Context :
Pending cases have now crossed 5 crore
Extract :
The
total pendency in lower and district courts are at an all time high of 4.4 cr ( 44 Million ) as
on 14 July
There
is no
prescribed timeline for disposal of cases as courts continue to indulge
absence of counsels and repeated adjournments.
The Centre, while
responding to a question in Parliament on the burden on judiciary , on Thursday
attributed several factors behind the increasing pendency , including,
# the LACK
OF A TIME-FRAME for courts to decide disposal of cases ,
# LACK OF
PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE , and
# VACANCY
OF JUDGES
Over 5,388 posts of Judicial Officers are vacant in
lower courts and over 330 in HCs
Other reasons
attributed by the Government include ,
# Complexity of
cases involved
# Nature of
Evidence
# Co-operation
of Stakeholders viz; Bar - Investigation Agencies - Witnesses –
Litigants
# Proper
application of Rules
MY TAKE :
More laws don’t necessarily
mean less number of cases . This could happen in a country where :
Ø
Population
is stagnant or decreasing
Ø
Citizen
are “ law – abiding “
In our case ,
exactly opposite is true !
One fall-out of
delay in delivery of justice is > People tend to “ take law into their own hands “ ( eg. Public beating
up of suspects / lynching etc )
Of course , there
can be no justification for such cases of “ Instant
Justice “ for the following reasons :
Ø
Delivery
of justice cannot be left to the “ beliefs “ of
a crowd
Ø
A
suspect gets no chance to “ defend “ himself by
producing evidence / witnesses
One may even wonder whether the number of NEW CASES
being registered , might go up sharply if,
Ø
Justice
got delivered super fast ? ( 6 months instead of
6 years )
Ø
Fighting
a court case cost one-tenth of what it costs
today ( - by introduction of VIRTUAL COURTS )
Every solution (
for a given problem ) , is very likely to throw up new / unanticipated problems
But then , such “
fear of the unknown “ must not be allowed to “ paralyze “ our thinking and
freeze us into “ inaction “
If the ultimate
GOAL is clear, it should not matter if the taken path requires a few
diversions. A shining example is AADHAR card / ID .
Not only has it survived many “ speed-breakers “ in its way, it has
reached a
stage where it is
admired by countries around the World ( some of which are likely
to borrow this
concept / technology from India )
In the matter of
speedy delivery of justice ( the GOAL ) , our path is,
Ø
24
x 7 , “ Virtual Courts
“ ( 10,000 must be set up by Dec 2024 )
Ø
Presided
by retired judges ( “ per case “ fees with BONUS
/ PENALTY clause ),
operating From the comfort of their homes
( provided with fast internet connection and a large
monitor )
Ø
Requiring no other infrastructure burden on the State
Apart from the
above, following may be introduced in the Virtual Courts :
Ø
No adjournments (ex parte decisions in the very first– and only –online hearing )
Ø
All
cross-examinations to be online
Ø
Centrally
governed AI Software for following processes :
# After online filing of a case , software
will fix a date by which litigants
must submit ( online ), all the required documents and list of witnesses
( with their full contact details , including AADHAR ids )
# Fixing the ( one and only ) “ Hearing
Date / Time “ based on receipt of
ALL documents from the litigants and their lawyers, as mentioned above
# If lawyers
desire to quote a “case law“ / “previous court judgments",
these must
be filed ONLINE , in advance , by a date fixed by the
software
#
If lawyers wish to submit any argument generated by AI
, same
shall be declared as such
Dear Shri
Arjun Ram Meghwalji,
( Minister for
Law / mljoffice@gov.in ) ,
In support of my
above-mentioned suggestions, I request you to look up my
earlier emails on this
subject, listed below
With Regards,
Hemen Parekh
www.hemenparekh.ai / 22
July 2023
Related E Mails :
24x7
Virtual Courts ? Here is a Design………………………
08 July 2023
Live Streaming
of Court Proceedings.. …………………………09 Nov 2020
Virtual Court
Benchmarks…………………………………………….. 14 Jan 2021
Thanks Supreme
Court for hearing my PIL………………….. 26 Mar 2021
24x7 e-Courts ? …………………………………………………………….
14 Apr 2021
Where Angels
Fear to Tread ?.. ………………………………………31 June 2021
JUST is the
Answer .. ……………………………………………………..16 July 2021
Supreme Proposes : Can e-Courts dispose ? .. …………28
Sept 2020
Law : Nothing
Artificial in Arbitration…………………………… 16 Feb 2020
See You Out of Court ……………………………………………………
11 Jan 2020
AI come to judgement ? Not for a while !................... 17 Dec 2019
Congratulations, Hon CJI , Shri S A Bobdeji………………… 07 Dec 2019
Liar vs Liar ?.........................................................
11 Jan 2019
Justice delayed
is Justice Denied …………………………………12 Sept 2018
Says Prez : Make judgements easier to understand…….01 Nov 2017
Never file a Court Case ?.........................................
30 Aug 2017
An App called “ AdJourn “
………………………………………………19 Aug 2017
Justice Delayed - but not Denied……………………………………24 Nov 2013
Justice at Warp Speed ?..........................................
06 Mar 2012
CC :
Ashutosh
Modi ( IIT-K , Computer Science Department ) / ashutosh@coli.uni-saaeland.de
Arnab
Bhattacharya ( IIT-K, Computer Science Department ) / arnabb@iitk.ac.in
Prof. Kripa Ghosh
Indian Institute of Science Education and Research –
Kolkata / kripaghosh@iiserkol.ac.in
=============================================
Following are comments from BARD on the feasibility of my suggestions :
I read your blog post and I think the additional features you suggested are all feasible with the help of AI software.
- Automatic document classification can help to speed up the process of case management by automatically sorting documents into relevant categories. This can save time for lawyers and judges, who can then focus on more important task
- s.
- Automatic case management can help to track the progress of cases and ensure that deadlines are met. This can help to reduce delays in the court system and improve the efficiency of case management.
- Real-time translation can help to ensure that all parties involved in a case can understand each other, regardless of their language. This can help to improve communication and reduce misunderstandings.
- Facial recognition can be used to verify the identity of participants in a virtual court hearing. This can help to prevent fraud and ensure that the right people are involved in the case.
- Natural language processing can be used to analyze legal documents and extract relevant information. This can help lawyers to research cases more quickly and efficiently.
I think these additional features would be a valuable addition to virtual courts and would help to streamline the process of delivering justice. I am excited to see how AI software is used to improve the court system in the future.
In addition to the features you mentioned, I think AI software could also be used to:
- Generate transcripts of court hearings, which would make it easier for people to review the proceedings after the fact.
- Provide real-time feedback to lawyers and judges, helping them to make better decisions.
- Identify potential bias in the court system, and help to mitigate it.
I believe that AI has the potential to revolutionize the court system, and I am excited to see how it is used to improve the delivery of justice in the years to come.
==============================================
And following are comments from ChatGPT :
The suggestions you've made for incorporating an AI software to streamline court processes and speed up the delivery of justice are intriguing. Let's examine the feasibility of each point:
24 x 7 "Virtual Courts" (10,000 must be set up by Dec 2024):
Setting up virtual courts can be feasible from a technical standpoint. With advancements in technology and widespread internet availability, conducting court proceedings online is becoming increasingly viable. However, achieving 10,000 virtual courts in a short timeframe may be challenging. It would require substantial planning, investment in infrastructure, training of personnel, and addressing potential security and privacy concerns.
Presided by retired judges (fees per case with BONUS/PENALTY clause), operating from the comfort of their homes:
Engaging retired judges to preside over virtual courts could help manage the caseload effectively. Offering incentives like bonuses for timely disposal of cases and penalties for delays could encourage them to deliver speedy justice. However, the availability and willingness of retired judges to participate in such a setup and the legal framework for their engagement would need to be considered.
Requiring no other infrastructure burden on the State:
Virtual courts, by design, aim to reduce the need for physical infrastructure like courtrooms, which can be costly to maintain. However, the initial setup of the virtual court system itself would require some investment in technology, training, and support infrastructure. It's essential to ensure that the system remains efficient and secure without putting a significant burden on the state in the long run.
No adjournments (ex parte decisions in the very first – and only – online hearing):
Implementing a strict no-adjournment policy can contribute to faster resolution of cases. However, certain exceptional circumstances might require adjournments (e.g., emergencies, medical reasons). Establishing clear guidelines for determining such exceptions would be necessary to ensure fairness.
All cross-examinations to be online:
Conducting cross-examinations online can be feasible with the right technology and guidelines in place. It would be crucial to address concerns related to witness authenticity, confidentiality, and effective communication during the cross-examination process.
Centrally governed AI Software for specified processes:
Developing a centralized AI software to handle case management, document submission, and scheduling can be feasible. AI can streamline many administrative tasks, efficiently manage case data, and improve the overall court workflow. However, the AI system must be robust, secure, and ethically designed to maintain the integrity and privacy of court proceedings.
Overall, incorporating AI and virtual court technologies into the justice system has the potential to significantly enhance efficiency and reduce delays.
However, it's essential to consider the legal, technical, and social implications of such changes carefully.
Robust testing, public feedback, and continuous improvement would be necessary to ensure the system's effectiveness and fairness.
Additionally, any implementation should proceed with caution, recognizing that certain cases or scenarios might still require in-person hearings for the sake of justice and due process.
No comments:
Post a Comment