A Two Day Training Programme on Ghana's Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2010 (Act 798)

GHANA ASSOCIATION OF CERTIFIED MEDIATORS AND ARBITRATORS
Presents a 2 Day Training Programme on
“THE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) ACT 2010 (ACT 798)”

The two-day intensive training will help participants to:
Develop a comprehensive understanding of ADR practices and ethics
Understand the practical application of the ADR Act 2010 (Act 798)
Be able to implement the relevant provisions as it relates to their
organization so as to avoid unnecessary court litigation.
Be introduced to a review of different statutes that relates to their work
Understand the mechanism of enforcing ADR decisions in the courts.

Who Should Attend:
Corporate Executives, Human Resource Managers, Middle Level
Managers, Banks and Non – Banking Financial Institutions, Private Legal
Practitioners and Lawyers of Companies, Construction, Mining, Oil and Gas
Companies, Religious Leaders and Organizations, Development Partners,
Chiefs and Persons with the Chieftaincy institutions, Policy Makers, Land
Administrators and Surveyors, Community Relation Officers, Legislators,
Non- Governmental organization and Community Based Organizations,
Leaders of Social Groupings, Trade Unions, Metropolitan, Municipal and
District Chief Executives and their presiding members, Politicians and
Leaders of Political Parties. All persons desiring to discover sustainable,
effective and innovative approaches to resolving disputes.

PRESENTERS
• Professor Kofi Quashigah , President of
GHACMA and the Dean of the Faculty of Law
University of Ghana Legon
• Prof. Kofi Kumado, Lecturer University of Ghana
• Austin Gamey CEO Gamey and Gamey Academy of Mediation
• Nene Amegatcher Legal Practitioner
• Martin Nwosu, Mediator, Legal Aid Ghana

DETAILS
6-7 October, 2010
Time: 9am to 5pm Daily
Fee: GHC 500
Venue: Alisa Hotel, North Ridge Accra

For Registration, Enquiries and Course Details Call:
Call: (+233) 0289108353 Email: info@ghacma.org

Prof Fiadjoe on Mainstreaming ADR in Ghana

A Professor of Public Law and a Fellow of the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences, Albert K. Fiadjoe has called for an immediate and radical reform of the country's legal system to include an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that will ease congestion of cases at the law courts and also provide much-needed access of justice for the citizens."Currently, our legal system is a jumble of pieces much like a jigsaw. As a nation we need to undertake a comprehensive referendum and review of the administration of the civil and criminal justice system", he noted.

The professor believes that when this is achieved, it will further create a congenial environment for investors to do business in the country.

Albert Fiadjoe was speaking at a public lecture on his elevation to a fellow of the Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences in Accra recently.

According to him, the assumptions of lawyers when it comes to disputes that the law is the best instrument for resolving all disputes and that the channel for that resolution has to be through the courts needed to the revised as it has not in any way helped in settling disputes in the country.

"Our line of thinking, which is reflected in our training methods and legal institutions, is the result of a rights' culture where a conflict between two people is resolved on the basis of which party has the strongest and best-argued claim.

Fortunately for our jurisprudence, there is now an increasing recognition of the fact that legal standards alone cannot in themselves ensure an end to systematic inequalities nor do they guarantee access to realistic solutions that meet the need of individuals whose lives are usually ruptured by legal disputes," he said adding "As a consequence, many now question the basis of the rights ideology both as a method of dispute resolution and a definition of social relationships."

The ADR is a non-litigious dispute resolution processes whereby disputing parties actively participate in the resolution of their dispute under the watchful guidance of a trained neutral third party.

The proposed ADR according to Mr. Fiadjoe represents a paradigm shift of how disputants think about the resolution of their conflict which encompasses the principles of fairness, speed, informality, flexibility of outcomes and the containment of cost.

