Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG 16) envisions peaceful, just, and inclusive societies grounded in accountable and effective institutions. Yet across jurisdictions, formal justice systems remain overburdened, adversarial, and inaccessible to many, particularly vulnerable communities. In this context, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has often been viewed merely as a procedural mechanism to reduce court congestion. This paper challenges that narrow perception and argues that ADR must be reconceptualised as a structural and operational instrument for advancing the normative vision of SDG 16. By examining core ADR mechanisms- mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and negotiation- the study maps their contribution to key SDG 16 targets. Dialogue and participatory dispute resolution processes not only resolve conflicts but also prevent their escalation, foster social cohesion, and build institutional trust. In doing so, ADR functions as a form of “peace infrastructure” within domestic and transnational governance systems. The paper further situates ADR within global peacebuilding efforts, including post-conflict reconciliation and community-based justice models. While acknowledging concerns regarding power imbalances, enforceability, and the potential privatisation of justice, it contends that the institutional integration of ADR within judicial, humanitarian, and developmental frameworks offers a pragmatic pathway toward sustainable peace. Through a doctrinal and analytical methodology supported by comparative and policy-oriented evaluation, the study positions ADR not as an alternative to justice, but as an essential component of sustainable governance in the pursuit of the 2030 Agenda. The study further highlights the need for institutional safeguards that ensure transparency, accountability, and fairness within ADR processes, thereby enhancing their contribution to sustainable governance and long-term social stability.