Law unto itself

The judiciary is only a mechanism for resolving differences, for providing satisfaction tolitigants. Advani’s statement comes only a few weeks after another by Attorney-General Soli Sorabjee, in which he said that the more the machinery of justice fails to deliver, the more the common man will turn to street law for satisfaction. It is an option that is widely exercised, is something of an institution in popular culture and challenges the very basis of civil society.

Hopefully, Advani’s words will be followed by deeds. Legal reform was, after all, on his party’s election manifesto and the National Agenda for Governance. But previous governments have also spoken of sweeping reform in the judicial system. Precious little has been done so far. The latest was the Gujral government’s initiative to overhaul the archaic laws that contribute significantly to the work of the courts by calling for procedures that have become irrelevant.

Nothing came of it. In the meantime, the courts are becoming increasingly burdened by a large number of cases which they should not even begin to entertain. In fact,filing a lawsuit has come to be regarded as a holding tactic rather than a plea for justice. The government cannot absolve itself of complicity in the problem, for it launches into litigious activity regularly, prepared to spend a few thousand rupees in order to recover a few hundred in dues from citizens. It also contributes to legal delay by failing to make judicial appointments in good time. Neither is the political class free of blame. It is they, in fact, who invented the "false case", which is freely used to embarrass political opponents.

If Advani intends to make good his promise, he will have his work cut out for him. The very premises of our legal system will have to be changed. The law will no longer be able to deal diligently with every case. A good number of cases will have to be either decided or thrown out at the earliest stage of the process. Others will have to be moved to specially created legal or quasi-legal bodies, on the lines of the consumer courts. Judicial change will call for anexceptionally pragmatic vision. One that realises that justice does not have to be perfect. It just has to be satisfactory.