"Some of the essential principles of ADR are frank discussion, active listening, brainstorming, recognizing the legitimacy of the other and the empowerment of each party. These qualities remain significantly absent in the litigation context. Furthermore, once people have an interest in the outcome of a process and participate meaningfully in arriving at a solution, they become more committed, at least in theory, to carry out the solution, which has been arrived at. Apart from the parties themselves, the public also benefit from a more workable policy, improved implementation and better relationships," he said, drawing tumultuous applause from the crowd that graced the occasion.

 

Please Note:

Prof Albert K. Fiadjoe is currently the Chairman of the Ghana Constitution Review Commission

This report is sourced from here. The rest of the report can be accessed from there as well.

SMK

THE DAGBON REGICIDE AND MATTERS ARISING

In March 2002 there were some uneasiness in the Dagbon Traditional area lasting some three days between March 25th and 27th. This uneasiness resulted in the death of the overlord of the Dagbon Traditional area Ya Na Yakubu Andani and some forty (40) other persons.

The incident has since heightened tension in Dagbon leading to the resignation of key government functionaries including the then Minister for the Interior who is also a Member of Parliament for Yendi, the area where the incident occurred which is also the place where the palace (Gbewa Palace) of Dagbon is situated and the then regional Minister for Northern Region Prince Imoro Andani. It is instructive to note that whilst the former is believed to be associated with one of the gates to the Dagbon differences, the latter is believed to be associated with the other gate. Others who resigned include Major Suleman and General Joshua Hamidu. I have brought this to light at his stage of our conversation so as to as much as possible help us draw the line to the colourisation of the dispute in political lights. This is important when we wish to reflect that the two Ministers are members of the same political tradition a la Prof. Wayo Seini known to be a royal of one of the gates and a politician who has had a taste of any of the two leading contemporary governance groupings in Ghana – NDC, NPP.

This having been said, the Dagbon differences is known to be an age-old issue of succession. There may be other attendant issues but that of succession has always been the highlight. Please refer to the Wuaku Commission Report.pdf. The Government of Ghana at the time considered the three-day incident as events that occurred within a state of war. Please refer to Gov't White Paper on Wuaku Commission.

Persuant to the recommendation of the Wuaku Commission that the Government of Ghana should take up steps to integrate the two gates to the Dagbon skin, the Government set-up a three (3) member Committee of Eminent Chiefs (CEC) comprising the Asantehene as chair and the Na Yiri (Paramount Chief of the Mamprusi Traditional Area) and Yagbonwura as members respectively, to facilitate a resolution of the dispute. The Yagbonwura, Paramount Chief of the Gonja Traditional Area has since passed away earlier this year (see Yagbonwura Bawa Doshie). It is not clear how the committee has since been conducting its business.

Again, it is worth mentioning that there has been some disquiet among some dagombas with the choice of mediators. The view is that differences between and among Dagombas has traditionally been settled by the Na Yiri, the Paramount Chief of the Mamprusi Traditional Area. Nontheless there has been general co-operation with the panel of mediators by the two gates, namely the Abudus and the Andanis, since the commencement of the mediation process in 2002.

As part of the process the Gbewa palace has been renovated, a Regent has been installed pending funeral(s) of the deceased among other monumental strides.

Understandably there has always been claims of involvement of politics or politicians in the regicide and its aftermath. And a section of the political population often use association with their party or lack of it as a trump card to justify or rationalize one deed or another.

In recent times there has been numerous anxieties in different parts of the country in relation to chieftaincy. In fact the Andani gate of the Dagbon royal family held a press conference to request of the current Government of Ghana to own up to its campaign in the last election of finding those who committed the regicide of the late Dagbon king and making them face justice. See Andani Press Conference on Prez Mills' pledge

Putting in motion the criminal justice system in itself is not out of place. Especially being aware that criminality has no expiry date. Also being aware that some persons were arrested, charged and arraigned before court is important except to say that they were discharged and acquitted for lack of evidence. The arrests followed shortly after the recommendation of the Wuaku Commission Report.pdf which was formed by Constitutional Instrument (C.I. 36)in April 2002 to investigate the disturbances in Dagbon.

