This article was published in the Malaysian Journal of Consumer, Vol. 19, December 2012, pp 125-141. USER SATISFACTION WITH SULH (MEDIATION) IN THE SELANGOR SYARIAH JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT SA’ODAH AHMAD Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Faculty of Human Ecology Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. One of the resolutions of the Seminar on Alternative Dispute Resolution, held by the Legal Division of the Prime Minister Department in 2002 was to enhance the use of mediation as a mechanism of conflict resolution. It was suggested that a law pertaining to mediation be enacted. Responding to this resolution and in view of the importance of sulh as an alternative method in settling disputes amicably (particularly in family disputes), an effort has been taken by the Selangor Syariah Judicial Department to introduce Majlis Sulh in 2002. The present study aims to determine firstly, the relationships between demographic characteristics of users of sulh and satisfaction with sulh and secondly, the difference in satisfaction with sulh between male and female users. Males and females from the State of Selangor, who fulfilled the selection criteria, were selected as respondents for the study. The results reveal that majority (87 per cent) of the respondents reported that they were highly satisfied with sulh. Nonetheless, male respondents were found to exhibit higher level of satisfaction compared to female respondents. Satisfaction was not related to demographic characteristics. Findings implies that sulh is a very viable alternative dispute resolution mechanism in the Syariah Courts and it is timely for other states in Malaysia to follow the example of Selangor in mandating sulh (mediation) as the first step towards resolving family disputes amicably. Key words: sulh (mediation), alternative dispute resolution, user satisfaction, Selangor Syariah Courts. INTRODUCTION In the last few decades, there is a widespread trend in family law in the United States of America, Europe and other industrialized countries, towards informality in dispute resolution particularly for disputes involving custody and other issues about children (Wall & Dunne, 2012; Nolan-Haley, 2012; Wilson-Evered, Macfarlane, Zeleznikow & Thomson, 2011). Increased rates of divorce, general dissatisfaction with the procedural aspects of the law and the ineffectiveness of the provisions intended to encourage reconciliation, resulted in the introduction of an alternative mechanism for helping parties to deal with the consequences of their family disputes (Kim & Oka, 2011; Emery, Sbarra & Grover, 2005; Conneely, 2002, Kelly, 2001). This alternative mechanism is known as family mediation which was claimed by its proponent to be more family friendly.