This article critically examines the incorporation of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms into the administration of criminal justice in Nigeria, with particular emphasis on the reformist objectives underlying their adoption and the absence of a coherent structural and legal foundation to support their effective implementation. While the integration of ADR is intended to decongest courts, promote restorative justice, and enhance access to justice, Nigeria’s criminal justice system remains predominantly adversarial and retributive. This structural orientation generates significant tension between entrenched procedural norms and emerging reformist aspirations. The article identifies persistent legislative gaps, institutional weaknesses, procedural ambiguities, and inconsistencies in policy and practice that undermine the operational viability of ADR in criminal proceedings. It further interrogates the suitability and enforceability of ADR outcomes, particularly in cases involving serious offences where public interest considerations and victims’ rights are paramount. Employing doctrinal and empirical methodologies, the study argues that, in the absence of comprehensive legal reform, institutional capacity building, and normative reorientation of justice sector actors, the adoption of ADR in criminal justice constitutes a largely symbolic reform. The article concludes by proposing a structured framework for the principled integration of ADR into Nigeria’s criminal justice system, grounded in legislative coherence, institutional accountability, and restorative justice values, with a view to ensuring its long-term effectiveness and legitimacy.