So, having come this far, it is understandable when some stakeholders demand of government to fulfill its campaign promise of finding those who by law might have erred and making them face the law. It is also known that by law a criminal proceeding can be commenced at the same time a civil proceeding is commenced for an offence that has both a criminal aspect and a civil aspect.

But there has already been worrying signal with the recent arrests. Some of the arrested persons are being represented by a key member of the current Minority in Parliament The Party Politics of Dagbon Crisis and government apologists are already rationalizing and using not so pleasant language in condemning critics who suggest government is responding to the pressures of the Andani Press Conference on Prez Mills' pledge to find the killers.

While recognizing that the NPP lawyer representing the accussed persons may be doing his rightful job, it is also important to state it may actually fuel suspicion that the Abudus are indeed NPP and a lot of political capital ( or liability) could be made out of it. So it is no wonder that some civil society suggested that Ghana should Create a Platform to Engage Dagbon Politicians. This arrest if not well managed may be set-off on a bad start. The government apologists may want to reword their responses and the MP/Lwayer may want to reconsider his involvement.

In future it is important to give maening to the Constitutional Provision on National House of Chiefs, give the National House of Chiefs the necessary capacity to ajudicate on matters relating to chieftaincy from within its structures. Indeed the Chieftaincy Act of 1971 (Act 370) and its replacement, the Chieftaincy Act of 2008 (Act 759) are expected to be documents that help reduce governments participation in resolving chieftaincy matters. All governments have complexions that have always affected the pace, perception and procedure for resolving chieftaincy disputes. And as may be noted there are Debates about the place of Chieftaincy in contemporary times

Be it as it may what however is expected is the full integration of Dagbon with each being the brother's keeper as ever before. This may take a while and Ghanaians will be much pleased if nothing is done to unduly affect this transition. It is our expectation therefore that the recent arrest of some forty-one (41) persons in Yendi in relation to the 2002 incident does not unduly affect the true management and resolution of the differences in Dagbon.

Saeed Musah-Khaleepha

rafani@email.com

+233(0)208121764

http://samuleepha.blogspot.com/

http://raafani.blogspot.com/

http://i-mediate.blogspot.com/

Khaleepha Consult

Box AS 194, Asawasi, Kumasi

Box NB 889, NiiBoi Man, Accra

Ashaiman ADR settles 832 cases in 2009

March 12, 2010

Ashaiman, Accra
March 12, GNA -

The Ashaiman Central Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) centre settled 832 cases out of 849 cases brought before it in 2009.


Mr Gabriel Atsu, Chairperson of the Ashaiman ADR Centre, told the Ghana News Agency in an interview on Friday that 793 of the cases were received from Ashaiman while 56 came from outside the Municipality.


Out of the 832 cases settled, rent-related cases were the majority - 562 cases.


Mr Atsu said the rent-related cases were followed by 168 debt recovery cases, 18 child neglect cases and 15 each of marital and land disputes.


The rest are 13 disputes over payment of electricity bills, seven denials over family property and five denial of paternity as well as 46 miscellaneous cases.


He said tenants were mostly the complainants in the rent-related matters.


Mr Atsu said cases of landlords demanding two years or more rent advance dominated the complaints and most of these houses are without toilets, kitchens and verandas.


He said some tenants were also brought before the Centre by their landlords during the period for performing rituals in the houses.


Mr Atsu said in such cases, the tenants alleged that they were ordered by their pastors and Mallams to perform the rituals for their protection.


Under debt recovery, some recipients of loans from banks and individuals used the money for house-keeping, payment of rent and school fees among others, making it difficult to refund the money.


He said child neglect was very rampant in the Ashaiman community.


Mr Atsu said most of these children were denied access to education, medical and parental care, compelling them to undertake all sorts of menial jobs to support themselves.


He said boys aged between 10 and 15 years were engaged in collection of refuse and carrying of goods on daily basis from houses, markets, shops and lorry stations for a fee.

