27 oktober 2016, NBC Nieuwegein, 13.30 uur – 17.30 uur
Dagvoorzitter: Frederique van Zomeren
|13.00 uur||Ontvangst en registratie deelnemers|
|13.30 uur||Opening door minister Van der Steur|
|14.00 uur||Using legislation to promote mediation: recipe for success of a slippery slope?
Barney Jordaan (Belgium)
A perennial and as yet unanswered question is why, if it is as beneficial and effective as it is claimed to be, has mediation globally not become the preferred method for resolving legal disputes? For those who believe in its real benefits, it is tempting to push for mediation to be made compulsory in one form or another, e.g., compelling attendance at but not necessarily participation in the process. What are the potential pitfalls? Does an opt-in system – such as in Belgium – provide a better solution? Or are there other possible solutions?
|14.30 uur||Compulsory and voluntary mediation in diverse prejudicial experiences in Argentina, Chile and Brasil
Juan Tausk (Argentinië)
Several Latin-American countries have opt-out systems of compulsory prejudicial mediation in various fields: labour, family, business and penal mediation. Prof. Juan Tausk will explore the benefits that can be expanded, the pitfalls that may be avoided and the quality of the professional services delivered; considering the experiences of countries such as Argentina, Chile and Brasil.
|15.00 uur||Compulsory mediation in Italy: problems and opportunities
Luigi Cominelli (Italië)
The Italian mediation legislation produced a high number of mediation cases which can be seen as a very positive effect of it. However, there are also aspects of the Italian law to be identified which are potentially problematic.
How for example, compulsory mediation rules need to have a very clear relationship with jurisdiction from the beginning, to avoid confusion and opportunistic behavior. That would require clear guidelines from the judiciary which is at present unfortunately not the case in Italy.
Furthermore, in the long term, the Italian opt-out system will not be sustainable if it continues not to be financed by the state. Right now it is in fact based on “quasi-pro-bono” mediators (mediation fees are ridiculously low), and this is not an incentive for professionalizing mediators.
|16.00 uur||De maatschappelijke voordelen van effectieve Nederlandse wetgeving
Het primaire oogmerk van effectieve wetgeving op het terrein van mediation zou het creëren van maatschappelijke meerwaarde moeten zijn.
|16.30 uur||Plenair debat|
|17.00 uur||Afsluiting en borrel|