Empowering Mediators in the MENA Region

One of the questions I am most frequently asked when engaging with policymakers, judges, arbitral institutions and dispute resolution professionals across the Middle East and North Africa is deceptively simple: what next?

The question usually arises in the context of the Singapore Convention on Mediation. For some states in the region, the Convention has already been signed and ratified. For others, it remains under active consideration as part of wider legal and institutional reform agendas. Yet regardless of where a particular jurisdiction stands on the formal treaty process, the central issue remains the same. What follows the act of signature? What practical, institutional and legal steps are required to ensure that the Convention delivers meaningful change in commercial dispute resolution practice?

This is precisely the question that Professor Nadja Alexander addresses in her important article, The Singapore Convention: What Happens After the Ink Has Dried? Her central insight is both persuasive and timely: signing the Convention is not the end of the journey, but the beginning of a broader transformation in dispute resolution culture.

For Arab states, this observation is especially significant. Across the region, there is increasing momentum behind mediation as part of a wider shift towards modern, commercially responsive dispute resolution systems. The real challenge, however, lies not in treaty status alone, but in what states do next. The first step after signature or ratification must be effective domestic legal implementation, whether through direct incorporation via ratification instruments, legislative transformation through dedicated mediation laws or amendments to existing procedural legislation, or a hybrid approach combining statute and court rules. Several MENA states have already introduced, or are in the process of introducing, mediation laws and institutional rules as part of broader dispute resolution reforms. However, these reforms are often developed in isolation, without expressly linking domestic mediation frameworks to obligations arising under the Singapore Convention. For example, Qatar’s Law No 20 of 2021 on Mediation for the Settlement of Civil and Commercial Disputes, enacted after Qatar signed and ratified the Convention, does not expressly refer to it. Instead, article 2 provides that the law applies ‘without prejudice to the provisions of international agreements in force in the State’, leaving the relationship between the domestic regime and the Convention implicit rather than clearly operationalised. At the same time, several states in the region that have signed, ratified, or acceded to the Convention have yet to introduce dedicated mediation legislation that fully incorporates it into the domestic legal system. This creates uncertainty for commercial parties, who require clarity on recognition and enforcement. Going forward, domestic laws should expressly address triggering mechanisms, mediation procedure, enforcement of settlement agreements, and mediator accreditation, while remaining in technical alignment with the Convention to ensure certainty, consistency, and commercial confidence.

Yet legislative reform, however well drafted, cannot operate effectively without corresponding judicial understanding and support. In several MENA jurisdictions, mediation as it presently operates is intrinsically linked to the courts, making judicial engagement central to its success. Qatar provides a clear example: while its Mediation Law recognises consensual mediation, article 15 also expressly provides for court-annexed mediation, permitting the court to invite parties in ongoing proceedings to attempt settlement within a specified period, with the case removed from the roll upon settlement or continued if either party objects. A similar judicially integrated approach can be seen in Saudi Arabia, where the Commercial Courts Law and its implementing regulations provide for mandatory or court-directed mediation in certain commercial disputes before substantive proceedings continue. Likewise, the UAE Federal Law No. 40 of 2023 on Mediation for the Settlement of Civil and Commercial Disputes permits courts to refer disputes to mediation, subject to party consent, further embedding mediation within the formal litigation framework. This judicial dimension becomes even more significant in the context of cross-border disputes and the Singapore Convention. Where mediated settlements may later be subject to international recognition and enforcement, judges must be equipped with a clear understanding of the Convention’s objectives, the limited grounds for refusal under article 5, and the principles governing enforcement of international settlement agreements. Judicial training programmes, specialist commercial benches, and procedural guidance are therefore essential to ensure that court-linked mediation frameworks operate consistently with international obligations and foster commercial confidence.

Beyond courts and legislation, the success of mediation also depends on the strength of the institutional ecosystem within which it operates, supported by credible institutions, professional standards, and market confidence. Several states across the MENA region have already taken important steps towards the institutional inclusion of mediation, reflecting a growing recognition of its commercial value. The Saudi Center for Commercial Arbitration (SCCA) Mediation Rules (2016) marked an early institutional move in Saudi Arabia, followed by the Bahrain Chamber for Dispute Resolution (BCDR) Mediation Rules (2019), the Oman Commercial Arbitration Centre (OAC) Mediation Rules (2021), and most recently the Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) Mediation Rules (2023). These developments demonstrate that mediation is increasingly being embedded within established arbitral institutions that already enjoy strong reputational capital. The next step is to ensure that mediation is positioned not merely as an adjunct to arbitration, but as a sophisticated dispute resolution process in its own right, particularly in sectors central to the region’s economy such as infrastructure, construction, energy, technology, and investment disputes, where speed, confidentiality, and commercial flexibility are especially valuable.