SOurce:GNA http://www.ghananewsagency.org/s_social/r_13336/

Feature: Some Reflections On Ghana's Search For Alternative Dispute Resolution

In recent times the leadership of Ghana's Judiciary are making decidedly determined efforts to initiate and cultivate the culture of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the mix of the court litigated and court burdened system. The gain, if it all came to meaningful fruition, is a less burdened court system and , hopefully, by extension, a more efficient court system. That, by itself, is a worthy goal.

In the larger context of our democratic experimentation, an efficient and reliable judiciary is in my view, the ultimate gain.
I am not entirely certain as to how our judicial leadership views their charge in the structuring and promotion of this concept (ADR). Every time I come across a leadership pronouncement relating to an attempt to get the populace to accept the idea, they have explicitly referred to the concept as some mechanism to be used and promoted in respect of perceived or defined “petty cases”.

Without identifying names of pretty high personage in the judiciary who have pointedly referred to “petty cases” as the kind of cases that people should use ADR for. It is safe to say that the positive development efforts in the crafting of the modalities of ADR would be internally poisoned and a grave disservice would be done to the growth and development of the concept. If, indeed, the knowledgeable persons charged with its development continue to suggest- rather explicitly, that the concept of ADR is operationally valid only in “petty” or “small” cases we have a major distortion.

The Meaning of Alternative Dispute Resolution:

And so, back to the fundamentals. What exactly is Alternative Dispute Resolution? It would seem that the terminology defines itself. But there is an inherent caution. ADR methodology seeks to resolve disputes without direct recourse to the central institution for dispute resolution, that is the court system: To provide a frame work (that may be as institutional) as the court system for the resolution of disputes – and do so efficaciously and cheaper than the court system.

Thus, while the term 'alternative' gives us some understanding of the concept, it disables us from truly visualizing the true purpose: It is an 'alternative' to the “normal” legal process only in the sense that in the initiation and prosecution of legal action, for the redress of perceived wrongs, the court must not the central mechanism but, perhaps far more significantly, it is complimentary to the structured functions of the court system. And in-fact, for the ADR methodology to be meaningful and productive, the ultimate enforcement power of the court must be behind it. Two of the best known ADR frameworks are Mediation and Arbitration.

Clearly, there are several permutations of the Mediation process and Arbitration is, perhaps, even more complex in terms of their uses as ADR mechanisms. From Whence They Came: Mediation and Arbitration Are Known Concepts in our Juridical Tradition.

Must Ghanians know that “mediation” as a portal for dispute resolution is our creation. And so is Arbitration. When I was growing up I saw countless cases being handled and settled in my house. You see, the Chief of my town, Hiawu Besease (Atwima Nwabiaqya, Ashanti.) Nana Kwame Bonsu (May he rest in peace) was my uncle. When he “sat down,” it was a big deal in my town. I sat through some of these cases. I observed him.

I did not understand much about what was going on, but I knew people were settling their cases or “fights” in my house! And the “fines” and awards sometimes translated into sheep being slaughtered for some pretty good eats in the evening!

From war-like land disputes through to family and divorce issues, including adultery related case claims to 'a wabu me kwasea' complaints of cheating of one kind or another, my uncle, Nana Kwame Bonsu, Hiawuhene and his elders and others associated with him in the hearing of cases, conducted tons of cases- most with little or no adjournments! And, from what I can remember, it was mediation in one form or another or usually a combination of arbitral and mediation processes.

Sometime last year when I visited home, my sister Nana Amma Agyeman who is currently the Queen mother of (Hiawu Besease), was conducting hearings and settling cases exactly like our uncle, Nana Kwame Bonsu used to do. She was hearing and settling cases- this time in our family house at Kumasi, [Hiawanfie mu].

In fact, just for the thrill of it and to compare with aspects of my bare knuckle litigation practice in New York, and to relive my kiddie days when the Nana Kwame Bonsu was alive, I twice sat in at the Queen mother hearing and settling cases.

