Advisories will be issued to private entities engaged in business within ADs to undergo this process or else risk prosecution and penalty under the IPRA. Thereafter, each processed project/program becomes a mutually held responsibility which should be formalized through appropriate Memoranda of Agreement with mandatory contract provisions for submission to Mediation as a grievance procedure and Voluntary Arbitration by the CHR or through its accredited pool of arbitrators in the event of fraud, malice or negligent misimplementation and this requires documented civil damages directly arising therefrom. c) Protection and Promotion of IP Rights through Mediation and Arbitration Under prevailing laws and jurisprudence, the mediation/arbitration award is a form of out of court settlement and no matter that is discussed or given in evidence therein may be used in adversarial judicial proceedings by any party, to encourage free discussion to facilitate settlements. The award cannot be cited as precedent as it is binding only on the participating parties; the arbitral award, however, may be deposited in the Regional Trial Court by the parties for execution purposes 40. It is proposed that the CHR senior lawyers and the Regional Directors in all the Regions be capacitated for Mediation and Arbitration. NCIP-endorsed senior lawyers, ex- Commissioners, and Civil Society lawyers may also be invited to the capacity building seminars, provided these are all duly recommended by partner IP communities. The seminars apart from cultivating technical expertise, will have advocacy components such as IP and Business Human Rights, IPRA, UNDRIP and jurisprudence legal framework as well as IP Rights to Alternative Development components and shall actively promote IP Rights advocacy. The UP Human Rights Institute will be invited to join the government agency partnership. Thereafter, the CHR-NCIP shall jointly accredit a List of Mediators/Arbitrators that IP complainants and their respondents nationwide may freely choose from for alternative dispute resolution involving Non-IP. The CHR convenes the process of Mediation and Voluntary Arbitration where there is a dispute between IP and Non-IP especially when it is based on a MOA which authorizes Mediation and/or Voluntary Arbitration. This, however, does not mean that the CHR automatically sits as member of the Panel. The Panel may result in a different mix of Arbitrators after the parties choose their respective arbitrators and agree on a 3rd member of the Arbitral Panel. It is not vital for CHR to sit as Arbitrator. It is only important that it supervises the accreditation process by setting guidelines designed to create a Pool of technically competent yet reputable arbiters that can effectively settle disputes and resolve conflicts without sacrificing IP’s interests. The IP Human Rights Observatory can invite ex-NCIP Commissioners; senior Human Rights Lawyers of good repute among IP; etc. etc. until a good pool is created and publicized at the CHR-NCIP website. Thereafter, the CHR IP Observatory shall: i) convene the process of mediation/ arbitration; ii) sit as 3rd Arbitrator if mutually acceptable to both parties to the Arbitration and iii) monitor the progress of the Arbitration proceedings until the arbitral award is duly executed. 40 As provided for in Republic Act 9285 An Act to Institutionalize the use of an Alternative Dispute Resolution System in the Philippines and to Establish the Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution, and for other Page | 28