Implementing Criminal ADR in Bangladesh: A Restorative Paradigm Shift

Partha Sharathi Ray
Advocate, Appellate Division, Supreme Court of Bangladesh
Member, European Attorney’s Association & Commonwealth Lawyers Association

Introduction
Introducing Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) into the criminal justice system of Bangladesh requires a
strategic shift from a purely retributive model to a restorative one. While ADR is well-established in civil and family
law (through the Code of Civil Procedure and the Artha Rin Adalat Ain), it remains largely informal or limited to
compoundable offenses in criminal matters. To successfully implement Criminal ADR, Bangladesh must follow a
multi-tier legal and structural framework.

1. Legal Reforms and Legislative Action

The primary hurdle is the current lack of a comprehensive statutory mandate for criminal mediation. Implementation
should begin with legislative amendments:

• Amend the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC): Expand the list of compoundable offenses under Section 345.
  Increasing this scope to include more non-heinous, socio-economic, or rehabilitative offenses would create the
  necessary legal space.
• Enact a Restorative Justice Act: A dedicated law could define the roles of mediators, the rights of victims, and the
  legal weight of a mediated settlement, ensuring it is enforceable and recognized by the court.

Plea Bargaining Framework: Formally introducing plea bargaining into the CrPC would allow the prosecution and
defense to reach an agreement on the nature of the charge or the sentence, significantly reducing the case backlog.

2. Structural Implementation Models

Criminal ADR can be implemented at various stages of the legal process to maximize efficiency:

Pre-Trial Stage (Police/Thana Level)

• Police Mediation: Empowering police officers or designated legal aid officers at the Thana level to divert minor
  disputes to mediation before a Formal First Information Report (FIR) is lodged.
• Community Policing: Strengthening the role of community policing units to resolve localized, non-violent conflicts through a village court style mechanism enhanced by professional legal oversight.

Trial Stage (Court-Annexed Mediation)

Magistracy Referral: Once a case reaches the Magistrate Court, the presiding judge should have the discretionary
power to refer parties to a court-annexed mediation center if the offense is compoundable.

The Role of DLAC: The District Legal Aid Committees (DLAC) is already active. Their mandate could be
expanded to include specialized criminal mediators who work under the supervision of the District Judge.

3. The Implementation Roadmap
Phase Title Action Plan

Phase1 Legislative
Amendment

Amend Section 345 of the CrPC and Section 89A of the CPC (by analogy) to
provide a clear statutory basis for criminal mediation in non-heinous cases.

Phase2 Pilot Programs Launch Criminal Mediation Cells in high-volume districts like Dhaka and

Chattogram, utilizing existing DLAC infrastructure.

Phase3 Training &
Certification

Develop a specialized curriculum for Criminal Mediators including victim-
offender mediation (VOM) techniques and trauma-informed care.

Phase4 National Rollout Integrate successful pilot results into national policy, making ADR a

mandatory consideration for magistrates before framing charges.

4. Key Benefits for the Judiciary

Implementing ADR in the criminal sector would address the systemic clogging of the Bangladeshi courts:

Reduction of Case Backlog: Thousands of minor cases could be diverted from the trial list.

Victim Restitution: Focuses on the victim receiving an apology, compensation, or restorative action rather than just
state punishment.

Cost-Efficiency: Reduces the financial burden on the state regarding prison costs and on litigants regarding legal
fees.

Critical Note: ADR should never be applied to heinous crimes (e.g., murder, rape, or offenses against the state). Its
scope must remain strictly defined to maintain public safety and the rule of law.