(Again) the initial 'filing' of complaint begins when the complaining party “plaintiff” swears some kind of oath asserting a state of affairs and the opposing party “defendant” challenges the oath [obi asaman obi] The word 'asaman' is manifestly a perversion of the English 'summons'- the traditional time tested way of initiating a legal action to attempt to resolve a dispute.

( I have recently learned that as a result of some ongoing unresolved internal family dispute my sister Nana Amma Agyeman, has been estopped from conducting and settling cases in our house at Hiawa; Could someone please initiate some mediation proceedings to resolve this matter please! )

I went into the personal reflections to illustrate that we do have a rich history of where we come from. We do know for certain that these ideas of Alternative Dispute Resolution are not new to our traditional Judicial system. They are central, not alternative to our our own juridical paradigm.

It would seem therefore that the full recognition and acceptance of some of the finer aspects of our own home grown principles of dispute resolution, should make attempts to expand the reach of those concepts to their newer modern court structures an easy process. In that endeavor, let us be advised that the traditional approaches of mediation and arbitration were not, designed for “petty cases”.

Far from that. However, it is fair to concede that if a case was deemed not particularly grievous then, perhaps, even the merits of that case might not be heard and parties were encouraged, not to dwell on their self-hurt and bruised feelings, but to “shake hands” and move on- a classic understated mediation approach. I saw it done!

As I observed it operate, arbitration and the arbitral procedure applied when the dispute was truly adversarial and issues were defined and contested. Evidence and testimony were believed to be “truthful” an d accepted because the parties were sworn – invoking one more or more of the deadly gods of the realm [or perhaps the Almighty God Himself] Such testimony was evaluated by a jury -sometimes including the presiding chief . I have seen the winning party get powder thrown on him or her- victory. But, beyond that, the parties do come to a resolution; a defined settlement of the problem.

That was and is an effective “judicial” system. And the beauty of it all was that even the awards and the fines after all said and done- were also subject to negotiation, bargaining and eventual settlement. Everybody went away “happy”: Problem solved. Peace becomes the community. Law achieves its principle purpose.

The Evolution, Growth, and Expansion of Alternative Dispute Resolution Facilities in the U.S

By some fortuitous play of circumstances, I studied and practiced law in Ghana. I taught law in Nigeria. I studied law in the United States . I practice law in new York, at the heart of what it is believed to be the most complex legal market in the world. In the last twenty years or so, ADR has become a major part of the legal and business framework in the United States.

On several occasions, I have personally resorted to either mediation to help a terminated employee get some benefits such as insurance or a mother resolve a particularity bitter child custody issue with an errant father, or resorted to arbitration to advance the position of the town I represent against its employees and their Union- a system mandated and directed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

Now , almost all civil matters may be subject to the growth and expansion of Mediation and Arbitration as the preferred methodology in dispute management. It is generally agreed among the practicing Bar that what drives the growth and expansion of the ADR procedures is:

First, the expensive nature of litigation in the United States and; second, the crippling burdensome congestion in court dockets. There is no doubt that the same reasons apply as to the situation at home. If properly developed ADR will blossom in Ghana: Yes litigation is expensive and the dockets are congested. There are no real options!

The development of ADR approaches have affected several facets of the litigation bar: From complex insurance related issues to Commercial/Business Transactions, Maritime and Admiralty Entertainment/Sports Law, Family/(Child Custody; Employments/Labor Relations; Intellectual Property, Professional Liability- the whole gamut even issues of Arbitration and arbitrability- nothing petty here!

In order to deal with these multiple range of issues, (here have developed three major ADR institutions in the U.S: AAA, the American Arbitration Association;. JAMS, the JAMS New York Resolution Center and NAM, National Arbitration and Mediation. These three constitute the giants of the industry. ( you see, I use the word 'industry' because that is indeed what it has become.)

Other not so familiar players in this arena are International Institute of Conflict Prevention and Resolution, (Cybersettle) and ICC International court of Arbitration and Resolve Systems LLC. All these companies are based in New York and they advertise their personnel as wares in the market place.