Institutional development must, however, be matched by investment in human capital and professional expertise. The region needs a specialised cadre of mediators with expertise in complex commercial and cross-border disputes, including infrastructure, PPPs, technology, IP, and investment matters. This requires advanced training, certification, and continuing professional development. Encouragingly, mediation training in collaboration with internationally recognised accreditation bodies such as the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution (CEDR), the Singapore International Mediation Institute (SIMI), and the International Mediation Institute (IMI) is already being offered in several MENA states and should be further promoted. This presents a major opportunity for the region not merely to use international mediation services, but to emerge as a leading global and regional mediation hub.

Equally, the long-term success of mediation in the region will depend on how effectively it is integrated into existing dispute resolution pathways. One of the most promising global developments has been the rise of hybrid models such as Med-Arb and Arb-Med-Arb, which are particularly well suited to the MENA region given its established arbitration institutions and increasingly sophisticated commercial courts. Rather than being treated as a separate or competing process, mediation should be embedded within the wider dispute resolution architecture through multi-tier dispute resolution clauses, mediation windows within arbitral proceedings, and seamless pathways to court enforcement. Several institutions in the region already support this approach through model clauses and procedural frameworks, including DIAC, SCCA and OAC. This integration is especially valuable for large construction, infrastructure, and energy disputes, where early facilitated settlement can preserve relationships and reduce cost and delay.

Perhaps the most important challenge, however, is cultural rather than legal. The Convention cannot transform dispute resolution culture on its own. Commercial parties, legal advisers, state entities and business communities across the Arab world must begin to see mediation as a strategic commercial tool rather than merely a conciliatory option of last resort.  This requires a shift in legal culture. Law firms must become more comfortable advising clients to mediate early. In-house counsel must see mediation as a risk management mechanism. Public sector bodies and state-owned enterprises must begin incorporating mediation clauses into their contracts. Ministries and procurement authorities should consider embedding ADR pathways within standard project documentation.

Yet when these developments are viewed collectively, a deeper structural challenge becomes apparent. Taken together, the measures discussed above demonstrate that the MENA region is, in many respects, responding to what the literature demands: states are signing and implementing the Singapore Convention, introducing mediation laws, expanding institutional rules, investing in professional training, encouraging judicial engagement, and developing hybrid processes. However, the principal difficulty is that these steps are often undertaken in isolation and in an independent, fragmented manner, rather than as part of a cohesive ADR strategy. Reform has too often been reactionary rather than structured, driven by immediate policy needs rather than a long-term systemic vision. Simply signing the Convention, enacting a mediation law, adopting institutional rules, or offering training is not, in itself, sufficient. What is required is a coordinated and systematic framework in which legislation, institutions, courts, professional standards, and enforcement mechanisms operate together as an integrated dispute resolution ecosystem.

This, ultimately, brings us back to the central question posed at the outset: what truly comes next after signature? Ultimately, the true success of the Singapore Convention in the Arab world will not be measured by the number of signatures or ratifications. It will be measured by whether mediation becomes a routine feature of commercial contracting and dispute strategy. That is where the real transformation lies. As Professor Alexander so powerfully notes, the Convention is an invitation to reshape dispute resolution culture. For the Arab states, that invitation now presents a major strategic opportunity. The real work begins after the ink has dried.

‍

The relationship between private international law and mediation is not apparent. As is well known, mediation is primarily a non-legal dispute resolution method, where emphasis is mostly put on relationships and personal dynamics, not on the application of the law. Interest behind the position is what the mediator is looking for, before they embark on the negotiation stage of the mediation.

‍

The “legal shell” of mediation

However, the law is always there, as a “shell” around mediation, starting from the contract (or the court order, or the law as the case may be) to mediation, the law that governs the process of mediation and eventually the law that governs the agreement after mediation. Indeed, in all the above, some law shall apply. In a domestic setting, this is the law of the country where mediation takes place. But what is the case internationally?

‍

The law in cross-border mediations

In an international dispute having cross-border dimension, the relevant private international law questions are related (a) to the venue (b) to the applicable law and (c) to the enforcement, if needed. These points form the second (special – microview) part of the book).
The first (general -macroview) part is about the way that the international community approaches mediation from a legal point of view. In this context, a general discussion on mediation is done (roots, terminology, non-legal aspects, and then a more focused discussion on the “legal shell”, on mediation and the question of access to Justice, on the “special” character of mediation as a dispute resolution method and on the so-called “hybrid” nature of the MSA, as well as on the legislative initiatives of the international community regarding mediation.

