Saturday, March 04, 2006

A critique of the Judicial System

In an ideal utopian society, education, health and justice of the highest quality should be free for everyone. The effects of this are obvious. There will be great progress and there will be great happiness in society. But obviously this is impossible to achieve. Nevertheless, free education, health and justice are worthy ideals to strive towards. Whilst decent progress has been made on the education and health fronts, free justice still remains an unfulfilled dream. The condition is far worse in under developed nations like India.

The justice system in place today will certainly rank amongst the worst possible systems that has ever been conceived by the human mind. It certainly cannot take us anywhere near the ideal goal of free justice to all. There are a plethora of reasons for the same. Some of the most important ones are
  • Justice is not decided by the spirit of the law, instead it is decide by the word of the law.
  • The accused and the accuser have to pay inordinate amounts of money to lawyers to get justice.
  • There is absolutely no consistency in the delivery of justice.
  • Time taken to deliver justice is inordinately high
1.) The first point mentioned above is probably the worst of the above four points. This alone makes the court rooms a circus. Any law should be adhered to in spirit. If not, all you need to break the law is sophistry. One just needs to keep on talking until one finds a way to interpret the words in a particular fashion. What this does, is that law and all legal documents are so embroiled in legal jargon that the common man, for whom the law was designed, cannot interpret it.
e.g. a smart young man gets a patent on a technology and this is worded in a certain fashion
In comes a corporation with great economic muscle. It hires the best legal talent, interprets the word in the patent statement in a certain fashion and steals the technology that came out of that smart chaps efforts.
There are countless such examples. Now this is a simple example from a civil case. Criminal cases are even more notorious. This is the greatest bane of our society. Justice by the word of the law and not by the spirit of the law is exactly how it should NOT be.

And this is something that is not restricted to the judicial system. It is in our culture. We somehow want to twist each others words to get our job done. That is the root of the problem. Is it possible for us to challenge our mind to break out of this? No matter what, can we stick to honesty and the spirit of our word in each and every action of ours, no matter how trivial?

2.) The Government is of the people, for the people and by the people. So, it is the responsibility of the government to ensure justice prevails. For that, the government mechanism should take care of both the for and against arguments. Instead it appoints a lawyer as the public prosecuor and leaves the defendants to fend for himself. So, for the same crime a poor man for want of money to hire a bright legal mind will have to face the stick whilst a well heeled one will escape the law becoz he is able to hire someone who is better at gabbing than the public prosecutor. This clearly shows that whether one is right or wrong is simply decided by the depth of ones pocket. Can there be a bigger disgrace to justice?

Similarly when two people have a civil case on some issue, the person who hires the better legal talent wins. If lawyer A is better than lawyer B and if X hires A in a suit that he has filed against Y, then X wins. On the other hand, if X had hired B instead of A, then Y would have won. Things certainly cant get worse than this.

3.) The third point is simply a by-product of the first two. The sessions judge dismisses the case, high courts then convicts the accused, the supreme court then dismisses the case. I just cant help but laugh at this. Is it possible to evolve a system that deliver judgement consistently. Yes, overriding a decision is bound to happen now and then. But, in this system it is the norm rather than the exception.

4.) Justice delayed is justice denied. If this were maxim were true, there is hardly any justice available in India. The primary reason for is point 1 mentioned above. Beyond that, it is incompetency and corruption in the prosecuting side. What is the damn point in

With such ills, is there hope? Do we simply accept this as There Is No Other Alternative? Any thoughts?
Is it possible for us to brain storm and find out various ideas to counter this - ranging from the most insane to the most sublime of possiblities?

5 comments:

BadhriNath said...

India is not an underdeveloped country but a developing one. Sorry mate I disagree on that account with you. Also, the mdeia has created undue hype over the cases. NDTV,CNN-IBN want to boost their rankings and hence have taken up Jessica lal case and Best bakery case to project themselves as champions. For media bringing the negative feelings improve their ratings not the good deeds. These cases are the exceptions if you consider country as a whole [and order of the day in Goodas controlled areas]. Hence, branding the justice system as a corrupt utterly failing system is like doing injustice to justice system.

Giving comments like the verdict is wrong is actually making mockery of justice system. A justice can give verdict only based on the evidence and not on media reports. His personal feelings cannot make an accused guilty. This is the correct and proper and stable way to render justice.

If politicans can corrupt the bench and the prosecution then it is a diff case altogether. For some lakhs of cases handled tens of cases go this way and are being brought to limelight..

May be we disagree but then .....

Partha said...

point 1)
The aim of the post is not about the +ve/-ve role of media in projecting a case for rankings or about the development state of india. So am not going to comment on that as it would deviate from the main point of my post. The main point, I would like to belive, is about the design of the system and not about its implementation in India though there might have been a couple of references to that.

point 2)
So with that perspective, please re-read, if necessary, and let me know of ur comments. I would like to hear ur thoughts on the four points that I had listed.

I will try to follow this blog with some examples of what I have mentioned. Will need more time for that though.

Partha said...

@ mmn - excellent points and very well thought out comment...

"the cases are won by lawyers and not the law"... just loved this...

"The 'Spirit of law' is an Utopian thing, perfect and unachievable" - may be not in my opinion... even if it is, it is definitely worth an effort to try and get as close to it as possible

Anonymous said...

Totally hardcore daa... But since the alternative is nattamai with thundu under aalamaram, the existing s/m is okay.. And frankly, i am not one for changing the s/m or world. It wont happen,and if it does, you hafta watch where you spit. Too painful...
Of course, stay outta harms way and you shud be okay..

Ram

Partha said...

@ ram - thx for taking time to read thru this..

"Koi be desh perfect nahi hota hai!! Usko perfect banana padtha hai!!!" :)

anycase, naatamai need not necessarily be the only way out... I have some thoughts which Ill be posting in the next post...