A parliamentary panel recommended the continuation of virtual courts in certain categories of cases such as appeals and final hearings with the consent of the parties involved even after the Covid-19 pandemic, saying it will pave the way for cheaper and faster means of deliver justice as a court is more of a service than a place.
Also read: Virtual courts can help in distributive justice by ensuring accessibility and affordability: Bhupender Yadav
He has suggested permanent virtual procedures for courts of appeal such as Telecom Dispute Resolution Court of Appeal, Intellectual Property Court of Appeal, National Society Law Court of Appeal, etc. “This will reduce the cost and increase the efficiency in resolving cases without the need for unnecessary delays. Virtual courts can deliver faster results with fewer resources. They can also reduce travel time to court and wait time in court, ”said the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Complaints, Law and Justice in an interim report presented to Rajya Sabha President M Venkaiah Naidu, the Friday.
The report stressed that digital justice is “cheaper and faster.” The panel added that it addresses economic and location disadvantages, ensures the safety of vulnerable witnesses giving testimony, and streamlines processes and procedures.
The panel led by Bharatiya Janata Party lawmaker Bhupender Yadav said virtual courts are an improvement over traditional ones “as they are the most affordable, citizen friendly and offer greater access to justice.”
Court proceedings have been conducted digitally for more than five months to adhere to social distancing rules as part of measures to control the spread of the pandemic. Late last month, the Supreme Court notified standard operating procedures (SOPs) to govern physical court hearings that were expected to begin soon. Physical hearings on the cases are expected to initially start in just three courtrooms, the SOPs said. The court was expected to respond to a call on how many attorneys and litigants will be allowed into the courtroom, based on capacity and physical distancing rules.
The physical hearings of the cases in the Supreme Court were suspended on March 23 in view of the pandemic. The high court has been hearing cases via video conference ever since. The high court issued a circular on March 23 suspending the entry of lawyers and litigants to the court premises and ordering that only urgent cases be brought to the hearing by video conference.
The panel’s recommendations have come even as several bar associations have questioned the effectiveness of digital procedures and pointed out the limitations of the infrastructure required for them. They have said that digital proceedings favor tech-savvy defenders as well as depriving many attorneys of opportunities to change the course of arguments based on the changing dynamics of a case during hearings.
In their presentations to the panel, the councils said that more than 50% of advocates, primarily at the district and lower levels, do not own laptops or computers and lack the skills necessary for virtual proceedings.
The report argued that virtual courts and case hearings via video conferencing have gained immense ground during the pandemic and will continue to be a new reality and a new normal. He added that virtual courts will promote access to justice, since litigants in remote areas will be able to access the Supreme Court without spending money on trips to Delhi. “Litigants do not need to leave their job to attend court, as they can access the proceedings from their home or office. Make it easy for a lawyer to argue in any court in India. An attorney can argue in one court in the morning and be present in another court later that day. Therefore, it creates a level playing field between the rich and the underprivileged. “
The panel has suggested the necessary amendments to the law to give legal validity to virtual courts and their procedures so that they are not challenged in court.
Up to 13 of the 25 superior courts in the country have introduced and allowed electronic filing of cases. But district and subordinate courts in many places have lagged behind due to lack of infrastructure and experience in managing and transitioning to virtual hearings.
The committee acknowledged the difficulties of the report and said massive investments would be required to put in place the necessary infrastructure to support digitized audiences. It has suggested the feasibility of new financing approaches such as the public-private partnership model for this purpose.
The committee said that the transfer of certain categories of cases from regular to virtual courts will reduce the processing of cases. “[The] The Committee considers that the current system should be allowed to continue on an experimental basis with the consent of all parties for certain categories of cases such as appeals, etc. and final hearings where the physical presence of the parties / attorneys is not required and only a virtual online hearing is required. enough. The costs involved in establishing a large number of Courts / Tribunals can be greatly reduced. This will also reduce the crowd in court and reduce other litigation costs and overhead, ”the report says.
The report says that virtual courts will make judicial services accessible to all. “No member of the general public should be disadvantaged by location or financial or other disadvantage. The Committee is of the opinion that digital justice is cheaper and faster. People living in remote and far-flung areas can also participate in court proceedings. ‘
The committee said one of the main benefits of virtual courts will be that they will speed up processes and procedures that would otherwise be lengthy and laborious. “Virtual courts can deliver results faster and with fewer resources. Virtual Courts help attorneys argue in a concise, precise and focused manner, which makes the system faster, ”the report says.
The panel said there is currently no mechanism to separate simple cases from complex ones that involve cumbersome procedures and multiple witnesses. “The Proportionate Justice principle requires that the cost, speed, complexity and degree of combativeness of any case be commensurate with the substance and scale of that case. Minor cases must be resolved quickly within a reasonable time. Such cases should not require cumbersome procedures. “
Virtual courts, according to the report, can address this problem. The committee concluded that physical courts alone will not be enough. He added that virtual courts should be integrated into the country’s legal ecosystem. As a first step towards this, the judiciary should identify cases that can be heard by virtual courts, he suggested.
“The Committee is of the opinion that all matters in which personal presence can be dispensed with can be transferred from ordinary judicial establishments to virtual courts. … The virtual award will bring massive benefits across the system, ”the committee said.
It also recommended expanding virtual courts to cover arbitration hearings. “For example, if national and international arbitrations are allowed to take place through Virtual Courts, there will be almost no requirement to travel in real time to distant locations. … this measure will unblock the Courts and also mitigate the inconvenience of attending the Courts, as long-distance travel can be dispensed with and the procedures also become less expensive. “
The other recommendations include the installation of E-Sewa Kendras in all judicial complexes, the rapid implementation of the National Broadband Mission, the introduction of computer courses for law students, and the development of an indigenous software platform to guarantee the privacy and data security. The panel also suggested to provide a wide area network facility, adoption of machine learning, artificial intelligence, etc. for a transformative change in the administration of justice.
“The Committee believes that ‘Justice delayed is Justice denied’ but ‘Justice hurried is Justice also buried’. The Committee believes that Virtual Courts are a mechanism that will achieve a balance between these two extremes and will extend expedited Justice to the litigating public without compromising quality. The Committee considers that the transfer of certain categories of cases from the ordinary courts to the Virtual Courts will reduce the processing of cases that have been obstructing the wheels of Justice for decades ”, says the report.
Yadav referred to virtual courts in countries such as the United States and Singapore and said that they have also worked hard on aspects such as conducting pretrial detention matters virtually to prevent the movement of prisoners between courts and prisons. “We have used virtual courts effectively during the lockdown period in which more than 1.8 million cases were registered across the country, of which nearly 800,000 have been resolved.”
.