‍

Discussing mediation from a private international law standpoint

As is well known, venue, applicable law and enforcement are the three main subparts of private international law. The position on mediation and private international law is as follows:

Venue. While there is no jurisdiction in mediation, venue can be crucial. First of all, the parties must be happy to travel and spend time at the venue. Secondly, the process rules will most probably differ from country to country (for example the question whether internal confidentiality is the default rule, or the exact opposite unless a party chooses not to disclose). It is important to agree in advance on such rules that do not need to be the ones of the venue (as the venue is not forum), save for any public policy rules that apply there and cannot be contracted out. Thirdly, choosing the venue may also be relevant for the enforcement of the MSA, if ever needed. This question needs to be assessed proactively, also with a view to the choice of venue.

In the book, one can find an extended discussion of all above points, with emphasis on commencement of mediation (contract, compulsory mediation under law or court order), or the mediation process, especially on the conduct and duties of the mediator. In this context, the UNCITRAL model mediation law and rules are extensively presented.

Applicable law. There exist few contracts in a mediation environment, next to the substantive law of the actual contract (if any): (i) The agreement to mediate and the agreement with the mediator. One needs to make sure that the applicable laws in these two agreements do not invalidate any provision of these contracts. (ii) More importantly the MSA. The applicable law to it will bear influence on its enforcement and on any action for its annulment. In the book the method that can be used to define the applicable law in all above contracts is discussed. One can find answers to the problems that may arise in this context, to the extent that such answers are feasible at the present stage of development of mediation.

Enforcement. If a party to the MSA does not perform its obligations under it, the question of enforcement arises. In this context, one can find extensive discussion of the 2019 Singapore Convention on Mediation as well as of the EU systems of enforcement, based on the relevant EU regulations and references to the system oh OHADA. The former has adopted the “direct” enforcement model whereby the place of origin of the MSA is not important (although the term used is “relief”, to mitigate the various legal traditions of the contracting parties of the Convention). What matters is for the state of enforcement to have adopted the Convention. The EU has adopted the “cross-border” enforcement model which means that first an MSA becomes enforceable in a member state of the EU and it can then be enforced in the rest of the EU by virtue of the enforcement regulations of the EU. To be noted here that the fact that the EU has not ratified the Singapore Convention makes enforcement of MSAs from third countries literally impossible in those Member States that do not allow for direct enforcement. Therefore, one needs to examine proactively if such enforcement, either cross-border (in which case the venue matters) or direct, is possible in the country where enforcement may have to take place eventually. To be noted that under certain conditions, the 1958 New York Convention on arbitration can also be used for enforcement.

One important point is that the international community has not worked on all the above issues with equal effort. In fact, the systems of enforcement are the most developed internationally, followed by venue, while applicable law has not stirred the interest of the international community in relation to mediation yet, and in this sense the discussion in the book comes from general applicable law standpoint.

‍

This book can be a valuable assistance to the practitioners of international commercial mediation, both mediators and lawyers and is hoped to initiate a wider discussion of the relevant topics.

‍

Mediation is one of the most effective ways to resolve disputes in Dubai and across the UAE without lengthy court or arbitration proceedings. It is a confidential and flexible process that helps parties reach a commercial settlement with the support of an independent mediator.

At a federal level, mediation is now supported by a dedicated statutory framework under Federal Decree-Law No. 40 of 2023 on Mediation and Conciliation in Civil and Commercial Disputes, which came into force in December 2023. This law provides a comprehensive legal framework governing mediation processes, mediator conduct, and mediation centres across the UAE.

Businesses often choose mediation because it can save time, reduce costs, and protect working relationships. It is also flexible and can take place before proceedings are issued, during proceedings, or even at a late stage when the dispute has escalated.

This guide explains how mediation works in the UAE, when it is useful, and how legal support can help parties reach the best outcome.

‍

What is mediation?

Mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution where an impartial third party (the mediator) helps the parties negotiate a settlement. The mediator does not decide the dispute or impose an outcome. Instead, they guide discussions, clarify issues, and help parties explore realistic options for resolution.

Under Federal Decree-Law No. 40 of 2023, mediation is expressly recognised as an optional and alternative method for amicable settlement of civil and commercial disputes, whether arising from contractual or non-contractual relationships, and whether initiated by agreement or court referral.

