1. INTRODUCTION

The peaceful resolution of international disputes constitutes a continuous, uninterrupted process based on international law, in which states participate as equal entities in rights. Forced to prevent the occurrence of any international situation or dispute, states have the duty, according to the 1982 Declaration, to resort only to peaceful means of settlement for disputes between them, having the right to freely decide and choose, on the basis of their joint agreement, those peaceful means that are considered convenient, timely and appropriate for a peaceful settlement.

The universality of this obligation in contemporary international law has contributed, together with the principle of non-return to force, to essential changes in the content and purpose of this right, in the sense of accentuating and amplifying its function to promote and maintain international peace and security.

Black law dictionary defines conflict or controversy; a conflict of claims or rights; an assertion of a right, claim, or demand on one side, met by contrary claims or allegations on the other(1)

2. Do states have an obligation to settle their disputes peacefully?

In the absence of a special agreement, states are under no international legal obligation to settle, or even attempt to settle, their disputes. It is well established that, absent special agreement, they are under no obligation to refer their disputes to third parties for impartial resolution.

However, states that have signed the UN Charter have agreed to at least certain broad treaty obligations in this regard. According to Article 1(1) of the Charter, the United Nations organizations first purpose shall be:-

To maintain international peace and security, and to that end; to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace

Article 2(3) of the Charter provides:

All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.(2)

Articles 33-38 of UN Charter Chapter 6 emphasize the importance of peaceful conflict resolution. Article 33 encourages parties to settle disagreements peacefully through negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, or other means. Article 34 delegates to the Security Council the responsibility of investigating disputes and recommending resolution procedures. Articles 35-38 emphasize the importance of regional agreements and agencies in conflict resolution, emphasizing cooperation with the UN to maintain international peace and security. These provisions aim to prevent and resolve conflicts through non-coercive and diplomatic means.

3. Diplomatic methods of dispute settlement

They are :- Negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, and good offices.

NEGOTIATION:- Negotiation has been defined as any form of direct or indirect communication in which opposing parties discuss the form of any joint action that they might take to manage and eventually resolve their dispute. Negotiations can be used to solve an existing problem or to lay the groundwork for a future relationship between two or more parties.

Negotiation has also been described as the most important mode of dispute resolution which is not surprising given its use in almost every aspect of daily life, whether at the individual, institutional, national, or global levels. Each negotiation varies in terms of the subject matter, the number of participants, and the process implemented.

It should be noted that neither party is obligated to participate in the negotiation process. The parties have the option to accept or reject the decisions attained during the negotiation process. The number of parties who can participate in the negotiation process is not limited.

Negotiations are probably the most flexible form of dispute resolution process in terms of procedure because they involve only those individuals or parties who are interested in the matter. They shape the negotiation process to suit their own needs and convenience. Because all parties acceptance is guaranteed, the chances of reaching a mutually acceptable agreement are high in this process. Because the negation process employs an interests-based approach rather than the more commonly used positional-based approach, it increases the likelihood of a successful outcome.

Though negotiation increases the likelihood of a successful outcome, if the parties are unequal, those in a weaker position may be placed at a disadvantage. The parties may terminate the process at any time during the proceedings, which may result in a significant loss of time and money invested in the process. Negotiation does not guarantee either partys good faith and trustworthiness.

ENQUIRY:-Enquiry is also known as inquiry or fact-finding, which accurately describes what it is. It can be used as a stand-alone procedure or as a prelude to other forms of peaceful conflict resolution. It can and has led to settlements in a few cases by exposing the truth of a situation to the parties involved.

Many bilateral agreements have been signed, and fact-finding commissions have been established to report to the parties involved on the disputed facts. Furthermore, the inquiry procedure has found expression in treaties for the peaceful settlement of disputes. Commissions of inquiry were established as formal institutions for the peaceful settlement of international disputes by the two Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

ts goal is to produce an impartial finding of disputed facts, paving the way for other peaceful methods of dispute resolution. The parties are not required to accept the findings of the investigation; however, they always do.

In the practice of international organizations such as the United Nations and its specialized agencies, the use of inquiry is evident.

MEDIATION:-Mediation is an informal, but structured settlement procedure. A mediator is employed to facilitate and assist parties in reaching an amicable dispute settlement.The main characteristics of mediation are that it provides; a voluntary, non-binding, confidential and interest-based procedure.(3) Mediation allows the parties to express their emotions, interests, end goal, and opinions, which are often overlooked in traditional courts.

Advantages of mediation

• Economical and time-saving

When compared to judicial procedures, the cost of mediation is negligible. Because legal counsel is not required in mediation, a significant amount of money is saved. There are no obligatory procedures, as in traditional courtrooms, resulting in lower procedural costs. Due to the lack of legal formalities and procedural flexibility, the dispute resolution process is moved faster. A mediator is free to consider only those issues that she or he believes are important in bringing parties to an agreement; time-consuming evidence is generally avoided, saving time and resources.

• Solutions are adaptable and innovative

Because there is no set procedure for mediation, parties can expect a wide range of outcomes. Different mediators have different styles, which are frequently modified to meet the needs of the specific case. Resolutions reached through mediation are sometimes not possible through arbitration or judicial procedures. Both parties collaborate to resolve their differences and are free to develop customized solutions based on their needs.

• Confidentiality

Because all information and evidence presented during mediation is kept confidential, outside parties are not permitted to observe the mediation proceedings. Data provided to the mediator may not be used for any purpose other than assisting the mediator in reaching an appropriate resolution. In fact, there is such secrecy that one party and the mediator have unique confidentiality.

