (Pseudo names) was 24 years old, which often disturbs her. Several times Saiful Islam proposed to her. When Rima moved here and there, he always followed her. Once, Rima was going to the bank of the river with her younger cousin. There was nobody around there. At that time, Saiful requested her to do to physical relation, but she refused. Then Saiful touched her hand and want to feel her private part. When Rima started crying, Saiful left her. Her younger cousin noticed everything and informed Rimas's mother of details. Her father complained against Saiful to the court. After some days, Shalish sitting in her locality at the school field. UP members and renowned people gathered to resolve the problem. Seven persons constituted a jury board to end the crisis. After hearing the whole matter, they took the decision. The Jury Board decided that Saiful would give Tk 30,000 as a fine. He must be seeking an apology for his misbehavior to Rima. The Saiful family accepts the decision and agrees to provide money as compensation. The case was solved without any enforcement.

Key Observations and Findings
Significant findings of the study are given below: