Judicial overload

When a Bandra-based landlord Clarence Fernandes couldn’t get the tenant to vacate his 850 sq ft flat, he and his five brothers approached the court in 1969. But their lawful attempts to get back their ancestral property remained in animated suspension until as recently as 2010, when the court ordered in their favour.

In the interim, two of his brothers died of natural causes. And, the four rounds of litigation, over four decades, had a debilitating impact on the family... But in India, this is not unusual. There are many such cases, the most egregious being the Bhopal gas leak tragedy, in which some thousands of people faced physical, mental and financial hardship, for no fault of theirs. Only after more than two decades did the victims get partial justice, when seven ex-Union Carbide executives were punished.

From Kashmir to Kanyakumari, the judiciary is creaking under an overload of too many cases, and too few to deliver justice. In fact, the situation on the ground today is a far cry from what the first prime minister of free India, Jawaharlal Nehru, had said in his address to the members of the Punjab High Court in Chandigarh on March 19, 1955. That “justice in India should be simple, speedy and cheap.” The tragedy is that 56 years since that statement, the district courts, high courts and the Supreme Court are struggling to tackle the millions of pending cases across the country.

This is not to say that governments have not taken any action to improve the situation. As Ramesh Periyasamy, a Supreme Court lawyer, says: “The situation has improved from what it was in the last 15 years. But still, we have a long way to go. Compared to Western countries, we are way behind. And, to catch up with international standards, we have to overhaul the system.”

The tragedy perhaps is in the medication that is being prescribed to deal with the illness. For, despite myriad efforts by successive governments, the judiciary is not exactly in the pink of health. The dearth of sitting judges is aggravating the situation. Look at the statistics: In India, there are only 11 judges for every million people. Compare this with the USA, where there are 110 judges per million. The gap is huge, and will take time to fill. Perhaps, clearing the backlog of pending cases is the biggest headache. Says Andhra Pradesh High Court judge, Justice VV Rao: “Courts would take 320 years to clear the backlog.” Even Congress general secretary Rahul Gandhi admits: “We have a system of judiciary which is too slow.”

Keeping this in mind, the law ministry has promised to overcome the deficit in law dispensation by appointing more judges. The objective is that by the end of 2013, there could be 50 judges per million Indians. For skeptics, this is a Himalayan task. What worries them most is where will the money come from to orchestrate this major facelift? Not to be discouraged by such misgivings, the Centre is to increase its contribution by Rs 2,000 crore to help the fatigued judiciary get a shot in the arm.

Over the next five years, the centre hopes to beef up the infrastructure of trial courts too. Further, in the north-eastern states, the government’s contribution is expected to be 90 per cent of the total expenditure.

Law experts are optimistic that things may change for the better, with the Centre taking responsibility for 75 per cent of the cost of infrastructure expansion of trial courts. But some legal experts suggest caution. An internationally recognised expert on law, Dr Usha Ramanathan, says: “Before jumping the gun, it is important that we must first see how the earlier schemes had an impact on the system. Only then we should take action on the new schemes.” (See exclusive interview).

That being said, it is widely perceived that, this time around, the government has taken the bull by its horns — by identifying the main reason for the backlog. Officials are of the opinion that enhancing the court infrastructure would help lubricate its rusty machinery, apart from clearing the backlog. Other than these steps, the government may even extend working hours.

Meanwhile, former law minister Veerappa Moily’s forward-looking proposal to operationalise the National Mission for Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms has also been approved by the Union Cabinet. The main focus of the National Mission 2011-16 would be to make sure that delay in resolving cases is reduced. But it would be interesting to see how it works. It appears that by enhancing accountability through structural changes, the ministry plans to address the issue. Over the next five years, the government is also planning five major strategic initiatives to completely overhaul the system. The first is to achieve is to unroll policy and legislative changes. Once it succeeds in its move, the ministry will get down to re-engineering procedures and finding out alternative methods of dispute resolution. Also, a lot of focus will be given on human resource development. All told, leveraging information technology for better justice delivery will be given more importance.

Hopefully, when all these come together, knocking on the gates of justice would not be such a difficult task. Among the proposals that the government is considering is the much talked about creation of an All India Judicial Service. Others include the creation of a Litigation Policy, the Judicial Impact Assessment of all new laws, and an amendment to the Negotiable Instruments Act and Arbitration and Reconciliation Act.

On paper things appear to be rosy. But the litmus test will be when officials start executing the schemes. It is here that things may go awry, claims Ramesh. “We don’t know when all this will be implemented. The fact is that infrastructure is a big issue, that too in the local courts, where communication is not good.” He even feels that to get things really working, the government may need to pump in more money, over and above the Rs 2,000 crore promised.

For now, however, all eyes will be on Mission 2011-16. There might be hiccups along the way. But hopefully, there won’t be anything impossible about this mission.