There should be a deterrent present for judges not working properly
While the chief justice of Pakistan is actively fulfilling his duties by dispensing speedy justice, the long standing questions regarding the judicial system yearn for answers. The 3,000 judges, occasionally mentioned by the CJP, have inherent flaws which need to be countered.
Although, it is true that 3,000 judges are not enough to cater to the needs of the country, however, it is equally true that these 3,000 fail to cater to even a fraction of the population. Every other litigant has a horror story of their own to tell. Some are busy fighting for their inheritance shares for the past 5-7 years. Others are downtrodden seeking justice for their murdered sons.
The workload is surely immense. But the lack of desire to work and the basic level of intellectual competence required to work is lacking even more. The first level of judicial hierarchy, the trial courts, is where the major predicaments are encountered. Though, even at appellate stage people spend almost a decade. The High Courts work at their own will with no questions asked. Even the timings of certain judges are self-convenient with no checks in place.
The CJP himself is a man of action and works tirelessly to finish the cause list of the day and is mostly successful in doing so. However, unlike him his contemporaries and more importantly his sub-ordinates do not have the same sense of responsibility present within.
A vast majority of the trial court judges are either incompetent or unwilling to work. All they want is to get over with the day and move ahead. It doesn’t matter if a litigant had to travel miles and reach the courtroom only to be saddened by yet another stroke of pen adjourning his case to another date. Secondly, these judges lack sight to interpret various special laws that are now being enacted in Pakistan. Moreover, they are not willing to learn. Every now and then a professional lawyer walks into a courtroom, brief in his hand, to do his duty and assist the court in comprehending a complex proposition or a newly enacted special law. Almost every time, the lawyer turns back disappointed because either the judge he appeared before was not willing to seek his assistance and understand or the judge simply lacked the intellectual capacity to do so.
Another practice which needs to be discontinued is the meeting with other judges during working hours. All such meetings should be scheduled for after work hours so as to maximise utility during court timings. Any judge found to be in violation of the guidelines set by the superior judiciary should be exemplified in the eyes of the others. Nobody should be allowed to play with the rights of the general public.
Yes, there may be a need to increase the number of judges but first their level of training and the induction process needs to be revamped. The judges already present require serious checks and balances.
There should be a deterrent present for judges not working properly. For instance, a judge who renders 3-4 decisions unacceptable to the superior judiciary in a row should be discharged from his duties. This would save time for thousands of litigants who after years of quest for justice are handed out orders which are only understandable by the author judges themselves. Some decisions are not even near the mandate of the law and blatantly highlight the incompetence of these judicial sailors.
The workload is surely immense. But the lack of desire to work and the basic level of intellectual competence required to work is lacking even more.
Apart from their evident reluctance, it is satirical to see trial court judges disregarding directions of the superior courts directing them to dispose of a particular case within a fixed period of time. Despite directions of a few days, the matter remains undecided for months and even years. In such situations, the judges should be penalised and punished accordingly.
A board responsible for the conduct of the judges should be created which should include senior members of the bar as well as the superior judiciary. The board should even evaluate the progress of all the judges on a quarterly basis so as to remove those who are unfit for the job. After all, justice for the sake of justice would amount to no justice.
Similarly, the members of the superior judiciary require a check and balance system to be able to dispense justice fairly. Independence of judiciary is of vital importance but at the same time this independence cannot be arbitrary. There should be consequences for non-serious attitude towards the hearing of cases. Laws making it mandatory to finish the cause list of the day should be enacted so as to eliminate the cause of delay present due to cases being leftover.
Literally, at the moment, if a judge doesn’t feel like taking up a case he can casually do so with no questions asked. Regretfully, this isn’t the independence of judiciary that the judges around the world strive for. As a general rule, a judge should be bound to take up each and every case fixed in a cause list for any given day. Under no circumstances should the case be leftover because court time was over. Judges shouldn’t be allowed to dispense justice at their own whims. Working hours, punctuality, discipline and most importantly respectful attitude towards the members of the bar should be made part and parcel of being a judge.
Simple steps similar to the aforesaid would bring about a significant change in the judicial paradigm. It will allow room for simple matters to be disposed of at the earliest and other more complicated ones to be in the pipeline to be heard. A trudge in the right direction would achieve miles.
It should also be adopted as a practice for a member of the superior judiciary to show cause a trial judge whose order has been brought into a challenge before him and is found to be patently illegal.
Once the existing fleet is revamped then yes, we can talk about adding to it.
