Just Peace

The concept of Just Peace has several defining elements.  It rests on a specific understanding of the word “peace”.  In common usage, of course, peace typically refers to the political condition that is the opposite of war.  Within the Just Peacetradition, however, the word has a radically different meaning—It is a social condition of harmony, wholeness, completeness, prosperity, welfare and tranquility. It is a state of social wellbeing in which all relationships between humanity, God and creation are justly ordered and in which the basic needs of people are met.

Violence then is viewed as a manifestation of evil that prevents people from meeting their basic needs or that undermines the social structures and relationships necessary for human flourishing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

From a Just Peace perspective, there is an intimate and inescapable link between peace and justice.  The nature of this link is captured most pithily in Pope Paul VI’s phrase “if you want peace, work for justice.” 

To the extent that it addresses the narrower issue of war at all, Just Peace theory does so by asserting that war is a function of the operation of unjust political, economic and social structures. Presumably, the operation of these structures gives rise to violent conflict when those seeking to perpetuate those structures clash with those who seek to overturn them. 

 The condition of Just Peace in the holistic sense, in other words, solves the problem of both structural violence (harm) and direct violence (war).

Johan Galtung, the father of peace studies often refers to the distinction between ‘negative peace’ and ‘positive peace’. Negative peace refers to the absence of violence. When, for example, a ceasefire is enacted, a negative peace will ensue. It is negative because something undesirable stopped happening (e.g. the violence stopped, the oppression ended).

 Positive peace is filled with positive content such as restoration of relationships, the creation of social systems that serve the needs of the whole population and the constructive resolution of conflict.

Peace does not mean the total absence of any conflict. It means the absence of violence in all forms and the unfolding of conflict in a constructive way.

Peace therefore exists where people are interacting non-violently and are managing their conflict positively – with respectful attention to the legitimate needs and interest of all concerned.

Before we begin our discussion of conflict, we need to have a good working definition. Conflict has been defined as "an expressed struggle between interdependent parties who perceive incompatible goals, scarce resources, and interference." In order for conflict to be considered present, there must be an expressed struggle. This is more than a mere disagreement. It is a behavior. Long-term, deep-rooted problems that involve seemingly non-negotiable issues and are resistant to resulotion are conflicts. Sometimes our disagreements are expressed verbally, and sometimes through a mean look or a harsh tone of voice. Conflict occurs between interdependent parties, or people who depend on each other in some way. That is, if the actions of one person affect the well-being of the other, interdependence exists

 If two people are not dependent upon each other, even if there is disagreement, this is not considered interpersonal conflict. Conflict exists with incompatible goals. More than a mere disagreement or difference in goals, incompatible goals mean both cannot be satisfied.

 

Disputes, are short-term disagreements that are relatively easy to resolve. Following Burton's distinction, disputes involve intrests that are negotiable. That means it is possible to find a solution that at least partially meets the interests and needs of both sides. For example, it generally is possible to find an agreeable price for a piece of merchandise. The seller may want more, the buyer may want to pay less, but eventually they can agree on a price that is acceptable to both. Likewise, co-workers may disagree about who is to do what task in an office. After negotiating, each may have to do something they did not want to do, but in exchange they will get enough of what they did want to settle the dispute.

Most people probably do not recognize a distinct difference between the terms "conflict" and "dispute." However, many conflict scholars do draw a distinction between the two terms. Conflict are defined as the fundamental disagreement between two parties in Long-term, deep-rooted problems that involve seemingly non-negotiable issues, People who have opposing interests, values, or needs are in a state of conflict, which may be latent (meaning not acted upon) or manifest, in which case it is brought forward in the form of a dispute or disputing process. In this sense, "a conflict can exist without a dispute, but a dispute cannot exist without a conflict."

 

Historically, International Law has been regarded by the international community as a means to ensure the establishment and preservation of world peace and security. The maintenance of international peace and security has always been the major purpose of the International Law. It was the basic objective behind the creation of the League of Nations in 1919 and the United Nations in 1945. Since the direct cause of war and violence is always a dispute between States, it is therefore in the interest of peace and security that disputes should be settled.

Diplomatic methods involve attempts to settle disputes either by the parties themselves or with the help of other entities including negotiation, commissions of inquiry, mediation, conciliation and good Offices.

they are methods and procedures that involve the parties to the dispute, either alone (negotiation) or with some third party participation (inquiry, mediation, conciliation). The outcome of these diplomatic methods is not binding on the disputant states. Adjudicative methods involve the settlement of disputes by tribunals, either judicial or arbitral such as the International Court of Justice. the submission to arbitration or a court of law is optional, once the tribunal has made its decision that decision is binding and has to be implemented.

