National Judicial Conference on Mediation and IT: President, Law Minister, CJI bat for mediation to check case pendency

🗞️ Subscribe Now: Get Express Premium to access the best Election reporting and analysis 🗞️

The President also said that the topmost objective of switching the justice delivery system to information and communication technology (ICT) should be the “improvement of access to justice”.

In his address, Rijiju emphasised the need for “teamwork” between the executive and the judiciary, while CJI Ramana advocated for “active effort” by courts to “make negotiations and mediation mandatory as part of case management”.“As long as justice is being served, it does not matter whether it is delivered by courts or under the aegis of the executive through mediation,” Rijiju said, adding that the Mediation Bill was now before the Parliament’s Standing Committee of Law and Justice for deliberations, and is taking a very good shape.

Rijiju added the government’s goal was “to ensure that people should not wait for formal litigation to get justice. Let us explore other means to provide quick justice…I also feel that the existing system will burden us more and more unless we reform ourselves internally”.

CJI Ramana echoed that lok adalats, gram adalats and mediation centres have the “potential to transform the legal landscape of India by providing millions of people a platform to settle their grievances” and that “imbibing effective alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms into the judicial process can reduce pendency, and allow the litigants a degree of control over the dispute resolution process and its outcome”.

Justice L Nageswara Rao of Supreme Court, who was part of one of the three sessions held on mediation, underlined the need for “reducing the pressure on courts, and that with delay in justice delivery comes the grave danger of people losing faith in the system”.

Justice Rao also outlined the lack of “proper training and sensitisation” on mediation, pointing out “reservations” among judges on the benefits of mediation, and that the “Bar does not support mediation” as lawyers fear loss of work.

Justice Rao said, “Mediation is a different ball game and some people who want mediation do not want judges to be there because as judges they are used to adjudication, not mediation…training and learning on part of judges is needed as well. Time has come where you have domain experts as mediators.”

CJI Ramana said, “Lawyers must pursue every possibility of pre-litigation settlement and advise clients to approach the lok adalats. It should not be used as a mere delaying tactic. Judicial officers dispensing justice should not bring any adjudicating flavour to the proceedings and must understand parties and their economic conditions with patience.”

Weighing in on the importance of having skilled mediators, CJI Ramana said, “We need skilled mediators to decide some significant issues during the process of mediation, particularly in a situation where settlement is fully going in favour of a particular party. Should the mediator be a silent spectator during such negotiations? The ideals of substantive quality must be reflected in the resolution processes as well.”

Touching upon how legal regulations have failed to keep pace with advancements in technology, CJI Ramana cautioned that he expects litigation in technological areas to only go up. “Technological developments such as cryptocurrency data protection, encryption and artificial intelligence have caused courts and law enforcement agencies to engage in novel issues. ” he said.