http://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum/miscellaneous-topics/19913-such-scot-free-judiciary-no.html
20.11.2008
There is long going high talk about the independence of judiciary. While this is not a bad idea at all but the question is: Is it worthwhile to let the judiciary have its way given the state of 'elements' which constitute it?? I think not. The entire judiciary needs major reforms, inter alia, not only in the mode of appointments and termination of judges but also in harnessing, controlling and regulating the conduct of the officers of the court, viz the lawyers.
Lawyers, pleaders or the officers of the court as they are called 'grow' up to be selected as future judges. If their conduct and reputation during their legal practice is not exemplary and they are 'chosen' to decide the fate of litigations it is not hard to conceive the kind of judiciary we would be having and how the 'independence' of judiciary would end up in killing justice. Unfortunately, the conduct and character of many lawyers is not exemplary and they do not seem to be bound by any code of conduct. Since the lawyers are dominant fiduciaries of the litigating clients many of them are wont to 'exploit' them as well as play the role of 'devil's advocates'.
There have been many cases of non-prosecution, non-appearance and non-filing of necessary documents with the courts within the statutory period which go unreported. The wretched client, in search for justice, mostly suffers the brunt of law at the hands of his lawyers deliberate negligent conduct or incompetency while the lawyer is seldom held accountable for his excesses. This is all primarily due to the dominant position of the lawyer and the inefficiency of Bar Councils to cater for such contingencies. Bar Councils which are bodies of the lawyers cannot be said to be impartial in taking action against their member lawyers for their 'atrocities' committing aganst their clients.
Not that an independent accountability council be set up for hearing complaints against dishonest lawyers but also a separate and independent body should also be set up to select lawyers for the post of judges not only on the base of their experience but also their general reputation and past conduct. A judgeship qualification exam should also be made mandatory for lawyers aspiring to become judges of the higher courtsas well . Their conduct as well as that of those in the civil courts also be monitored by some independent agency. Needless to say corruption is too rampant among the court's paralegal staff . At every step the litigants have to throw them dough to expedite their work and most of the lawyers and their so called 'munshis' form a part of that 'cult'. Bribery is a common feature witnessed at the lower courts while the method of fleecing at the higher courts (excluding the Supreme Court) is done under a 'sophisticated streak' of extortionism. It is almost impossible to get certified copies of documents at the lower courts without greasing the palms of the copyist and the other concerned staff. Judges who were once lawyers themselves and had spent years in these courts cannot claim to be ignorant of this situation yet they seem to be helpless or uninterested or negligent in seeking measures to get rid of the corruption menace with the para legal staff...and to set the judiciary right. I dare say that without improving on some of the evils mentioned hereinabove and which cling and overshadow the existing judiciary
The idea of a free and independent judiciary would be nothing but a fancy and futile exercise.
Mazhar Butt
20.11.2008
There is long going high talk about the independence of judiciary. While this is not a bad idea at all but the question is: Is it worthwhile to let the judiciary have its way given the state of 'elements' which constitute it?? I think not. The entire judiciary needs major reforms, inter alia, not only in the mode of appointments and termination of judges but also in harnessing, controlling and regulating the conduct of the officers of the court, viz the lawyers.
Lawyers, pleaders or the officers of the court as they are called 'grow' up to be selected as future judges. If their conduct and reputation during their legal practice is not exemplary and they are 'chosen' to decide the fate of litigations it is not hard to conceive the kind of judiciary we would be having and how the 'independence' of judiciary would end up in killing justice. Unfortunately, the conduct and character of many lawyers is not exemplary and they do not seem to be bound by any code of conduct. Since the lawyers are dominant fiduciaries of the litigating clients many of them are wont to 'exploit' them as well as play the role of 'devil's advocates'.
There have been many cases of non-prosecution, non-appearance and non-filing of necessary documents with the courts within the statutory period which go unreported. The wretched client, in search for justice, mostly suffers the brunt of law at the hands of his lawyers deliberate negligent conduct or incompetency while the lawyer is seldom held accountable for his excesses. This is all primarily due to the dominant position of the lawyer and the inefficiency of Bar Councils to cater for such contingencies. Bar Councils which are bodies of the lawyers cannot be said to be impartial in taking action against their member lawyers for their 'atrocities' committing aganst their clients.
Not that an independent accountability council be set up for hearing complaints against dishonest lawyers but also a separate and independent body should also be set up to select lawyers for the post of judges not only on the base of their experience but also their general reputation and past conduct. A judgeship qualification exam should also be made mandatory for lawyers aspiring to become judges of the higher courtsas well . Their conduct as well as that of those in the civil courts also be monitored by some independent agency. Needless to say corruption is too rampant among the court's paralegal staff . At every step the litigants have to throw them dough to expedite their work and most of the lawyers and their so called 'munshis' form a part of that 'cult'. Bribery is a common feature witnessed at the lower courts while the method of fleecing at the higher courts (excluding the Supreme Court) is done under a 'sophisticated streak' of extortionism. It is almost impossible to get certified copies of documents at the lower courts without greasing the palms of the copyist and the other concerned staff. Judges who were once lawyers themselves and had spent years in these courts cannot claim to be ignorant of this situation yet they seem to be helpless or uninterested or negligent in seeking measures to get rid of the corruption menace with the para legal staff...and to set the judiciary right. I dare say that without improving on some of the evils mentioned hereinabove and which cling and overshadow the existing judiciary
The idea of a free and independent judiciary would be nothing but a fancy and futile exercise.
Mazhar Butt
No comments:
Post a Comment