Outcome of Review of Community Dispute Management Framework
Ministry of Culture, Community and YouthSpeakers
Summary
This question concerns Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim’s inquiry regarding the review of the Community Dispute Management Framework and making mediation compulsory before filing Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (CDRT) cases. Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Edwin Tong Chun Fai stated that the inter-agency committee is considering mandating mediation for protracted disputes and requiring it prior to CDRT recourse. The committee is exploring giving officers stronger powers to issue orders for mediation, medical assessments, and warnings, alongside making procedural improvements to the CDRT for quicker interim relief. Upstream efforts focus on strengthening neighbourliness, while downstream measures aim to address low mediation take-up rates and difficulties in resolving cases involving intermittent or hard-to-trace interference. More details will be provided as the committee continues studying these proposals to enhance the effectiveness of dispute resolution between neighbours.
Transcript
32 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether he can provide an update on (i) the review of the Community Dispute Management Framework by the inter-agency committee and (ii) mediation being made compulsory prior to filing of Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal (CDRT) cases to manage and resolve disputes between neighbours.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: An inter-agency committee regularly reviews the Community Dispute Management Framework to (a) strengthen neighbourliness to minimise disputes upstream; (b) promote community mediation as the primary way to resolve disputes between neighbours; and (c) provide an effective avenue for legal recourse, as a last resort, for intransigent cases.
In the current round of review, one persistent issue that the Committee identified is that many residents involved in disputes are unwilling to attend mediation, even though the Community Mediation Centre (CMC) has a high settlement rate. This could be due to a lack of awareness of the benefits of mediation. So, efforts to increase public education around mediation is one area the Committee is working on.
The Committee is also aware that some residents face practical difficulties with regard to the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal (CDRT). CDRT, currently, takes a judge-led approach and is not bound strictly by the rules of evidence. This flexible approach, generally, works well, but some residents face difficulties in resolving cases where the facts are disputed, especially where the unreasonable interference is intermittent or transient in nature, or where it is challenging to pinpoint the exact source of such interference.
The Committee is studying a range of proposals to address these issues.
Upstream, the Committee is considering how we can collaborate with residents to strengthen neighbourliness, as part of our ongoing efforts to promote gracious living. These efforts can help reduce the likelihood of disputes arising in the first instance.
Downstream, the Committee is considering how to strengthen our response to protracted neighbour dispute cases and see them through to resolution in a more expeditious manner. Given the low take-up rate of mediation, the Committee is looking to mandate mediation in certain circumstances, such as for protracted disputes where voluntary mediation has not been conducted. The Committee is also looking into requiring claimants to attempt mediation before they can seek recourse at CDRT. The Committee is also considering giving officers managing the cases stronger powers on issuing orders for mediation and medical assessment, warnings, and to furnish formal evidence or reports to CDRT which may help residents pursue claims at CDRT. We are also looking at making various procedural improvements to CDRT to enable affected parties to obtain quick, interim relief in egregious cases.
We will provide more details of the review in due course.