Mediation in Hong Kong: The Government’s Direction for 2026 and Beyond

Hong Kong’s approach to mediation combines two priorities: preserving voluntary choice and strengthening professional standards. Here is what the Government’s seven accepted recommendations mean for the sector’s development.

How does the Hong Kong Government view mediation? Its June 2026 announcement offers a clear answer: mediation should remain a voluntary and flexible way to resolve disputes, supported by stronger professional standards and credible industry-led regulation.

On 16 June 2026, the Department of Justice (DoJ) announced that it had accepted seven recommendations from its Working Group on Mediation Regulatory System. The stated aim is to strengthen the professionalism and competitiveness of Hong Kong’s mediation services and solidify the city’s position as a capital of mediation. (info.gov.hk)

Preserving flexibility while strengthening public confidence

The Government’s approach is not to introduce compulsory licensing for mediators. Instead, it supports maintaining mediation as a non-licensed activity while enhancing the role of the Hong Kong Mediation Accreditation Association Limited (HKMAAL) as an industry-led accreditation and regulatory body.

The DoJ explains that retaining this flexibility will preserve mediation’s voluntary character and encourage people to use mediation skills in everyday life. At the same time, stronger professional oversight is intended to support a robust and credible regulatory system. (info.gov.hk)

In short, the policy direction brings together accessibility, professional responsibility and public confidence.

Seven recommendations shaping Hong Kong’s mediation framework

The accepted recommendations cover how mediators are accredited, how professional standards are maintained and how Hong Kong’s mediation sector connects with the wider world.

1. Keep mediation as a non-licensed activity

There should be no mandatory licensing or accreditation regime for practising as a mediator in Hong Kong.

2. Strengthen HKMAAL’s industry-led role

HKMAAL should remain a private company limited by guarantee, with an enhanced role and expanded functions as an industry-led mediation accreditation and regulatory body.

3. Introduce a statutory mediator-appointment mechanism

Through legislative amendments, HKMAAL should be given statutory power to appoint a mediator where the parties have not agreed on their choice. This is a proposed appointment mechanism—not a proposal to make mediator licensing compulsory. (info.gov.hk)

4. Give HKMAAL responsibility for the Mediation Code

HKMAAL should complete its review of the Hong Kong Mediation Code and take responsibility for its ongoing review, management and administration, providing a consistent professional standard.

5. Encourage adoption of the Code

Promotional efforts should encourage parties to adopt the Mediation Code.

6. Strengthen complaints handling and discipline

HKMAAL should finalise and implement a robust complaint-handling and disciplinary framework to enforce the Code, and take steps to publish a database of disciplinary findings on its website.

7. Build international connections

HKMAAL should participate in global discussions on dispute resolution as a representative of Hong Kong’s mediation industry and foster partnerships with mediation institutions worldwide. (info.gov.hk)

What progress had been made by June 2026?

The Government’s announcement distinguished between completed work and measures still being developed.

An updated Mediation Code had already been published. HKMAAL completed its review and issued the updated Code in April 2026, addressing developments in mediation practice and technology while enhancing professional standards. It also updated its sample agreement to mediate for voluntary adoption by parties and mediators. (info.gov.hk)

The proposed appointment power required legislative amendments. On 16 June 2026, the DoJ announced the commencement of stakeholder consultation on the key provisions of a draft amendment bill. Its stated aim at that time was to introduce the bill into the Legislative Council in the second half of 2026. The announcement did not state that the proposed power had already become law. (info.gov.hk)

Further work on discipline and transparency was planned. HKMAAL would review its complaint-handling and disciplinary framework and explore publishing disciplinary findings, with due regard to confidentiality. (info.gov.hk)

“Mediate first”: the Government leading by example

The Government’s support for mediation also extends to its contracting practices.

Since 6 February 2025, its general policy has been to incorporate mediation clauses into all applicable government contracts. According to the statistics reported in the June 2026 announcement, more than 95% of government contracts within the policy’s scope had incorporated such clauses.

The DoJ presented this as a practical demonstration of the Government taking the lead in promoting “mediate first” in dispute resolution. (info.gov.hk)

Looking ahead: choice supported by professional standards

Read together, these measures point to a clear policy direction: preserve mediation’s flexibility while strengthening the professional framework that supports it.

For readers following mediation in Hong Kong, the important distinction is between voluntary participation, professional accreditation and proposed statutory powers. The Government’s announcement supports stronger standards and accountability without introducing a mandatory mediator-licensing regime. (info.gov.hk)

As Hong Kong develops its mediation framework, understanding these distinctions provides a useful starting point for a more informed conversation about dispute resolution.

Continue exploring our blog for more insights into mediation and dispute resolution in Hong Kong.

Source: Hong Kong Government press release, “Implementation of regulatory enhancements for mediation profession to solidify HK’s status as capital of mediation”, 16 June 2026. This article explains that announcement and is not a statement of subsequent legislative developments.