Abstract The "System of Mediation", which plays an important role in autonomy is a judiciary alternative for the purpose of seeking a practical and prompt solution to disputes among people. In conformity with sensible and fair practices, its function can be marked by providing multiple choice of feasible arrangement over emotionally unpleasant behavior and misdeeds so that advice will be put into use and favorable negotiation can be reached by those who are involved. To have the best of both worlds will give free reign to the nature of mediation. In this monographic study, there are separate descriptions of arbitrated occurrences concerning districts of county and town along with comparative research about arbitral structure between domestic organization and foreign countries. Related complementary assignments are also mentioned in this paper, such as the qualification, ways of election and procedure of appointment of arbitral committee in autonomous districts. Improvement is also taken into consideration with a view to the optimizing of the arbitral system. Findings of study: (1) Superfluous arbitral staff results in unsuccessful mediation. (2) Dubiety exists in the failed arbitral certificates. (3) The identity, rights and obligations of committee members aren't guaranteed specirically. Suggestions: (1) Professional expertise and deliberation should be the critical requirements for the election of mediatory committee and secretary. (2) Appropriate reward or extra compensation should be paid to the arbitral committee as they are qualified public officials. (3) Skilled mediator should be exclusively responsible for the task of mediation. (4) Advance in juristic knowledge and training for the arbitral committee and reliable secretary involved are required to bring about a available agreement. (5) Reform in the operation of arbitral organization may promise better service for the public.