“Fears of Undermining ADR’s Public-Interest Role”... Task Force Withdraws Plan to Establish “Dispute Resolution Support Foundation”

The tentatively named “Dispute Resolution Support Foundation,” which had been in the process of being established with the goal of implementing an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) model, has voluntarily withdrawn its application to establish a foundation and decided to return the full amount of contributed funds. The decision reflects concerns that launching the foundation without sufficient institutional groundwork could instead undermine the public interest and credibility of ADR.

According to the foundation establishment task force on February 5, the task force resolved to halt the establishment procedures just before obtaining approval from the competent authority. All contribution funds paid in by donors will be fully returned. Costs incurred during the establishment process will be borne by the executive leadership, including the chairperson of the board and the secretary-general.

Secretary-General Yoon Kwanghee explained the voluntary withdrawal from establishing the foundation, stating, “There were serious concerns that a hasty launch could damage the original public-interest nature and neutrality of ADR,” and added, “At this point, stopping is in fact the more responsible decision.”

The ADR model refers to resolving disputes through agreement between the parties, rather than through a judge’s ruling in court. In line with this, the foundation was being promoted as a non-profit public-interest foundation aimed at building social infrastructure that shifts conflicts away from a win-or-lose focus toward a process of restoration and dialogue.

Approximately 100 contributors participated, including ADR education faculty members, labor scholars, labor-management relations practitioners, union officials, corporate HR managers, attorneys, labor consultants, and civil society representatives, and contribution funds totaling 200 million won (KRW) were raised. Organizational groundwork such as drafting the articles of association and forming committees had also been completed.

However, the policy environment has deteriorated, as the “Dispute Resolution Supporters Act” has made no progress in the National Assembly, and it has become uncertain whether the government budget for training private-sector ADR experts will be maintained. Secretary-General Yoon said, “Under these conditions, if the foundation were launched, there would be a risk that it could be misunderstood as a private for-profit model rather than a public-interest platform.”

Controversy over independent operational plans proposed by some internal members also heightened the need to reexamine basic principles. Yoon said, “Although this was not the direct cause, it was a decision made to prevent long-term damage to trust,” adding that they also took into account the possibility that if ADR professionals trained with state funds were to engage in for-profit business activities, it could give rise to ethical and legal disputes.

The task force stated, “This pause is not a step backward, but a process toward a more solid new start,” and added that it would continue discussions on an ADR platform that strengthens the principles of public interest, fairness, and neutrality.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.