Legal perspective

The Supreme Court has specifically barred plea bargaining. But thenplea bargaining is not needed. The police-lawyer nexus is what propels the practice of a successful criminal lawyer in the district courts today. Unfortunately, judges who choose to address the nation about the ills of delay and miscarriage of criminal justice offer remedies by ignoring this reality. Faulty diagnosis leads to cosmetic remedies. No attention is paid to recognising and awarding the upright investigating officer or the lawyer who refuses to survive on police dole.

The next step of defence management is targeted at the prosecutor. Given the system of selection and appointment many are not difficult targets. Indeed clients who are intelligent come and tell you that they have managed the other side and can now pay their lawyer. But grand speeches of lawyers and judges ignore this fact. Consequently, no attention is paid to precisely what needs to be done to ensure prosecutorial integrity. None of the speech-giving judges have bothered to visit the prosecutorial branch in the Capital8217;s courts andtake stock of the sick state of affairs there, ranging from furniture, library, transport to keeping of records and of course the payments for the work they do.

The magistracy which judicially deals with most of the criminal cases is ill equipped, ill trained and thoroughly mismanaged by the high courts who have a constitutional duty to ensure proper management. Their own appointments and selections are the subject of litigation year after year.

The apex court speech-makers have not evolved any mechanism to even find out a high court which manages the district courts better than the rest and then try to replicate that elsewhere. The rules of court management laid down under the Court Act of each state and in the circulars of high courts are not available to the public. Inspections are more often than not arbitrary and the inspection reports are not available to the public. Which administrative judge in the district court and the high court is responsible for proper functioning of the courts is notdisplayed publicly. The bar councils and bar associations at the highest level are not asked to sit down and do the painful task with the judges in a phased step by step sectoral rectification and monitoring. Th-ere is no legal information plan for the litigants or the magistrates.

The result is the creation of a dual criminal justice system acirc;euro;ldquo; one for the poor and another for the rich. If the accused or his family can pay then the Criminal Procedure Code rights of the accused to quick production of documents after the final investigation report is filed, interviews in the lock up on the court premises, and quick production of his files and bail applications are assured. If the accused counsel is from legal aid then the same system refuses to work. Theremand counsel becomes a butt of jokes.

The lofty speech-makers, of course, refuse to take judicial notice of this or to ensure accountability of high courts. How does the apex court continue to elevate to the Supreme Court the chief justices of those highcourts where the criminal justice situation is the worst? This judicial promotion of district court mismanagement is related to another malaise 8212; conferring of senior advocates designation without any liability on them to serve at least for three years in the legal aid unit of the district court. Let the apex court enforce this three-year service on all its senior advocates of more than ten years standing. That is the test of judicial will.