Could Judicial Mediation Deliver a Better Justice? What if we TRAIN judges as EXPATS?

What challenges face the contemporary Canadian judicial system and how can the justice system be improved to deliver a better quality of justice for litigants? Here we bring together analyses and results emerging from the first large-scale Canadian study to theoretically and empiri- cally verify the hypothesis that judicial mediation may be an answer to the contemporary Canadian judicial system’s challenges. How do “judicial mediator” judges deliver justice? How could judicial mediation deliver a better justice? We respond to these questions by sketching an analytic profile of judicial mediation in Canada and its impacts, based on perspectives found in the academic and practitioners’ literature and expressed by Canadian judges. Our studies have led us to devise two complementary typologies to describe current practice in judicial media- tion. The TRAIN typology identifies four intervention models for the practice of judicial mediation, along the TRAditional-INnovative continuum; while the EXPAT typology identifies three manager/facilitator styles judges adopt in the practice of judicial mediation, along an EXpertise-PArTicipation continuum. Although each model and style has the potential to improve the judicial system to the benefit of the parties involved, our conclusion is that both the literature and Canadian judges espouse the view that the optimal way for judicial mediation to help remedy the judicial system’s constraints and lack of adaptability is for it to be conceived and practiced along innovative and participatory lines. The question then becomes, “How do we train judges in innovative-participa- tory judicial mediation? Should we TRAIN judges as EXPATS?”

Ce contenu a été mis à jour le 8 mai 2017 à 17 h 45 min.