‍

Why mediation is increasingly popular in commercial disputes

Mediation is attractive to businesses because it offers a number of practical benefits such as:

• A faster route to settlement: Court or arbitration proceedings can take months or longer, particularly where there are multiple parties, expert issues, or jurisdictional challenges. Mediation can often be arranged quickly and may resolve a dispute in a single day.
• Cost-effective dispute resolution: While mediation requires preparation, it typically costs far less than continuing to trial or an arbitration hearing. This is particularly important where legal fees need to be controlled or proportionate.
• Confidentiality and reputational protection: Mediation is a consensual process and the parties and the mediator typically agree in a Mediation Agreement that it is confidential and without prejudice to their case. This can be critical where the dispute involves sensitive commercial arrangements, internal financial information, or reputational concerns.
• Commercial flexibility: Unlike a court judgment, mediation allows parties to agree creative solutions - for example staged payments, revised contract terms, or future trading arrangements. This often leads to outcomes that are more practical and sustainable.
• Preserving business relationships: Mediation encourages a forward-looking settlement approach. In disputes involving suppliers, partners, employees, or clients, it can help parties preserve relationships.

The Federal Mediation Law also reinforces core mediation principles such as confidentiality, helping ensure mediation is conducted fairly and efficiently and giving parties greater confidence in using mediation as an alternative to litigation.

‍

When is mediation suitable?

Mediation can be effective in a wide range of disputes, but it is particularly useful where:

• parties want a swift and cost-effective solution;
• the dispute involves ongoing commercial relationships;
• there is uncertainty around evidence, liability, or quantum; or
• the parties want to remain in control of the outcome.

Even where a party believes they have a strong case, mediation can still make commercial sense. A settlement can remove litigation risk, avoid reputational exposure, minimise the risk and uncertainty of having to enforce a court judgment or arbitral award, and allow the business to focus on operations rather than prolonged dispute management.

‍

What happens during a mediation?

While each mediation is different, the process typically includes:

• Preparation:  Each party typically prepares a concise summary of their position, key documents, and what they want to achieve. Parties may also prepare settlement parameters and a negotiation strategy. It is common to exchange written summaries or ‘position papers’ ahead of the mediation session.
• Opening session: The mediator sets the ground rules and the process for the day. In some mediations, parties provide short opening remarks to outline their positions in an oral presentation.
• Private meetings: The mediator will then hold confidential meetings with each party separately. This allows the mediator to test the issues, explore settlement options and carry proposals between the parties.
• Negotiation and settlement: If agreement is reached, the settlement is recorded in writing, often on the same day, and typically includes payment terms, confidentiality clauses and any agreed steps to close the dispute.
• ‍

Is mediation legally binding in the UAE?

Mediation becomes binding once the parties sign a written settlement agreement. The terms of the agreement should be drafted carefully to avoid ambiguity and ensure the settlement is enforceable. In some cases, the settlement will also be aligned with ongoing court or arbitration proceedings, including agreed steps to discontinue claims or record the outcome formally.

Federal Decree-Law No. 40 of 2023 also confirms that mediation agreements and settlement arrangements must generally be documented in writing and signed by the parties (including via electronic communications where appropriate), strengthening enforceability and legal certainty.

‍

How we can help with mediation in Dubai and the UAE

Our Commercial Arbitration and Litigation team supports clients across a wide range of commercial disputes, including matters involving the UAE onshore courts and the ADGM and DIFC Courts and in a wide range of arbitration centres. We help clients approach mediation strategically and with a clear focus on achieving the best commercial outcome.

We can assist with mediator selection, early case assessment and mediation strategy, drafting mediation position statements and settlement offers, preparing key documents and evidence, representing clients during mediation sessions, and negotiating and drafting settlement agreements.

Where mediation is unlikely to resolve the dispute, we can advise on alternative routes, including court litigation, arbitration, or other actions.

If you are considering mediation in the UAE, we can advise on the best approach and support you throughout the process.

‍

Mediation in the UAE: A Guide, Alexandra Lester, Ban Lahham

Not everything in the UAE’s legal landscape makes noise — some of the most impactful shifts happen quietly.In her latest piece for LexisNexis Middle East, Christine Maksoud explores the UAE’s evolving Mediation and Conciliation framework, tracing its development from Federal Decree-Law No. 40/2023 to the 2025 implementing package.From the distinction between mediation and conciliation, to regulatory standards, cost structures, and cross-border implications — this is a system designed with both structure and strategy in mind.A civil law framework, built for international relevance.

‍

Read the full article: https://lnkd.in/dfUnqXEB