17 Feb It is not Justice, to wait for years – The new generation wants it early, Not in Courts.
[vc_row css_animation=”” row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css=”.vc_custom_1502869235314{padding-top: 53px !important;}”][vc_column][vc_column_text]
“Justice? You can get Justice in the next world in some other life, in this world, you have the law!”
– Willam Gaddis
If a case is decided after fifteen years, of victim compensation in an accident? if a case of property is decided after the death of the plaintiff? What is the value or use of such a decision? What is the use of the money received after the cause itself no longer exists? Who is the real culprit? The courts? or the government ?or the system? On whom the victim can put the blame? So, instead of saying that Justice Delayed is Justice denied, we should say Delayed Justice is the Injustice.
The pendency of voluminous litigation where every single day a new litigation is arising creates backlogs of cases that seems to be never ending. Also, the time consumed to conclude any trial is far from the expected and acceptable time frame.
The other essential reason for the forbearance of litigation system is the adversarial character of the administration of the judicial system. In an adversarial system, the judge’s act as passive listeners and so this liberty is taken by the rich and the influential people. They often tend to steer the trial in their favor even when they might not actually be the aggrieved party rather they may be the wrongdoer and for them, the courts are like safe houses as there is the lack of fear of consequences as the outcome of the preceding is uncertain.
The powerful and influential party usually overpowers the aggrieved party. Also the judges those working in lower judicial officers let this happen as they are also under constant psychological pressure with all the lawyers almost breathing down their necks. So the decisions are mostly not equitable and even if they are,
they are mostly based on the medieval rule of evidence which is not a difficult for the dominant to fabricate or recreate or distort.
The conventional judicial set up may offer long lasting results but on effective cost-benefit analysis, it could easily be identified that there are no potent gains available to either of the parties. On the contrary, when one party loses the legal battle and the other parties who apparently believes to have won the litigation but ends up incurring larger incremental costs. Also due to the hostility of the parties, they have trenchantly lost the relationship that they used to hold before the dispute had arisen.There is no need to explain why businesses like speed, are impatient with unwanted delays, and abhor unnecessary cost.
If the company is cemented in a dispute then it usually cannot focus on its commercial goals, and when they are unable to settle the dispute in a timely fashion, then will have tend to fall short in the eyes of the business and this will impair the reporting of profits until the final resolution of the dispute.
So, in a nutshell, it can be said that the delay in any litigation has a direct and negative impact on the cost of adjudication, as businesses know from experience that the longer it takes to resolve a dispute, the more effort, and resources that will inevitably be expanded on it. Hence no matter how sophisticated the clients are, whenever they approach any lawyers, they approach with stories of injustice and not stories about the law, it is these legal professionals who shape the agony into a legal issue and explain in the courts impairing the real aggrieved party to state their needs and wants. The inability of
perceiving the problem through some other perspective than law makes the process unnecessarily cumbersome and time-consuming.
It is an undeniable fact that mediation and conciliation institutions and providers are now fast becoming the preferred way of resolving disputes due to the frustration of people towards the ongoing legal system which is very formal, adversarial, expensive, and inflexible.Today’s world should have a system befitting to today’s time. The basic need is to be able to resolve the dispute by communicating and negotiating and so there is a need for a judicial system to become more adaptable to current needs. In order to be able to provide a platform which underscores towards an approach to resolve a dispute after becoming more sensitive towards the socio-economic factors and needs of communities.
Sensing this need, many organizations and eminent individuals have taken steps to bring about a change in the judicial system by providing an integrated approach to resolving disputes. Organizations like The Mediation and Conciliation Network (MCN) are becoming fast popular with their one goal – to resolve disputes early and without the need of getting into long drawn court battles. MCN helps disputing parties to understand the damages of a long-drawn dispute and engages the parties to resolve the issues, how so ever complex or protracted they may be.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
