//CORRECTED REPEAT//RIGHTS-ARGENTINA: Mediation Resolves Neighbourhood Conflicts

By Marcela Valente Reprint | | Print |

Marcela Valente

BUENOS AIRES, Sep 15 1999 (IPS) - Conflicts between neighbours in the Argentinean capital for minor causes, such as bothersome noises, pet messes on the sidewalks or loud dance clubs, can now be resolved through community mediation instead of attorneys.

The new method involves lodging a complaint with a person who is a neutral party in the dispute. The mediator does not offer a solution or provide legal advice for the affected person, but listens to the complaint and approaches the other party to work together with both sides to reach an agreement.

The project, which was initially applied to cases involving minor conflicts, now includes more complex cases.

Sergio Abrevaya, director of the Community Mediation Programme, explained to IPS that the goal is to harmonise neighbourly coexistence, improve their quality of life, and create a change in attitudes.

“People think they have to take their problems to the courts to resolve them, but when they come to the mediation centres they find they are given back the power to resolve the conflict, and that helps them reach an agreement with the the other party,” said Abrevaya.

One indication that people still think they need to turn to the government for solutions is that the centres operating in the former neighbourhood council buildings, which were state-run, bring in more people than the other centres.

Community mediation began in 1997 and operates in Buenos Aires through 16 centres, with 32 mediators hired by the city.

Since its creation, the programme has handled some 1,500 mediation requests, benefiting an estimated 10,000 people. Programme officials predict the number of people using the service in 1999 will be double last year’s total.

“Mediation’s level of effectiveness is very high,” stressed Abrevaya, who reported that more than 600 of the 969 cases presented in 1998 were resolved.

In some cases, the parties do not reach an agreement, but not for lack of will. Often it is the lack of economic resources that prevents them from resolving the dispute.

But even in those cases the mediators consider the experience a success: Co-existence has improved because the neighbours now know each other, and the affected party recognises that the other has made an effort to find a solution, even if it cannot be implemented.

The mediators are people trained to resolve conflicts without the intervention of attorneys or judges. Their strategy is based on the conviction that it is healthier to express the complaint than to live in fear or turn to violence.

If the parties talk about the problem, it reduces tensions and improves neighbhourly coexistence, agree the mediators.

Mediation training is also taking place in primary and secondary schools, where teachers, directors, parents and students are learning to mediate conflicts between their peers or other members of the educational community.

Psychologist Rosaura Paulero, who works in the school mediation training programmes, told IPS that the goal is to reduce the level of violence, and strengthen democratic and participatory values.

Children and adolescents participating in the training say that as a result of the experience their relationships with their parents or siblings has changed. They discovered that adults may explain their position in one way, but that adolescents hear them from a different point of view.

The programme has expanded since 1998 with what is known as multi- party mediation, in which groups of residents discuss solutions for neighbourhood problems with institutions or businesses.

In one case, when residents complained that a supermarket’s loading dock interfered with neighbourhood traffic, the supermarket changed the truck entrance, accepting the neighbours’ suggestions and maintaining the area’s architectural style.

Another successful mediation case occurred in a neighbourhood where residents complained that rubbish was accumulating at a site adjacent to the railroad tracks. The garbage collection company claimed the responsibility was that of another company.

The mediators called all parties in the dispute to a meeting, and in the end the garbage company agreed to collect the waste and the railroad service committed to keeping the sidewalk clean.

The residents were satisfied with the solution and with their ability to have an impact on a problem that affected their quality of life.

The programme co-ordinators reported that some 90,000 residents benefited from this type of multi-party mediation last year.