Supreme Court judge Justice Surya Kant declared that justice need not be confined to courtrooms but can be delivered through mediation, ensuring disputes end in fairness and dignity.
Justice Kant, speaking at the International Mediation Conference hosted in Visakhapatnam by the Asian Centre for International Arbitration and Mediation on Friday, said mediation deserves recognition as a constitutional value that bridges access to justice and guarantees that “disputes are resolved with fairness and dignity,” emphasising that it restores agency, preserves dignity and builds trust to enable swifter and more compassionate outcomes.
He described mediation as the “humane dimension of justice,” capable of transforming adversarial conflicts into cooperative solutions that allow citizens to experience fairness in practical, empathetic ways. He urged the legal fraternity, including lawyers and students, to embrace mediation as a profession’s expansion, one that prioritises consensus-building and preserves relationships beyond adversarial litigation.
Commenting on the role of modern technology, Justice Kant noted that digital platforms can advance inclusivity in mediation, provided they maintain confidentiality, security and ease of use.
At the same event, Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu announced plans to establish an international arbitration centre in Visakhapatnam, aiming to create an Alternative Dispute Resolution ecosystem superior to that of Singapore. He emphasised the state’s ambition to harness mediation and arbitration—backed by technology—to make justice accessible, swift and efficient.
The Chief Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, Justice D. S. Thakur, highlighted that mediation institutions like the one proposed are vital to ensuring public trust and delivering timely justice.
Justice Kant’s remarks align with his broader advocacy for mediation and legal aid. In August, he called mediation an “extraordinary tool,” recalling a dispute that had lasted 37 years but was resolved through dialogue. He contrasted how courts may decide, but mediators heal—and only mediation preserves relationships.
His words echo an earlier observation in July, made at an international arbitration roundtable in Gothenburg, where he asserted that India is “actively reimagining what arbitration and mediation can and should look like in a dynamic, multipolar legal order,” moving these methods from the status of “alternative” to independent pathways for justice.
By recognising mediation as a constitutional value—that is, a core, fundamental aspect of how justice ought to be administered—he urged a shift in the judiciary’s and legal profession’s mindset to view mediation not as a second choice but as a superior process: empowering, respectful, and community-centric—a point he reinforced by stating that “mediation must be recognised as a constitutional value”.
Mahagathbandhan Parties Must Give Up Seats for New Entrants 