Delayed justice, poor appreciation of evidence, and
incapacity to apply constitutional and legal principles to real life situations
play havoc with people's lives. Failure
of justice extracts a heavy toll from the society and economy. If we examine
the pendency of cases in courts, we come across two factors. First, certain
judges handle a much larger case load and yet dispose of cases swiftly and
fairly. Others take interminably tang, and yet fail to render justice. The
quality of justice administered depends on the quality of those who administer
it. The judiciary is completely independent and invulnerable to the vagaries of
politics and partisan pulls. The High Court has complete control over the
conduct and functioning of subordinate courts. And there are established
procedures for elevation to High Court and Supreme Court. Therefore, once
recruitment practices are sound, there are incentives for better performance
and effective monitoring at least until a judge is elevated to the High Court.
The current procedures to enforce accountability in higher
judiciary are not so effective, but that problem needs to be dealt with
separately. If judicial officers are accorded the prestige and respect that All
India Services enjoy, then the best talent can be tapped for the judiciary.
Then the control exercised by the High Court, and the prospects of elevation to
High Court ensure high quality performance in district and other subordinate
courts. At the very least, formation of an All India Service for judiciary
would ensure a high level of competence and skills in our justice
administration.
Article 312 of the Indian Constitution provides for the
creation of an all-India Judicial Service common to the Union
and the States. The first Law Commission headed by M C Setalwad, had made a
strong recommendation for the Constitution of an All India Judicial Service
(AIJS), like the IAS and IPS. Three Chief Justices' conferences in 1961, 63 and
65 favored this recommendation. In 1972, the Chief Justice of India suggested
the creation of AJJS. Later, the 8th Law Commission, in its 77th Report,
recommended creation of such a service. In 1986, Law Commission again examined
the issue in detail, and recommended formation of an All India Judicial
Service. The Supreme Court considered this issue in the All India Judges case
in 1992, and endorsed the creation of AIJS.
Undoubtedly our judge-population ratio is too low, and we
need many more trial courts. But as many jurists have pointed out, mere
increase in the number of judges, without improvement in their quality, is of
no avail. The quality of justice administered critically depends on the quality
of the judges recruited. Clearly, there is a compelling case to create a highly
competent, meritocratic All India Judicial Service. Creation of AJJS is a
low-cost, high-impact reform long overdue. There are many other steps required
to make our justice system work for the people. But improving the quality of
judges, enhancing the prestige and dignity of judicial service, and promoting
competition for recruitment is a relatively simple measure around which there
is impressive consensus. The creation of AIJS will surely benefit the judiciary
system and it is the need of hour.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.