Strategy assessment of legal systems development in Sri Lanka

and the Asia Foundation are assessed for strategic lessons. The Sri Lanka case, which includes activities in law curricula development, legal aid, mediation, development of the Bar Association, and training of judges, offers important insights with broader implications for the design of donor rule of law strategies. (1) As demonstrated by the new mediation program in Sri Lanka, which is staffed by volunteers, there may exist at the local level in many societies civic capacities which can be tapped to help in dispute resolution, providing legal assistance, and pushing for reforms in the larger legal system. (2) Although unsubsidized legal services are out of the reach, financially, of nearly all poor people, it is relatively inexpensive to provide legal services to the poor. There is a need for innovation in making legal services more accessible to the poor, especially for women, which could be undertaken at low cost, particularly if user fees are applied. (3) It is difficult to build constituencies willing or able to pressure governments to undertake reforms to increase access to legal services and improve judicial efficiency and effectiveness. In Sri Lanka, though some members of the Bar are reformist in orientation, the Bar as an organization is not likely to adopt the cause of reform, and other possible constituencies (e.g., the business community, the media, and the NGO community) remain weak and divided. Given these constraints, it was found that support for individual elites or elite coalitions could be effective in pressuring for reform or creating a climate favorable to reform; examples include the recent introduction of the national mediation program at the behest of higher officials within the judicial system, and curriculum reform efforts at the University of Colombo"s law school. More generally, it is fair to question whether donor-supported improvements in law faculties and training to improve the skills of practicing lawyers will in fact lead to a more efficient and effective judicial system. At the margins it probably will, but significant improvements may have to await the emergence of more vigorous reformist constituencies, the development of a less encumbered media, and systematic research on problems that constrain judicial performance.