Guarding interest of ‘haves’ at the cost of justice
It was a sweating hot and excruciatingly sunny day of June. Many lawyers and litigants soaked in Lahore High Court (LHC) amid intolerable heat and muggy weather. As I was approaching the court of senior puisne judge of LHC, I came across an acquaintance from Mianwali; his face wore a worrisome look and he carried a fatigued body. Being curious, I asked him, if I could be of any help. He gingerly replied “Last night, I reached Lahore after an eight hour exacting journey from Mianwali (Issa Khel) and spent the night in hotel near the railway station. However, today, after waiting for hours for my case to be called, I was informed by the reader that it has been leftover for a date yet to be fixed by the court”.
This is not just a single instance; such unfortunate happenings have become the norm in LHC. Indisputably, everyone suffers from unwarranted delays in judicial proceedings but it’s the litigants from remote areas of Punjab who are bearing much of the brunt. They face acute inconveniences in pursuing their cases in the LHC, some come from as far as Issa Khel, Mianwali (last town of Punjab bordering KPK, 430km from Lahore). Majority of them reach Lahore one day before the scheduled date in LHC as they are required to reach court at 8am on the day of the hearing. Spending a night in Lahore often means bearing the cost of stay of one day at a hotel. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind, as higher costs and inordinate delays are a true reflection of a failing judicial system. For the poor class, this system has become inaccessible, for them at its best it is irrelevant and at its worst oppressive.
A judge presiding in a court room is not a momentary phenomenon but actually an embodiment of a thousand years of juristic evolution. Inherent dynamism of the judiciary is a sine qua non of a healthy society; therefore, it is regarded as the best and most intriguing legal creation. The concept of rendering justice at the doorstep began in the 12th century, when Assize of Clarendon (the king´s council) of King Henry II commanded few Non-Kings Bench judges to tour various circuits of the country and settle the disputes there. This practice hardened into the custom of judges riding around the rural areas each year for dispensing prompt justice rather than forcing the litigants to travel miles and bring their dissensions to London.
Since the last decade, there has been huge outcry for constitution of permanent benches of LHC in some divisions of Punjab. A few weeks ago, the matter was for the first time seriously considered by the LHC, a full court was scheduled by the Hon’ble Chief Justice to hear out the protesting parties, which, however, vetoed this time-hallowed demand. The verdict has lead to mixed responses, some have supported it and some have raised serious concerns followed by demonstrations and strikes. Majority of those who have appreciated the ruling are from Lahore, even the big names of legal fraternity have stood by it and have fiercely opposed any adjustment in the current bench arrangement of LHC.
Some lawyers have scribed beautiful worded opinions in praise of LHCs’ decision; some have gone to the extent of mocking and lambasting the idea of new LHC benches in any form. Some have theorised that those who are demanding more benches must be asked: why not have a LHC bench in every tehsil? A LHC Model Town bench and a Mochi Gate bench? They have further argued that those complaining of lesser exposure are themselves responsible for it; they cannot get elevated to LHC bench due to their own incompetence. They have also suggested that litigants and lawyers should refrain from complaining about distant travelling and utilise modern transport.
After analysing the aforesaid mesmerising arguments, I find myself in total agreement with my learned brothers. Their arguments by no stretch of imagination are subjective, tenuous and ridiculous or by no means demonstrate the inbuilt bias and disdain for non-Lahore lawyers. However, they have missed some important points; I would like to supplement their hypothesis with some of my own arguments.
Firstly, those demanding new benches are selfish and oblivious to problems faced by lawyers of Lahore; only four or five LHC judges are performing duties in Lahore, poor lawyers of Lahore have to travel at least 300-400km daily to reach the LHC building at Mall Road. It takes 3-4 hours to reach LHC even from the Lahore GPO; some areas of Lahore are so far from LHC that one needs to charter a plane to reach on time. Although, there is a dire need to establish a bench near every police station of Lahore but still the self-sacrificing and altruistic lawyers of Lahore have never raised a dissenting voice.
Secondly, it is the fault of the litigants and lawyers if they don’t have the privilege of owning a Mercedes, V8 or BMW for travelling, even if they don’t have it, they still have the prerogative of utilising the latest public transport system of Punjab which is as perfect as it can get. Apart from that, they have smooth and carpeted roads of rural Punjab to enjoy a bump free road trip to Lahore. If they can’t travel for just 7-8 hours in presence of the aforementioned temptations, they can’t do anything at all.
