In an era where information flows freely and media wields substantial influence in shaping public discourse, the demand for a mechanism that efficiently and effectively resolves disputes within the media sector is paramount.

Such a system not only upholds the principles of a free, independent and professional media but also lays foundation for socio-economic progress. The success of any mediation process is not a matter of chance but the outcome of a meticulously planned strategy that guides the efforts.

These fundamental principles include preparedness, consent, impartiality, inclusivity, parties’ ownership, a robust legal framework, coherence, coordination, complementarity and cost considerations.

Preparedness serves as the foundation of any credible mediation effort. It necessitates that mediators possess the requisite knowledge and skills for the task at hand. This also extends to the development of strategies for different phases of the mediation process, from its initiation to the final settlement agreement.

Consent is another pivotal element of mediation. It is a voluntary process that hinges on the agreement of all parties involved. Impartiality is the linchpin of any mediation process. Any hint of bias can erode progress. Hence, a mediator must oversee a balanced process that treats all parties fairly and refrains from having a vested interest in the outcome.

Further, inclusivity ensures that needs of all parties are integrated into the process and outcome of the mediation. An inclusive process is better positioned to pinpoint and address root causes of the complaint and thoroughly attend to the needs of the affected parties.

Inclusivity enhances the legitimacy of the settlement agreement and fosters institutional ownership. Parties engaged in mediation have the freedom to be represented by lawyers and or representatives throughout the process.

Parties’ ownership signifies that both parties and their wider organisational leadership commit to the mediation process, the agreements reached and their implementation. This commitment shields the organisation from reputational harm in cases where complaints are not addressed effectively.

Top leadership within mediating organisations are empowered to nominate representatives and grant them powers of attorney to discuss proposed resolutions and make final decisions through mediation settlement. Coherence, coordination and complementarity in mediation efforts are crucial, particularly considering the growing number and variety of complaints within the media sector.

Coherence involves agreed and coordinated approaches, while complementarity underscores the necessity of a clear division of labour based on comparative advantages among mediation actors operating at different levels. In complex cases, co-mediators may be appointed, and ongoing dialogue with the parties and briefings with other members for team support and guidance are maintained.

The Complaints Commission, established under the Media Council Act of 2013 has been at the forefront in promoting mediation as a means to address complaints from media consumers in a swift and cost-effective manner, resulting in the publication of formal apologies, corrections and clarifications.

Success of the commission in employing mediation to resolve media complaints is a testament to a well-rounded approach that encompasses the essential principles of preparedness, consent, impartiality, inclusivity, parties’ ownership.

A solid legal framework, coherence, coordination, complementarity and cost considerations provide a practical roadmap for achieving effective mediation and dispute resolution.
— The writer is the former Complaints Commission chair, Media Council of Kenya
woketis@gmail.com