 Institutional methods involve the resort to either the United Nations or regional organizations for settlement of disputes such as Peaceful Settlement of Dispute by the United Nations or by regional organizations

 

In domestic law and in the case of any disagreement, individuals understandably aim to achieve the best possible outcome for their position (or perhaps an organization they represent). However, the principles of fairness, seeking mutual benefit and maintaining a relationship are the keys to a successful outcome.

Methods and procedures for the peaceful (pacific) settlement of disputes have been made available in the domestic law like International Law method as following:

 

 typically denotes a wide range of dispute resolution processes and techniques that act as a means for disagreeing parties to come to an agreement short of litigation However, ADR is also increasingly being adopted as a tool to help settle disputes alongside the court system itself

Despite historic resistance to ADR by many popular parties and their advocates, ADR has gained widespread acceptance among both the general public and the legal profision in recent years. Additionally, parties to merger and acquistiontransactions are increasingly turning to ADR to resolve post-acquisition disputes.

The rising popularity of ADR can be explained by the increasing caseload of traditional courts, the perception that ADR imposes fewer costs than litigation, a preference for confidentiality, and the desire of some parties to have greater control over the selection of the individual or individuals who will decide their dispute. Some of the senior judiciary in certain jurisdictions (of which England and Wales is one) are strongly in favor of this (ADR) use of mediation to settle disputes.

 

 Negotiation is a method by which people settle differences. It is a process by which compromise or agreement is reached while avoiding argument and dispute. In any disagreement, individuals understandably aim to achieve the best possible outcome for their position (or perhaps an organization they represent). However, the principles of fairness, seeking mutual benefit and maintaining a relationship are the keys to a successful outcome.

Negotiation is a dialogue between two or more people or parties intended to reach a beneficial outcome. This beneficial outcome can be for all of the parties involved, or just for one or some of them. It is aimed to resolve points of difference, to gain advantage for an individual or collective, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests

Negotiation skills can be of great benefit in resolving any differences that arise between you and others. Negotiation is a flexible means of peaceful settlement of disputes in several respects. It can be applied to all kinds of disputes, whether political, legal or technical.
 

Enquiry One of the common obstacles preventing the successful settlement of a dispute by negotiation is the difficulty of ascertaining the facts which have given rise to the differences between the disputants. Most disputes involve an inability or unwillingness of the parties to agree on points of facts. Herein lays the significance of the procedure of inquiry as a means of pacific settlement of disputes.

Its purpose is to produce an impartial finding of disputed facts and thus to prepare the way for settlement of dispute by other peaceful methods. The parties are not obliged to accept the findings of the enquiry; however, they always do accept them.

 

Use of an independent, impartial, and respected third party (called the conciliator or mediator) in settlement of a dispute, instead of opting for arbitration or litigation. Unlike an arbitrator, a mediator has no legal power to force acceptance of his or her decision but relies on persuasion to reach an agreement. Also called conciliation.

Conciliation is described a combination of expert determination and mediation. The conciliator investigates the facts of the dispute and suggests the terms of the settlement. The conciliators are appointed by the parties to a dispute. They can be appointed on the basis of their official functions or as individuals in their personal capacity. Conciliation is described by some as a combination of enquiry and mediation. The conciliator investigates the facts of the dispute and suggests the terms of the settlement.

 Arbitration is a process used by agreement of the parties to resolve disputes. In arbitration, disputes are resolved, with binding effect, by a person or persons acting in a judicial manner in private, rather than by a national court of law that would have jurisdiction but for the agreement of the parties to exclude it. The decision of the arbitral tribunal is usually called an award.

 

Features of conflict are easy to recognize. However, appropriate conflict management can actually produce benefits. When people work through their conflict in a positive, constructive manner, they can learn more about each other and their relationship.

Conflict can also lead them to find a more satisfactory resolution to the problem at hand than either of them could have come up with on their own.

Positive Conflict Management can also help prevent small problems from becoming large ones. Simply addressing the situation when it first arises can alleviate frustration early on, rather than allowing it to build.

 

(Wise Bridge may be called upon to Select the dispute settlement Method. This request should include a copy of the parties’ agreement or agreements clause to dispute Resolution by ADR).