Thirdly, if they don’t have money to spend a night in Pearl Continental or Avari that is not a defect in the judicial system rather they and their limited pockets are to be blamed for it. All the multinationals have head quarters in their villages, why don’t they apply for their retainer-ship and earn millions?
Fourthly, before opting for a career in law, the lawyers of Mianwali, Khushab, etc, should have thought about their bleak future. Were they not aware law is a profession of the elitist, where bounty is confined to the rich people born with silver spoons in their mouths? Were they not aware that they will belong to the category of ‘have nots’ among lawyers? Were they not aware this profession thrives on aristocratic and noble lineage? Were they not aware that it is mandatory that they must be enrolled in Atchison College, Lahore Grammar School, etc, and subsequently join Harvard, Yale, Oxford or Cambridge for pursuing a degree in law?
Fifthly, dignity and honour of LHC will be under threat which may lead to world war three if divisional benches are constituted. The non-Lahore lawyers possess violent tendencies, once they threatened a judge and also locked his court room. This single incident shows that they all are uncivilised and untamed species. Have you ever seen any lawyer beating judges and locking court rooms in Lahore? No, because every lawyer in Lahore is a innocent soul, the videos aired by electronic media showing lawyers from Lahore beating cops and judges were forged and tampered with, those were aliens from Mars (who impersonated lawyers) beating cops.
In Marxist terminology, the current outlook of LHC benches resembles “Superstructure of Haves”; a formation designed to protect the economic interests of a group of powerful lawyers in Lahore. It seems like there is a virtual consensus among the legal elites (Haves) of Lahore to ensure complete enforcement of their capitalist manifesto; together they want to preserve the superstructure even at the cost of justice. The objection to new benches is not of principle and it has nothing to do with lowering down the dignity and respect of LHC (theorised by those who opposed constitution of benches). It is in reality a power struggle, the beneficiaries of the current superstructure don’t want anyone to join the party and share their potential earnings. Any idea, proposing alteration in the existing oligopolistic arrangement, will ferociously be resisted.
For the time being, let’s admit the concern raised by few that there are budgetary constraints in building up infrastructure of permanent LHC benches at divisional level, since the government of the day prefers siphoning off major chunks of its funds towards erecting landmark projects like Orange Line, Metro busses. In view of this, the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) aptly suggested a midway compromise which appears to be a very plausible solution i.e. application of latest technology in our judicial system by conducting court proceedings through video link in divisional registries of LHC. The Chief Justice of LHC is nowadays frequently conducting meetings with lower judiciary of Punjab through video link, if online meetings can be held; I see no intricacy in organising online court proceedings. All that is required is a two room divisional registry which can be connected to principal seat where concerned judges will be sitting; this can be done with a strong internet connection and simple electronic gadgets.
The online court proceeding technique has numerous other advantages. Firstly, it will shun fears (imaginary) of legal elite, as they are anxiously concerned about dignity of LHC. Secondly, it will not only provide swift justice but also lower down the cost of litigation, both for the judiciary and for the litigants. Thirdly, from the principal seat variety of judges will be available who can astutely decide on complex matters requiring subject expertise, for instance, intellectual property, company law, taxation matters can be directly heard by judges who are specialists in these matters.
To soothe down the mounting tensions, the new chief justice of LHC, a few days ago, announced the constitution of special benches for litigants belonging to remote areas of Punjab. However, such a development is inherently defective due to the very reason that it fails to consider the chief impediments in way of access to justice i.e. time and cost. It needs to be understood that cancer cannot be killed with aspirin; to nip it in the bud chemical therapy is required. And to seriously address grievance of the litigants from other divisions, deviation from existing bench arrangement of LHC is requisite as suggested above.
The main objective of every judicial system is to ensure easy access to justice in respect of cost and time; the online system discussed above will serve this purpose more efficiently and effectively. If easy means do exist, why make choices which in the end prove to be taxing for lawyers in general and litigants in particular. Why give the citizens the agony of travelling distances and hiring expensive lawyers (haves), if technology is available?
The concept of speedy and cost effective justice cannot come to realisation without easy access to higher courts. Access to justice the is fundamental right of every individual and is guaranteed by Article 4 and 9 of the Constitution of Pakistan. Concept of availability of justice at the doorstep through the establishment of divisional registries will not endanger dignity of LHC rather change the status quo and jeopardise the cartel of legal elite residing in Lahore. In fact, divisional registries connected electronically with principal seat of LHC, will restore litigants confidence on the judicial system, make them believe that it can deliver and meet their expectations thus eventually leading to a stronger and more relevant LHC.
