The US Supreme Court decides 130 cases a year. The House of Lords decides 60 cases a year. But the Indian Supreme Court decided 1000 cases per week…This shows that something is seriously wrong with the judicial system. Former CJI Venkatachaliah
In 2017, 42% of judges in Karnataka lower courts were women. In 2018, 48% of Karnataka lower court judges were women. You see, High Court Judges are not commodities; you require 25-30 years of practise to be a High Court Judge. In that regard, there is proportional representation of women in High Courts. But in another 3-4 years, more than 50% of the Karnataka lower court judges will be women.
Justice Raveendran
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the country and leads the judicial branch of the federal government. It is often referred to by the acronym SCOTUS.[1]
The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 7, 2019. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[2]
As of January 14, 2020, the court had issued decisions in four cases this term. Between 2007 and 2018, SCOTUS released opinions in 850 cases, averaging between 70 and 90 cases per year.
As of January 21, 2020, the court had agreed to hear 73 cases during its 2019-2020 term
Where are the cases coming from?
LEGAL AID IS
FULL OF LESS EXPERINCED LAWERS
On whether judges should participate in Legal Aid, Justice Raveendran stated that the duty of judges is to decide cases and nothing else.
“No, I think that judges should not be given any role in Legal Aid. Their duty is deliverance of justice. Let them concentrate on that. In referring cases to Lok Adalats, yes, judges should do that. But in other matters relating to Legal Aid, it is not required. Decisions regarding legal services should be taken by the executive."
Another important issue raised by Justice Raveendran was the poor quality of Legal Aid lawyers that come forward.
"Only young and inexperienced lawyers come forward. Unless you pay, the good people will not come", he asserted.
The only way to tackle this problem is to have a system in place, where you pay for defence advocates, he noted. If this is not done, the rights of the accused will be compromised, Justice Raveendran concluded his point.
On the point of technological advancements in courts, Justice Raveendran observed,
“Delhi High Court has shown us the way in being a paperless Court. But this is something that all the stakeholders of Courts have to put their minds into.”
Another member of the discussion panel, Advocate BT Venkatesh of the Karnataka High Court, noted there were sufficient number of advocates active with Legal Aid, but that their competency still remained a problem.
“Comparing with the situation three decades earlier, we have traveled a long way. Establishment of the Legal Aid infrastructure has been done well. However, quality representation is still lacking.”
Apart from the above dignitaries, former DG of Prisons, ST Ramesh and Former DG of Police, Ajai Kumar Singh were also part of the panel.
The discussion ended with an interactive question and answer session with the audience.
The India Justice Report, 2019 made various important observations with respect to legal aid in terms of the functioning of district legal services authorities, paralegal volunteers in the system, diversity in the legal aid space, workload, budget, and infrastructure, amongst others.
The Report also made pertinent observations on aspects of judicial case disposal, vacancies, infrastructure and diversity, among other issues in its chapter on the Indian Judiciary.
Comments
Post a Comment