The main advantage of this form of dispute settlement is that it allows the parties themselves to control the process and the solution.

ADR advantages:
 

1.      delivering respect, for example, affirming the feelings of a visitor, while staying explicitly neutral on the facts of a case

 

2.      active listening, serving as a sounding board,

 

3.      providing and explaining information, one-on-one, for example, about policies and rules, and about the context of a concern,

 

4.      receiving vital information,one-on-one, for example, from those reporting unacceptable or illegal behavior,

 

5.      reframing issues,

 

6.      helping to develop and evaluate new options for the issues at hand,

 

7.    helping people help themselves to use a direct approach, for example, helping people collect and analyze their own information, helping people to draft a letter about their issues, coaching and role-playing,

 

8.    offering shuttle diplomacy, for example, helping employees and managers to think through proposals that may resolve a dispute, facilitating discussions,

 

9.      "looking into" a problem informally,

 

10.  Suitable for multi-party disputes

 

11.  Lower costs, in many cases it's free when involving consumers

 

12.  Likelihood and speed of settlements, Flexibility of process and Practical solutions

 

13.  Wider range of issues can be considered

 

14.  Shared future interests may be protected and Confidentiality

 

Mediation''' is a dynamic, structured, interactive process where a neutral third party assists disputing parties in resolving conflict through the use of specialized communication and negotiation techniques.

In wise Bridge Mediation method, we act as of an independent, impartial, and respected third party (called the conciliator or mediator) in settlement of a dispute, instead of opting for arbitration or litigation.

All participants in mediation are encouraged to actively participate in the process. Mediation is a "party-centered" process in that it is focused primarily upon the needs, rights, and interests of the parties. The mediator uses a wide variety of techniques to guide the process in a constructive direction and to help the parties find their optimal solution. A mediator is facilitative in that s/he manages the interaction between parties and facilitates open communication. Mediation is also evaluative in that the mediator analyzes issues and relevant norms while refraining from providing prescriptive advice to the parties. Mediation, as used in law, is a form of (alternative dispute resolution) (ADR), a way of resolving disputes between two or more with concrete effects.

Typically, a third party, the mediator assists the parties to a settlement. Disputants may mediate disputes in a variety of domains, such as commercial, legal, diplomatic, workplace, community and family matters. The term "mediation" broadly refers to any instance in which a third party helps others reach agreement. More specifically, mediation has a structure, timetable and dynamics that "ordinary" negotiation lacks.

The process is private and confidential, possibly enforced by law. Participation is typically voluntary. The mediator acts as a neutral third party and facilitates rather than directs the process.

As the practice gained popularity, training programs, certifications and licensing followed, producing trained, Wise Bridge professional mediators committed to the discipline.

1-    Cost: While a mediator may charge a fee comparable to that of an attorney, the mediation process generally takes much less time than moving a case through standard legal channels. While a case in the hands of a lawyer or a court may take months or years to resolve, mediation usually achieves a resolution in a matter of hours. Taking less time means expending less money on hourly fees and costs.

2-Confidentiality: While court hearings are public, mediation remains strictly confidential. No one but the parties to the dispute and the mediator or mediators know what happened. Confidentiality in mediation has such importance that in most cases the legal system cannot force a mediator to testify in court as to the content or progress of mediation. Many mediators destroy their notes taken during a mediation once that mediation has finished. The only exceptions to such strict confidentiality usually involve child abuse or actual or threatened criminal acts.

2-    Control: Mediation increases the control the parties have over the resolution. In a court case, the parties obtain a resolution, but control resides with the judge or jury. Often, a judge or jury cannot legally provide solutions that emerge in mediation. Thus, mediation is more likely to produce a result that is mutually agreeable for the parties.

3-    Compliance: Because the result is attained by the parties working together and is mutually agreeable, compliance with the mediated agreement is usually high. This further reduces costs, because the parties do not have to employ an attorney to force compliance with the agreement. The mediated agreement is, however, fully enforceable in a court of law.

5-Mutuality: Parties to mediation are typically ready to work mutually toward a resolution. In most circumstances the mere fact that parties are willing to mediate means that they are ready to "move" their position. The parties thus are more amenable to understanding the other party's side and work on underlying issues to the dispute. This has the added benefit of often preserving the relationship the parties had before the dispute.

