Editorial: Make judiciary transparent

One of the biggest dangers to the constitutional institutions in a democracy is the opacity of their functioning. Judiciary is a key pillar of democracy that needs to be accessible and accountable to people. Transparency is what makes the justice delivery system more effective and responsive. Opaque, obscure and inaccessible systems, however well-intended they may […]

One of the biggest dangers to the constitutional institutions in a democracy is the opacity of their functioning. Judiciary is a key pillar of democracy that needs to be accessible and accountable to people. Transparency is what makes the justice delivery system more effective and responsive. Opaque, obscure and inaccessible systems, however well-intended they may be, will only result in the erosion of public faith and widen the gulf. The Chief Justice of India Justice DY Chandrachud’s proposal for live-streaming of proceedings in district courts must be welcomed and acted upon in right earnest. Recently, the Supreme Court allowed live-streaming of the constitution bench hearings on its website. Live-streaming needs to be operationalised not only for big-ticket cases but also everyday proceedings at the district level, which is the first interface of the citizen with the judicial system. Improving transparency must be one of the important objectives of judicial reforms. For a majority of Indians, the first brush with the judicial system happens at the district court level, be it civil cases involving family disputes or property quarrels or criminal charges ranging from petty theft to murder and assault. An overwhelming majority of the 47 million pending cases in the Indian judicial system are piled up at the district-level courts. Any reform must begin at this level. Bringing the court proceedings live would bring accountability to the legal profession and help strengthen people’s faith in the judiciary. Though the apex court had given the nod for live-streaming in 2018, there was not much headway for nearly two years. However, during the pandemic, the SC and high courts were forced to commence virtual hearings.

Currently, six high courts — Gujarat, Odisha, Karnataka, Jharkhand, Patna, and Madhya Pradesh — live-stream their proceedings through their own channels on YouTube. Live-streaming could be of immense benefit for the litigants who are unable to attend the court. Live-streaming is a worldwide phenomenon, with constitutional courts in developed countries having their own channels. It will also help prevent disinformation and misinformation, bring discipline and improve how judges and lawyers conduct the proceedings, as they are aware that the public is watching. Such technological tools will help in bringing the judiciary closer to the people. In HCs across the country, over 59 lakh cases are pending. Like the apex court, around 70% of pendency there involves admission stage matters. The Central and State governments, the biggest litigants, have a greater role in reducing the pendency. They must upgrade judicial infrastructure, fill judicial vacancies and avoid frivolous litigation. A comprehensive set of judicial reforms is the best solution to address systemic inadequacies. The issues of pendency, delays and backlogs can be tackled to a large extent by strengthening the physical, digital, and human infrastructure of the courts.

---