Improving Access to Justice

By Wajahat Ali Malik | April 2021

Pakistan inherited its judicial system from the British. However, the laws and legal institutions inherited were those suited for rule by a colonial power. In the 74 years history of Pakistan, the legal and judicial system has been adapted to suit the needs of martial law and an evolving democratic system. While successive governments have adopted the inherited judicial system, very little has been done to analyze and address its problems and to increase its efficiency. This results in a massive backlog in the courts and severe dissatisfaction among litigants. Litigants complain not only about delays in obtaining justice but also about the quality of justice received. With inadequate educational standards and malpractices in the legal profession, the quality of the legal profession has rapidly deteriorated. The situation has been exacerbated by neglect and inadequate investment in the system by successive governments. As a result, courts are understaffed and lack trained administrators, and modern management systems and technology. The physical infrastructure of the courts is also grossly inadequate and of a poor quality.

According to the Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan, there is a long pendency of cases in courts all over the Pakistan. There are forty thousand cases pending with the Supreme Court, about three hundred thousand with the five high courts and about two million with the subordinate judiciary of the four provinces and the federal capital. During the last five years, the number of cases pending in the Supreme Court has become more than double and is at the highest level for the last 15 years. In 2006, the number of pending cases before it were 13,724, but today it is three times of that.

Here are some recommendations regarding steps that could be taken to improve access to justice, reduce the backlog of cases, and make the justice system more efficient, transparent and accessible. Some of these recommendations have already been proposed by the judiciary and partially implemented, but can be further improved with support from the government.

Alternative Dispute Resolution:
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is the procedure for settling disputes without litigation, such as negotiation, conciliation, mediation, and arbitration. ADR procedures are usually less costly and more expeditious.They are increasingly being utilized in disputes that would otherwise result in lengthy litigation. ADR is adopted as a tool to settle disputes alongside the court system itself.

The National Judicial Policy and the Punjab and KP strategy documents include references to ADR processes for improving access to justice. In Punjab, since 2017, ADR centres have been introduced at the district judiciary level in all districts of the province. Punjab’s success with the ADR centres in each district should be replicated across Pakistan and the number and scope of ADR centres in Punjab should also be increased.

Civil and Criminal Model Courts:
In March 2019, the then Chief Justice of Pakistan, Asif Saeed Khosa announced the setting up of model courts in every district of the country to conduct daily proceedings in cases so that speedy justice to the public could be provided and the massive backlog of cases could be reduced. Initially, only murder and narcotics cases were assigned to model courts but later, civil, family and cases of rent nature were also transferred to these courts..

In 2020, the Supreme Court Monitoring Cell released figures about the performance of model courts. The figures showed that by January 2020, 465 model courts had been set up across the country, which had decided over 30,000 cases in just one year. From 01 April 2019 to 30 March 2020, these courts awarded death sentences to 874 people while handing down life imprisonments to 2,616 criminals. The model courts operated without adjournments and finished criminal trials within a month. Other cases were also disposed of within a short period.

Critics, including lawyers and judges, showed serious concerns about the working (non-stop proceedings in cases without any adjournments) of the model courts and completion of case proceedings within days as this, in their opinion, compromised the quality of justice. They said that if courts were rushed to decide cases for procedural reasons, there was a serious risk of miscarriage of justice. In the last few years, more than 78 per cent of the death sentences handed down by the lower courts of Pakistan were overturned by the Supreme Court. The important issue of delivering speedy justice by model courts badly affected canons of justice and required immediate scrutiny by the National Judicial Policy Making Committee.

Legal Education and Judicial Training: This component particularly focused on enhancing the capacity of the legal profession and the judiciary for providing quality legal services and access to justice. To strengthen the domain, the existing system of legal education and judicial training in Pakistan needs to be addressed. The Federal Judicial Academy and the Provincial Judicial Academies, with the collaboration of civil society (NGOs), have been doing tremendous work during the last few years and need to further upgrade and strengthen their efforts to achieve their objective.

Filling of Vacant Posts in the Administrative Tribunals and Special Courts:
Currently, a large number of posts of judicial officers are vacant in the administrative tribunals and special courts working under federal and provincial jurisdictions. Appointments must be made to these posts immediately for provision of speedy and inexpensive justice to the general public to reduce the workload of courts.

These suggestions, if implemented in the judicial system in their true letter and spirit, can significantly improve the performance delivery of the judiciary.

Region

Improving Access to Justice

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Update

One thought on “Improving Access to Justice”