Knowledge of rights is imperative in a vibrant democracy, but this can’t be seen as a disqualification for expeditious disposal of cases.
It’s intriguing that the key reason for the unbearable increase in the number of criminal and civil cases — around 3.5 crore now — is legal knowledge and liberal interpretation of laws.
Knowledge of rights is imperative in a vibrant democracy, but this can’t be seen as a disqualification for expeditious disposal of cases.
There were amendments in the codes of civil and criminal procedure to simplify trials. Yet, an ordinary criminal trial takes 15 years and civil matters pass from generation to generation.
It’s argued even at the highest level that legislatures must appreciate expected legal costs involved in new laws.
But it should also be examined whether the existing laws can be amended, so that time-consuming components in a loosely worded legal document are wished away.
After all, right to life under article 21 includes speedy trial and justice.
A task force set up to assess the cost impact of laws feels providing an estimate of the likely burden on courts by every bill passed by parliament or state legislatures should be made mandatory.
New laws must have the provision of making money to meet this legal challenge.
“Assessment must be made for estimating the extra load any new bill or legislation may add to the burden of courts and expenditure required for the purpose,” law minister M Veerappa Moily says.
At a legal conference some time ago, a senior Supreme Court judge was blunt in telling the government that unless necessary judicial infrastructure in consonance with the legal necessity caused by a new law was provided, judiciary wouldn’t be wrong in refusing law suits involving it.
Wouldn’t that be judicial defiance, some mind contend, but there’s no dispute that the right of existing litigants for even delayed dispensation can’t be subverted by a new class of litigants conceived by a new enactment.
Madhavan Menon, founder-director of the national law school of India in Bangalore, says 15,000 judges dispose of 1.5 crore cases annually. Add another 15,000 judges and you can comfortably wipe out the arrears in 2 years, he says.
Systematic national legal surveys can give an indication of the litigation demand and consequent court workload variations.
Similarly, experimental study on litigant response to a draft legislation before its introduction in parliament can assess litigation demand.
Hope Moily is aware.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}