The Role of Mediation in Addressing Transnational Human Rights and Public Interest Disputes

Abstract

Cross-border human rights and public interest disputes have grown more visible and complex in recent decades. These conflicts usually involve overlapping jurisdictions, culturally diverse parties, and actors with unequal bargaining power. Formal adjudication, whether before domestic courts or international tribunals—remains essential, but it is increasingly criticized for being slow, rigid, and adversarial. As a result, parties often struggle to obtain timely or meaningful remedies. In this context, mediation is emerging as a promising complementary mechanism. Unlike traditional litigation, mediation allows disputants to engage in structured dialogue, explore creative solutions, and acknowledge social, cultural, and emotional dimensions that courts may overlook.
This paper critically examines the utility of mediation in transnational human rights and public interest matters. It highlights the theoretical, normative, and institutional foundations that support its use, including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs), the practice of independent accountability mechanisms (IAMs), and the growing influence of the Singapore Convention on Mediation. It also uses comparative case studies to illustrate both the potential of mediation and the challenges associated with power imbalance, legitimacy, and enforcement.
The paper argues that mediation, when conducted with strong safeguards and anchored in human rights, can provide restorative, participatory, and forward-looking outcomes. However, its effectiveness depends on institutional integrity, meaningful participation by affected communities, and cross-border enforceability of settlements.