I have personally used AAA several times. I have used JAMS. I don't readily recall using NAM. In most of my use of these organizations it was probably in employment law or some Wall Street termination and the use of the services of one of these players was probably indicated or mandated in the original (hiring/employment contract

AAA, JAMS and NAM generally hire retired judges lawyers with years of experience in handling the traditional litigation and related issues; retrain them for the needs of Arbitration and Mediation. They are paid according to a preset “daily” rate agreed to by the parties.

The adverse parties share equally in paying the “hearing officer”; time spent on the hearing and writing of the decision and arbitral award. Some are “specialists” in their chosen area of expertise.

For example, maritime/admiralty matters and related issues; I have done several cases before arbitral specialists on Employment (Discrimination) issues, and on Union disputes etc. all CBA's mandate arbitration and procedure to follow before the actual arbitration hearing is triggered. And, though, it is supposed to be an “alternative” approach to litigation the “normal” courts may be the ultimate enforcer of the arbitration award.

That process of enforcing an arbitration may itself become a subject of severe, gruesome litigation! For example, if the award is deemed to excessive or beyond the mandate of the arbitrator, or the decision is challenged as violating some rule or the hearing officer/arbitrator is charged in some significant way. Otherwise, the award is enforceable, period.

Thus, where a specific practice normally accepted in a specific industry calls for mediation and or arbitration, you will not be permitted to prosecute your claim in the court. The arbitration clause will be available to you.

Court-Connected (or Court-Run) ADR Programs

In New York, there is established in the Court system the office of ADR and court improvement programs. It has the overall function of seeing and promoting ADR options for cases already filed in the court system. All the civil court system ares utilizing the ADR system to improve the delivery of the judicial service. It is most prevalent in the family court where mediation is used for a variety of matters custody and child care issues.

It is also widely encouraged in the Commercial Division. Significantly, in all these issues, the issues are very serious – emotionally and financially. And yet, it is the preferred option to resolve issues. I understand that the Judicial Service of Ghana calls its program, court connected ADR. It is not very different from New York's Court-Run ADR programs.

Encouragement of Lawyer-Initiated Resolution of Disputes.

Subject to preserving your right to sue and prosecute a case you deem meritorious, it is always, the most effective and satisfying if, the lawyer initiates contact with opposing counsel on the perceived problem and, without any input from the court or anybody, the issue is fairly and quickly resolved between the parties ; let's say between the employer and employee.

I call that sub-mediation in that the parties accept and recognize a potentially long drawn out litigation with huge expense and resolve that issue with minimum cost and some measure of satisfaction to all parties.

That is the purposeful thrust of ADR. Even when a case is filed, before discovery is initiated, or in the course of discovery,especially in Federal Practice the Magistrate-Judges all the Federal Districts make it a point to encourage the lawyers to “talk” and negotiate and settle. Most federal judges are happiest when a case gets resolved because the lawyers (and the litigants) joined up in a happy enterprise to resolve the issues before (full apparatusof the court process takes full gear. That too is a court initiated, court-inspired dispute resolution that helps all.

Corruption and Failure of Professional Ethics and Integrity Undermine Development of ADR

The thrust of these reflections is not really devoted to the subject of corruption in the Judiciary or any of its component parts. At the proper time, I will probably have to “reflect” on that weighty issue as well. However, I am not able to escape that a multi-headed dragon that must be slain, if we are to make any meaningful progress in the development of Alternative Dispute Resolution paradigm of our own creation. Several months ago, when I was in Ghana, I visited the Supreme Court building to sit and observe and learn; to explore some matter. I stepped out of the new swanky new building to walk half a block to my old law school; Ghana Law School. It was exam time and the subject exams where published on the notice board. I saw the traditional courses I took when I was there;(I would not tell you when that was!) The mundane Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Drafting, etc.