The process of mediation is becoming more popular in India because it is a low-cost, party-centric, and neutral procedure. There is a need for specialized laws to formalize the mediation process. To acquire a better understanding of their rights, parties can hire ADR-trained legal professionals to represent them and explain the situation to the mediator in a professional manner. Because of all of these advantages, mediation will become the most common method of dispute resolution in the future, particularly in corporate matters and family disputes.

CONCILIATION

Conciliation is a voluntary proceeding, where the parties involved are free to agree and attempt to resolve their dispute by conciliation. The process is flexible, allowing parties to define the time, structure and content of the conciliation proceedings. These proceedings are rarely public. They are interest-based, as the conciliator will when proposing a settlement, not only take into account the parties legal positions, but also their; commercial, financial and / or personal interests.(4)

Conciliators serve a role similar to mediators in that they may: have skilled knowledge and provide you with some legal information; suggest or provide you and the other participants with professional guidance on the possible options for fixing the issues in your dispute; while actively push you and the other participants to arrive at an agreement.

GOOD OFFICES

Justice Marshall used the term Good offices for the first time in Schooner Exchange vs. M Faddon (1812). The terms are frequently used interchangeably, but they are distinct aspects of the ADR mechanism. The term Good Offices refers to a procedure in which a neutral third party or a state, either on its own initiative or upon request, seeks to bring the parties to a dispute together on the same platform, either to begin a direct negotiation among the parties or to find other methods for resolving the dispute

Good offices can be international organizations, any one country or group of countries which are not hostile and offer any two disputing countries a peaceful resolution to their dispute. Good offices may provide a wide range of services and facilities, but they fall short of active participation in the process. When the parties begin to negotiate, the work of Good Offices comes to an end. The Good Offices do not actively participate in the negotiation; rather, it brings the unwilling parties together for bargaining.

4. Adjudicative Methods of Dispute Settlement

Adjudication is a quick way to settle disputes on a provisional interim basis; it is binding until the dispute is finally resolved through arbitration, litigation, or agreement. Natural justice requirements that are critical in litigation are also important in adjudication. However, in the context of adjudication, the rules of natural justice take a back seat to the requirement that the adjudicator reach a decision in a very short period of time.

First we will talk about arbitration

ARBITRATION:- Arbitration is a quasi-judicial proceeding in which the parties in dispute agree to appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute, and thus differs from court proceedings. The authority and functions of an arbitral tribunal are statutorily defined. Arbitration is thus essentially a contracting partys voluntary assumption of an obligation to resolve their disputes through a private tribunal.

Arbitration is aimed at preserving time and money by avoiding the time and expense of litigation. Instead, the case is decided by a single person (or, in some cases, a panel). The arbitrator serves as a stand-in for the trial court judge, jury, and even the appellate court. The decision of the arbitrator is final, and it is unlikely to be reversed or modified on appeal

One of its key features is the confidentiality it provides, allowing for a more private resolution than public court proceedings. Arbitration decisions are generally binding, requiring parties to follow the arbitrators decision. Notable benefits include faster resolutions, lower costs, and the ability to select an expert in the subject matter. However, potential drawbacks such as limited appeal options and the possibility of arbitrator bias must be considered. Arbitration is widely used in certain industries, and its importance extends to international disputes, particularly in cross-border business transactions.

The arbitration process may be governed by jurisdiction-specific legal frameworks, so staying up to date on current trends and developments in the field is critical. Real-world case studies can effectively illustrate successful instances of dispute resolution through arbitration, resulting in a nuanced view of its efficacy in various contexts.

JUDICIAL SETTLEMENT:- Judicial settlement is an important alternative dispute resolution (ADR) method in which the court takes part in dispute resolution outside of the traditional litigation process. The court, in this approach, acts as a facilitator, guiding disputing parties through various procedures aimed at reaching a settlement. These procedures may include pre-trial conferences, mediation sessions, or settlement conferences, during which the judge provides insights and recommendations.

The distinguishable advantage of judicial settlement is that it can provide a structured but less formalized environment for dispute resolution. This method not only accelerates the resolution process but also saves money by allowing parties to benefit from the courts expertise in navigating negotiations. When compared to traditional litigation, judicial settlement is set apart by its collaborative nature, which promotes more amicable and efficient conflict resolution.

5.CONCLUSION

In conclusion, prioritizing peaceful dispute resolution is critical for fostering global stability and cooperation. Adherence to international law, diplomacy, and dialogue provide a constructive alternative to conflict, allowing nations to navigate differences without resorting to violence. Not only are human lives protected by emphasizing peaceful resolutions, but a foundation for long-term collaboration and shared prosperity among diverse nations is laid. This strategy emphasizes the importance of multilateralism by encouraging nations to participate in diplomatic channels, mediation, and conflict prevention mechanisms. The credibility of international institutions is strengthened as a result of such efforts, as is belief in the efficacy of dialogue and negotiation as powerful tools for conflict resolution. In our interconnected world, cultivating a culture of peaceful conflict resolution becomes a collective responsibility. As we navigate the complexities of global relations, the commitment to resolving disputes peacefully emerges as a moral imperative, reflecting a shared commitment to the well-being and progress of humanity on a larger scale.

Citation

I. Henry Campbell Black, Blacks Law Dictionary 558 (St. Paul Minn, West Publishing Co., 4th edn., 1968).

II. United Nations, Charter of the United Nations,arts.1(1), 2(3).

III. Dispute resolution; Mediation available at https://www.dispute-resolution-hamburg.com/information/mediation#:~:text=Mediation%20is%20an%20informal%2C%20but,confidential%20and%20interest%2Dbased%20procedure ( last visited on December 5, 2023)

IV. Dispute resolution; conciliation available at https://www.dispute-resolution-hamburg.com/information/conciliation ( last visited on December 5,2023)