ADR, Public Interest Law and Access to Justice: The Need for Vigilance

Abstract

The increased use of non-adversarial or alternative dispute resolution ('ADR') processes, including mediation, creates tension for public interest lawyers. Certain groups in society suffer more than others from inequality before the law. The challenge for public interest lawyers is to ensure that the increased reliance on ADR by governments does not perpetuate or exacerbate existing inequalities before the law. Through an examination of Victorian research on mediation in consumer credit issues, this article highlights aspects of expanding ADR processes that warrant vigilant attention if those concerned with access to justice, both proponents of alternative dispute resolution and public interest lawyers, wish to further their objectives. It concludes by calling for ongoing evaluation and review of new processes. Most importantly, in recognition of the complex and paradoxical nature of access to justice developments, these evaluations must be rigorous and contextualised.