88
The World Bank Legal Review
playing supportive (though still crucial) back-up roles. But there are a few reasons to avoid drawing such a stark conclusion. First, insufficient data are available to support it. It would take years of rigorous research to make that judgment. Second, because legal-services NGOs are sophisticated in their legal knowledge and activities, they bring countervailing strengths to the table. Finally, and perhaps most significant, in many situations in Bangladesh the two kinds of NGOs are already cooperating in ways (such as training and other support by the legal services groups to the socioeconomic development ones) that produce integrated approaches. A cautious approach to strengthening village courts and other government dispute resolution mechanisms is advisable. MLAA’s interest in fortifying the village court system deserves respect, given its trailblazing role in community legal services in Bangladesh. UNDP’s initiative to work with these bodies also could bear fruit. Nevertheless, it is best to proceed cautiously with government-centered work in Bangladesh and other countries. NGO-assisted shalish merits a greater investment of donor resources. There are several reasons for such caution regarding village courts. First, the often corrupt and increasingly politicized nature of even the most basic local government functions, together with criminal links to politics, means that the village courts could be similarly infected. Conversely, there is also the more mundane constraint that Union Parishad chairpersons are often too busy to invest time and effort in participating in the process. Third, the problematic history of efforts to energize the system should be taken into account. In addition, MLAA aside, not all NGOs see the village courts as a vehicle for sound dispute resolution. NGO-assisted shalish merits a greater investment of resources because, when integrated with socioeconomic development efforts, it has the potential to modify underlying community dynamics in ways that reach beyond dispute resolution. The village courts could perpetuate such underlying dynamics to the disadvantage of women and the poor. In a related vein, although Disputes, Crimes and Pathways of Redress indicates that Union Parishad chairpersons play important dispute-resolution roles even outside the village courts structure, they may also perpetuate unjust community dynamics.