6-Support: Mediators are trained in working with difficult situations. The mediator acts as a neutral facilitator and guides the parties through the process. The mediator helps the parties think "outside of the box" for possible solutions to the dispute, broadening the range of possible solutions.

This method Consists of various kinds of action aiming to encourage negotiations between the parties to a dispute. Also, in contrast to the case of mediation or conciliation, the proffered of good offices does not meet with the disputants jointly but separately with each of them.

 Seldom, if ever, the proffered attends joint meetings between the parties to a dispute. Normally, the role of the proffered of good offices terminates when the parties agree to negotiate, or to resume negotiation.

However, the proffered may be invited by the parties to be present during the negotiations. As in case of mediation, an offer of good offices may be rejected by either or both parties to a dispute.

However, with the establishment of the League of Nations, permanent organs were set up to perform the functions of these methods of pacific settlement of disputes. This method is more flexible than arbitration or judicial settlement. it leave more room for the wishes of the disputants and the initiatives of the third party. The disputants remain in control of the outcome. Its proceedings can be conducted in secret. However, there are disadvantages to mediation and conciliation. Their proceedings cannot be started and be effective without the consent, cooperation, and goodwill of the disputants. The proposed settlement is no more than a recommendation with any binding force upon the disputants

 

3-     Wise Bridge Dispute Review Board (DRB)

Wise Bridge DRB may assist the Parties in avoiding Disagreements, in resolving them through informal assistance, and by issuing Conclusions with respect to Disputes upon formal referral. In formal referrals, DRB render Recommendations with respect to Disputes. Unless otherwise agreed, the Parties shall establish the DB at the time of entering into the Contract.
Upon receipt of a Recommendation, the Parties may comply with it voluntarily but are not required to do so.

·         The Parties agree that if no Party has given a written notice to the other Party and the DRB expressing its dissatisfaction with a Recommendation within 30 days of receiving it, the Recommendation shall become final and binding on the Parties. The Parties shall comply without delay with a Recommendation that has become final and binding and agree not to contest that Recommendation, unless such agreement is prohibited by applicable law.

·         If any Party fails to comply with a Recommendation when required to do so pursuant, the other Party may refer the failure itself, without having to refer it to the DRB first, either to arbitration, if the Parties have so agreed, or, if not, to any court of competent jurisdiction. A Party that has failed to comply with a Recommendation, when required to do so, shall not raise any issue as to the merits of the Recommendation as a defense to its failure to comply without delay with the Recommendation.

·         Any Party that is dissatisfied with a Recommendation shall, within 30 days of receiving it, give written notice expressing its dissatisfaction to the other Party and the DRB. Such notice may specify the reasons for the Party’s dissatisfaction, in the absence of which the DRB may request the Party to provide the DRB and the other Party with brief reasons for its dissatisfaction.

·         If any Party gives such a written notice expressing its dissatisfaction with a Recommendation, or if the DRB does not render its Recommendation within the time limit, or if the DRB is disbanded pursuant to the Rules before a Recommendation regarding a Dispute has been rendered, the Dispute in question shall be finally settled by arbitration, if the parties have so agreed, or, if not, by any court of competent jurisdiction.

 

Arbitration is considered the most effective and equitable means of dispute settlement. Arbitration is a process used by agreement of the parties to resolve disputes. In arbitration, disputes are resolved, with binding effect, by a person or persons acting in a judicial manner in private, rather than by a national court of law that would have jurisdiction but for the agreement of the parties to exclude it. The decision of the arbitral tribunal is usually called an award.

The submission of a dispute to an unbiased third person designated by the parties to the controversy, who agree in advance to comply with the award a decision to be issued after a hearing at which both parties have an opportunity to be heard. Arbitration is a well-established and widely used means to end disputes. It is one of several kinds of Alternative Dispute Resolution, which provide parties to a controversy with a choice other than litigation. Unlike litigation, arbitration takes place out of court: the two sides select an impartial third party, known as an arbitrator; agree in advance to comply with the arbitrator's award; and then participate in a hearing at which both sides can present evidence and testimony. The arbitrator's decision is usually final, and courts rarely reexamine it.

Arbitration cannot be initiated without the agreement of the parties to a dispute. An agreement of arbitration may be concluded for settling a particular dispute, or a series of disputes that have arisen between the parties. It may be in the form of a general agreement of arbitration. The usual pattern in arbitration agreement as regards the appointment of arbitrators is that each of the two parties has to appoint one arbitrator or more.