CHENNAI, Apr 23: Judges cannot blindly apply rules as conflicts have a human face and before rendering any decision, they have to weigh socio-economic factors and the impact of their decision on the society, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice N V Ramana said here on Saturday.
In this era of ‘instant noodles’, people expect instant justice. But they do not realise that real justice will be a casualty if we strive for instant justice, he said addressing an event at the Madras High Court.
People looked up to the judiciary in times of distress. And they firmly believe that their rights would be protected by the courts.
“It is necessary to contemplate how to improve the functioning of the judiciary, how to reach out to the people and fulfil their justice needs.” On the language used in courts, Justice Ramana said a common citizen cannot relate to the practices, procedures and language of courts. Hence, efforts should be on making the general population an active part of the justice delivery process.
“The parties must understand the ongoing process and development of their case. It should not be like chanting mantras in a wedding, which most of us do not understand,” he said.
Pointing out that strengthening the judicial institutions has been his top priority, Justice Ramana said buttressing judiciary is imperative for a democracy, sustained on the rule of law.
During the last one year of his tenure as Chief Justice, he has been highlighting various issues affecting the country’s legal system, he said. “The biggest issue affecting all institutions nowadays, including the judiciary, is ensuring sustained faith in the eyes of the public.”
The judiciary is vested with immense constitutional responsibility of maintaining the rule of law and checking executive and legislative excesses. “We have the duty of upholding and enforcing the constitutional values. It is no doubt, a heavy burden. But it is one that we have gladly chosen on the day we took our constitutional oath. This is the reason why strengthening judicial institutions has been my top priority,” he added.
Dispensing justice is not only a constitutional duty, but also a social one. Conflicts are inevitable for any society. But constructive resolution of conflict is integral to maintain the social order, he said. “Constructive conflict resolution is not a mere technical job. Particularly in a country like India, judges cannot blindly apply the rules, procedures and statutes. After all, conflicts have a human face. We are constantly aware about our duty to render justice, not merely procedural, but also substantial.”
“Before rendering any decision, the judges have to weigh several socio-economic factors and the impact of their decision on the society.” Justice Ramana said he firmly believed that judiciary should never be viewed as a mere enforcer of law as it is an engine of social integration.
Judging is not an easy task and judges should be aware of social realities. “We have to carefully watch the changing social needs and expectations. The world is moving very fast. We are witnessing this change in every sphere of life,” and mentioned how from 5 day test match the game has moved on to the 20-20 format.
He also referred to other aspects like preference to short duration entertainment over a 3-hour long movie.
“From filter coffee, we have moved on to instant coffee. In this era of instant noodles, people expect instant justice. But they do not realise that real justice will be a casualty if we strive for instant justice.”
Further, he said judges should sharpen ideas and perceptions. “We need to expand our knowledge base and adopt technology as an enabler. There cannot be a gap between the mind of a judge and the needs of the society. Ultimately, we are entrusted with the duty to deliver justice for all,” and quoted a couplet from Tamil classic Tirukkural the substance of which is intense probe, fairness, and not unduly favouring anyone.
Underlining the people’s belief that their rights would be protected by the judiciary and on reaching out to the people to fulfill their justice related aspirations, he dwelt on Indianisation of justice system.
“This is precisely why I have been a strong proponent of Indianisation of the Justice Delivery System. By Indianisation, I mean moulding the Indian Judicial System for the benefit of the Indian populace.” It is a multidimensional concept that called for inclusivity, providing access to people to participate in the proceedings, removal of language barrier, reforms in practice and procedure, development of infrastructure, filling up of vacancies, augmenting the strength of judiciary and so on.
Inclusivity is one of the most important dimensions of Indianisation. Any profession having representation from all classes and sections will be beneficial to all. “I have been a strong proponent of higher representation of women at all levels of the legal profession. Speaking of women particularly, we need women from all classes and all sections to find a place within the judicial system,” he said and quoted verses of nationalist poet Mahakavi Bharati on equality of men and women.
The social and geographical diversity of the nation must find reflection at all levels of the judiciary. With the widest possible representation, people get to feel that it is their own judiciary. “Everyone has a voice in this system, and they form a substantial part of it. In fact, we are awaiting a day where a person’s gender, orientation, birth or identity would not act as a barrier.” A judge from marginalised sections of the society understands the issues of the marginalised people better.
There is a severe gap between the existing infrastructure and the projected justice needs of the people. He said ever since he assumed office, strengthening judicial infrastructure, both in terms of manpower and physical infrastructure, has been on the top of his priorities. He said he was ‘deeply aware’ about the problems being faced by the judges, advocates and litigants.
“While certain states including Tamil Nadu have been actively working to augment their judicial infrastructure, several other states are in dire need of immediate attention.”
“That is the reason why I am championing the Judicial Infrastructure Authorities – both at national and state levels – which will implement the National Court Development Project. I have already sent a comprehensive proposal in this regard to the Government of India.”
Referring to a related issue of filling up judicial vacancies and increasing the sanctioned strength of judges, he said it is necessary to reduce the case load per judge and improve the judge to population ratio.
“As on today, out of 1104 sanctioned posts of High Court judges, there are 388 vacancies. From day one, it has been my endeavour to fill judicial vacancies.”
After he assumed office, 180 recommendations were made so far, for appointments in High Courts. Out of this, 126 appointments were made and 54 proposals are awaiting approval by the government.
The government has received nearly 100 proposals from various High Courts, which are yet to be transmitted to Supreme Court. “I am hoping that the High Courts will expedite the process of sending the proposals to fill the remaining 212 vacancies.” On demands from various regions to allow the usage of local language in the High Courts as provided for under Article 348 of the Constitution, he said a lot of debate has taken place on this subject.
“There are certain barriers that have prevented local languages from being adopted in proceedings before the High Courts. I am sure, with innovation in science and technology, and advancements such as artificial intelligence, some of the issues associated with introduction of local languages in High Courts may be solved in the near future.”
The practice of law before Constitutional courts should be based on one’s intelligence and understanding of law, and not mere proficiency in language. It is time for some decision to be taken on this issue, after assessment of the pros and cons, he said. (PTI)
Follow our WhatsApp channel