Mediation In
Provincia Arce, Tarija

Legal Framework

Mediation and arbitration in Bolivia follow Law No. 708 of Conciliation and Arbitration, issued on June 25, 2015, replacing the previous Law No. 1770 of Arbitration and Conciliation which was in force since March 10, 1997 for 18 years. Law 708 abrogated Law 1770. The previous Law 1770 was based on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law, but the current Arbitration Act (Law 708) is not recognised as being based on the UNCITRAL Model Law. In 2025, Bolivia's arbitration landscape experienced significant developments. This was before the July 10, 2026 research cutoff date. Most leading Bolivian arbitration centers including Centro de Conciliación y Arbitraje de la Cámara de Industria, Comercio, Servicios y Turismo (CAINICO-CCAC) in Santa Cruz, CAC in La Paz, and ICAM in Cochabamba, approved modern dispute board rules, defining jurisdiction across contract execution and specifying the continuum from nonbinding recommendations to decisions with contractual force. The centers complemented adoption with capacity-building workshops with international practitioners. A constitutional judge in Santa Cruz articulated a jurisdictional understanding of arbitration, recognizing that when parties opt for arbitration, they elect a jurisdiction whose decisions are autonomous within statutory boundaries, with judicial courts serving as guardians of minimal external control limited to grounds explicitly set out in the Arbitration Law. This is a judicial decision, not legislative change.

While Bolivia operates under this legal framework, The Olive Branch's remote mediators bypass local court backlogs by providing swift, confidential, and mutually agreed-upon resolutions online.

Court System

The Ministry of Justice is the competent authority to authorise the operation of Conciliation Centres, Conciliation and Arbitration Centres, or Arbitration Centres. The Ministry has powers to authorise, register, approve regulations, temporarily or definitively suspend authorization, promote training, and formulate reconciliation policies. For approving conciliation and arbitration regulations, the Ministry may exceptionally require specialised opinion. Authorized centres must have regulations approved by the Ministry of Justice. Exceptionally, confidentiality may be lifted when interests of the State are compromised (information given to Attorney General's Office) or when there is evidence of criminal commission (information delivered by tax order or court order). The law provides that conciliation information has no probative value, protecting the confidentiality of the process. The judicial system supports the arbitration framework through Ministry of Justice oversight and court enforcement when confidentiality exceptions apply.

Mediator Regulations

Legal persons may be conciliation and arbitration administrators under three modalities: Conciliation Centres, Conciliation and Arbitration Centres, and Arbitration Centres. For development of their activities, conciliators and arbitrators must register with one of the authorised centres, with the exception of Ad Hoc arbitration. Public institutions, within the framework of their powers, may administer conciliation centres. Legal persons must meet requirements to become conciliation or arbitration administrators: legal personality, conciliation or arbitration regulations approved by Ministry of Justice, accredited conciliators or arbitrators, and infrastructure meeting technical and administrative conditions. Authorized centres have powers to provide services, accredit and appoint conciliators or arbitrators, and temporarily or permanently suspend conciliators or arbitrators for breach of centre's rules of procedure. The Ministry of Justice promotes training in conciliation and arbitration through agreements with the university system and authorised centres.

Cultural Approach

Bolivian mediation and arbitration culture emphasises confidentiality and party autonomy. The legal framework allows parties to decide on language(s) for proceedings, reflecting respect for linguistic diversity. The confidentiality provisions, with limited exceptions for State interests and criminal matters, indicate a cultural emphasis on privacy in dispute resolution. The establishment of three modalities of centres (Conciliation Centres, Conciliation and Arbitration Centres, Arbitration Centres) provides flexibility in choosing appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms. The requirement for conciliation information to have no probative value in court proceedings encourages parties to engage in mediation without fear that statements made during the process will be used against them in litigation. The Ministry of Justice's role in promoting training through agreements with the university system indicates institutional commitment to developing professional mediation capacity.

Typical Costs

Specific fee structures for mediation in Bolivia are not detailed in available sources. The Ministry of Justice has sources of funding including specific resources and internal or external donations for fulfilling its powers regarding conciliation and arbitration centres. Authorized centres provide services in conciliation, arbitration, or both, which would involve fee structures determined by individual centres. No specific hourly or daily rates are documented in available sources. The requirement for infrastructure meeting technical and administrative conditions suggests centres operate with professional standards, but specific cost provisions are not documented. The legal framework does not specify fee arrangements between parties and mediators/arbitrators, leaving this to be determined by agreements between parties and centres or individual practitioners.