Social Activists Deliberate Cure To The Failing Judicial System
Chandigarh
March 21, 2009
A symposium on “Why is the justice system failing” was held by a group of civil society organisations at Commonwealth
Youth Centre today. A group of civil society groups from the region got together under the banner of “Coalition for
Social Engineering” and deliberated about the ills suffered in the administration of Justice.
Hitender Jain of Resurgence mentioned that the onus to uphold the Constitution, the laws and the regulation lies with
the Judiciary but however over the years, the situation has gone from bad to worse. “The judicial system appears to have
totally failed. The condition of the quasi-judicial system is even worst. Most quasi-judicial systems have become a
farce, and a place to accommodate and resettle the retired sycophants. The appointment in most of the commissions and
forums is done in a hush-hush manner and without any transparency.” Jain added.
Calling for the need to amend the contempt of court laws and expunge the unnecessary provisions in the constitution,
social activist Hemant Goswami mentioned, “The way out of any problem starts with an open debate, discussion and
constructive criticism. However, even honest and factual dialogues are often discouraged by the looming threat of
over-zealous and unjustified interpretation of the “Contempt of Court” laws. The lack of free dialogue and free speech
on the ills of judiciary and the corrupt elements within the system has only multiplied the woes.”
“It is important to speak up and reclaim the right to free speech and right to do an honest and critical assessment of
all the constituents of the system of governance. Judiciary is not above free speech and criticism by the citizenry
since even judiciary was a part of the Government, which has been formed by the people within the democratic system.”
Goswami added.
Social activist H. C. Arora mentioned that there was a need for an independent forum with members from other sphere of
public life too for adjudication of matters of criminal contempt of court. “All courts should also have video recording
in all the courts and all the proceedings should be duly video graphed. In the age of modern technology, the idea of
having an open court must include allowing people to witness the proceedings of the courts and make them more
transparent and open for public scrutiny.”
Kamal Anand of People for Transparency mentioned that “People were frustrated, angry; but helpless with the current
state of the judicial system. There seems to be no way out and the general view of the public is that the rich and
powerful appear to be getting their way around the justice and the laws appear to be adjusted to their standards; be it
the courts or the legislation enactment.”
Surinder Pal Singh emphasised that Contempt of the Constitution has to be bigger than Contempt of the Court as the “part
can never be bigger than the whole.” He added that since the enactment of the constitution no person has ever been
punished for the contempt of constitution.
Advocate APS Shergill added, “The bureaucrats frequently violate the fundamental rights of the common man, as guaranteed
under the constitution. However an automatic system of checks and balances was lacking and if someone approached the
Courts against the violation, at the best the rights were restored but no penal action against the executive officers
has ever been taken even though Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code provides for penal action against a person who
disobeys any direction of law.”
The mode of appointment of Judges and the members of quasi judicial bodies was also discussed and it was emphasised that
the appointment to Judiciary has to be transparent and purely on merit. The present way of appointment of members in the
Information Commission and other quasi judiciary was criticised as it was also not on merit and done in violation of
Article 16 of the Constitution.
ENDS