I specifically looked for “Ethics and Legal Responsibility” or something representing that core theme significant to graduating lawyers-- getting ready for practice. Nothing. There was no course indicated on the notice board reflecting any training in the Ethics of law and law practice. I would be very happy to be mistaken in my observations several months ago at the GLS.

I hope that I am wrong and in fact, such a course or several courses are rigorously taught to incoming lawyers. And whilst we are on the subjects that prepares students for law practice, I suggest we include Alternative Dispute Resolution as another core subject.

These lawyers are going to be the judges and if they have no foundation in Ethics and Legal responsibility in their practice, how can anyone expect such responsibility when they wear the white crown of judgeship.

A couple of years ago I received a call from Ghana for some advice. The recipient of my advice listened to me and suddenly said: “Kwadwo ei, eha dee wasem ede a yetc; enye de so a yeto” Let me attempt a translation: Here, if you have a sweet case (good case) we buy it, if you have a bad case we buy it.” I was stunned. I could not meaningfully respond especially as I was seriously planning to go back home to do what I have been trained to do.

My commentator was sharing the pervasive wisdom in the land with me. This is how the people perceive the process “ye to.” I actually get sad just thinking about that.

Happily I know the leadership of the Judiciary are doing whatever it takes to stop the tide of muddied and unhealthy judicial waters. That will be needed to give meaning to the search for ADR.

And our Judiciary will be counted among the finest Judiciary in all the World.



Source: The Chronicle/Dennis Adjei-Brenyah Esq

Challenges of Mediator/Peacemaker Chiefs

A good lesson for practitioners and others who might be engaged for one reason or another as mediators.
In recent times there has been some challenges between the Chiefs of Tuobodom and Techiman, both in Brong Ahafo Region, which led to some clashes partly reported in the news item in the link below.

http://www.citifmonline.com/site/news/news/view/4009/1

.

There has been reports of some intervention (see the link that follows).

http://gbcghana.com/news/32546detail.html

For us as Practitioners and students of Dispute Resolution there is one thing however that is of interest to us: That the Asantehene is the chair of the Committee of three (3) eminent Chiefs Mediating the Dagbon chieftaincy dispute; and that the Techimanhene is a member of the National Peace Council are worth our attention.

The lesson(s) may be quite obvious.

Interest- Based Negotiation (IBN) continued

We started a discussion on Interest-Based Negotiation and we mentioned some seven elements of it. Today we begin the first of a series of discussions on the elements of IBN. We start with INTERESTS.
We hope that the interval between the last post on IBN and this post is good enough to help us adjust to the subject matter.

INTERESTS
Negotiating based on interests has many positive attributes to it.
But what does 'interests' mean? Could it be any of the following?
* I want him to pay me
*I want the radio to stop being so loud
*I want my money back

The above are positions- not interests.
They are what you want to accomplish. Note that to create a greater chance of a mutually beneficial agreement, negotiate on interests and not positions.
When you negotiate on positions, both sides have a tendency to dig their heels in, get stuck in their thoughts, spend most of the negotiation defending their position and attacking the others.

Interest Based Negotiation (IBN) on the other hand creates more of a collaborative environment and expands your options.
By doing this, it creates a both-gain opportunity compared to the combative me versus you which creates a both-lose or a win-lose situation.

Using the above listed examples of positions, possible interests behind them could include:
*I feel like I was cheated and disrespected
*I need my rest, I go to bed early because I work the early shift
*I paid for a service that I feel I did not get and I am frustrated
Your interests represent your needs, hopes and concerns.

After knowing your interests, you have to figure out the other party's interests too in order for the negotiation to get a successful outcome with an agreement that is beneficial to both parties.

Figuring out their interests provides you with many benefits.
It prepares you on how they may or may not respond to your needs.
Also, knowing their interests helps you find out what their alternatives are.

In our next discussion, we will take a look at ALTERNATIVES. Till then, adieus.


Saeed Musah-Khaleepha
+233(0)208121764
rafani@email.com / raafani@gmail.com