This study aims at examining the role of traditional family shalish for matrimonial dispute resolution in Bangladesh comparing with that of hakam initiated by the Holy Qur'an for the same. It has been observed and strongly assumed that nowadays, divorce is becoming rife for lack of proper treatment by such a neutral third party. The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 is found insufficient to protect the families in this regard. As traditional family shalish in Bangladesh is playing the role of hakam for that problem, it needs to see how far this family shalish system conforms to that of Quranic hakam. The main objective of the study is to see how far the role of traditional family shalish conforms to the Quranic norms for matrimonial dispute resolution. It follows a qualitative method based on secondary data mainly. The translation of the meaning of the Holy Quran for this study is drawn from “The Nobel Qur'an, English Translation of the meanings and commentary”. It is hoped that this study will show the shalishkars right way to protect the families for assuring security and tranquility for those attached in a family.

In Bangladesh, the Family Court established under the Family Court Ordinance, 1985 strictly follows the statutory laws including Muslim the Family Laws Ordinance, (MFLO) 1961. MFLO 1961 provides for a requirement of permission of the first wife (wives) for a second marriage by a Muslim man, among others. Islam is a most comprehensive and flexible system making provisions for appropriately managing under various circumstances and conditions. Polygamy in Islam is one of such provisions. However, this special provision is often found misused. As a result, MFLO 1961 has imposed a kind of restriction in its use by Muslim men in Bangladesh. This has introduced, as intended, a vision that polygamy is ordinarily undesirable and a disrespectful act in the society, unless under some helpless situation. By critically reviewing and observing the Shariah literatures this study aims to critically analyze the Shariah validity and justifiability of this legal provision in restricting polygamy to make it befitting for the changing circumstances in the country.

Dispute resolution systems are broadly divided into two sides namely Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDRS) and Non-Judicial Dispute Resolution Systems (NJDRS). The first one is more formal, and the latter is informal which is known as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) all over the world. Though ADR is claimed to be a great innovation of the West, it is found to be practiced in the Islamic Judicial System from its very inception. ADR was practiced throughout the history of Islamic Judiciary as sulh. However, the use of the word sulh in the meaning of ADR needs to be explained in the present judicial context. Scholars sometimes discussed sulh as a system parallel to ADR and sometimes as a process, which creates confusion in its multiuse. Hence, this study aims at eliminating this confusion on the paradoxical use of the term sulh as a system for dispute resolution as well as a process of that system. At present, hardly any study has precisely differentiated between them. Thus, this qualitative study focuses on discussing it primarily from the perspectives of the Quran, documented sources as well as interviews. The major finding of this study is that sulh, comparing with present day ADR, does not need to be used paradoxically. The main contribution of the study is to propose a clarification of sulh in the line of ADR fruitfully. The findings of this study are not only useful in clarifying the exact meanings of the term as used in different contexts but also applicable to solve problems faced by arbitrators involved in various indigenous traditional dispute resolution systems such as shalish in Bangladesh and elsewhere.