Pages

Thursday, March 17, 2011

WHAT AILS OUR SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY? | Legally India

WHAT AILS OUR SUBORDINATE JUDICIARY? | Legally India

JUSTICE” is one thing that everyone whether rich or poor profoundly yearns for besides requisite ROTI, KAPRA AND MAKAN in life for soulful enjoyment of one’s all mundane gains and acquisitions. No wonder taking cue of this vital human need our constitution framers accorded due primacy to this noble aspect of human life while framing our constitution as would be evident from the opening recital of the preamble of our constitution which while elucidating the broad contours of the basic objectives of our constitution assigned top most position to justice in the tally of all objectives that WE THE PEOPLE OF INDIA resolved to provide to our people while adopting , enacting and giving to ourselves this CONSTITUTION. The preamble reads as follows:-
“WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all its citizens:
JUSTICE, social, economic and political;
LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity;
And to promote among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the [unity and integrity of the Nation];
IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION”
A bare perusal of our preamble thus suggests that securing JUSTICE to all the citizens is the foremost important task of the STATE. In the parliamentary system of democracy in our country, each organ of the state viz. legislature, executive and Judiciary has been assigned important but distinct role to play to achieve the aforesaid objectives, working in tandem and harmony with each other while working within their constitutional limits and competence. Broadly speaking, while legislature frames the laws to achieve the objective of democratic socialism, executive implements such laws for the welfare of the people and judiciary plays the role of a watchdog to see the validity or otherwise of the enactments passed by the legislature on the touch stone of our constitution and also to see if such public interest serving enactments passed by our legislature have been properly executed/ implemented by executive in letter and spirit or not. Thus it is clear no amount of laws framed by the legislature under the garb of public welfare could serve the cause of the people in real sense unless these are found to be in conformity with the constitution by the Judiciary. Similarly no legislation howsoever well intended in nature and character it may be would serve the intended purpose of public welfare unless it is implemented and executed with equally benevolent zeal and earnestness by the executive. This makes the role of JUDICIARY all the more paramount to achieve the real objectives of our CONSTITUTION in real sense of the term.
But no organ or institution howsoever great or important it may be, could work properly and deliver goods unless adequately equipped and strengthened, commensurate with the mandate assigned to it under constitution. An ailing institution itself ridden with a host of impediments and constraints and scrambling hard to get rid of such hindrances obviously cannot discharge its functions properly howsoever laudable its role may be and howsoever well intended efforts it may clamor to make in the name of public welfare.
In this backdrop of scheme of things, if we examine the state of affairs with regard to JUDICIARY in our country, let us first focus our attention to the function of subordinate judiciary in the matrix of three tier justice delivery system of our country. This is apt and important so to do because the journey of the long torturous road to justice actually begins from the portals of lower courts euphemistically called as the FIRST TEMPLES OF JUSTICE in the common parlance or the very threshold of the huge edifice of the judiciary in our country.
1. PERIPHERAL VIEW:-
A visit to any lower court in any part of the country (exception being made to newly constructed courts) would be a revealing pointer to the grim ground realities obtaining in our country about this august institution. This would enlighten us about the pathetic conditions in which the courts function and help us dispel much of our misgivings we often harbor about this premier oracle of our justice delivery system. A multitude of people thronging the campus in the quest of justice, a cacophony of sound often subsumed by the shrill voice of the court staff calling out the case, a bevy of tormenting touts chivvying you to the point of harassment and irritation is the common sight of any subordinate court anywhere in the country. With no clear signages provided conspicuously at appropriate places indicating the location of a particular court even if one succeeds locating the desired court after great deal of hustling – bustling in the huge crowd of the people one is appalled to see the old dilapidated structure of the building housing the court and its staff. On the way one comes across the shabby treatment meted out to the under trials brought from the jail for the hearing of their cases that day. The under trials are herded like sardines into a dingy, unkempt, stinking small enclosure called LOCKUP. The LOCKUP has no provision of adequate ventilation or fans etc. Even if by some altruistic gesture fans are provided, the same remain unused either for want of power supply for most time of the day or want of necessary repairs causing the conditions of the under trials all the more pathetic and revolting. One would also notice lack of adequate facilities like toilets and drinking water especially for women folk, senior citizens and children etc. on the campus. What is all the more deplorable is that in most of the subordinate courts across the country there is no provision for the litigants sheds or lawyer’s chambers in adequate numbers. LITIGANTS are the species to cater to whose needs primarily these courts owe their existence to and if they are denied such basic facilities on the campus it multiplies their plight and misery rather than alleviate the same even after reaching so close within the embrace of their saviours. In other words, the whole scene is so chaotic and pathetic that one often wonders if he has landed up in the portals of Justice or in the stock market. One remarkable similarity between the two however is the dominant role played by luck and speculation. In the case of the court also a litigant often treads with a sense of trepidation whether his case would be heard that day at all or not and would not be tossed up to some next date for reasons beyond his comprehension.
2. INSIDE VIEW:-
A long CAUSE LIST normally hung on the notice board outside every court room is no guarantee that all cases listed therein would eventually find the gracious favour of the Judge’s kind attention on that day as there are myriad grounds for adjourning the same to some other date which causes great deal of consternation and bewilderment to the indigent litigants who come from far off places leaving their work in the vain hope of to get prompt justice in their matter. Most common grounds responsible for such dismal affairs are vacancy of the judge for want of posting / appointment, flash or prolonged strike of lawyers or the staff of court, declaration of holiday by the government in the event of some festival or contingency having arisen all of a sudden necessitating declaration of a holiday on that day. While these are some of the common features which often cripple working of the courts to the detriment of indigent litigant , the poor litigant still has no reason to feel relieved and hopeful to get a patient hearing in his case even if no such grounds exist to force an adjournment of his case. There are other factors also which can belie his hope for an early justice. The Judge may be on leave on that day or lengthy arguments in some important case may be robbing him of a chance to take up any other case for hearing despite his best intention to exhaust the whole cause list of that day. So the chance of a hapless litigant getting a hearing of his matter largely depends upon his sheer luck. Instances are not few where everything being in order i.e. Judge being very much present, none gone on strike, no case of lengthy arguments or grilling cross examination of witnesses being there still the case could be adjourned if the Judge is busy dictating some important urgent orders or judgments in his chamber leaving him with no choice but to adjourn rest of the cases to some other day. This situation normally arises when the concerned Judge is saddled with the task of looking after the work of some other courts also besides his own court or during the closing days of a particular month or quarter of the year where the Judge is under a tremendous pressure to complete his mandatory quota of work.
3. MALPRACTICES GALORE:-
It is not that this state of dismal affairs hurts and adversely affects everybody. In fact there is a tribe of people whom this kind of situation suits best to serve their vested interest. While the poor litigant who has been wronged wishes to seek speedy justice, the other side which is on the wrong side of the law always wishes to be off the dragnet of law for as long as possible it could be managed and welcomes every single cause or reason that retards the movement of chariot of justice as far as possible. This party and its lawyer join hands to adopt all machinations of dilatory tactics to delay the process of justice by seeking adjournment on sundry grounds. This tribe of people has no canons of justice and no commitment to the society and ruthlessly feast on the plight and miseries of the people. What is shocking and surprising is that such people succeed in making an almost impregnable network of likeminded unscrupulous people including the court staff and work in such a well orchestrated manner that the system is geared to serve their vested interest to the detriment of needy poor litigants waiting desperately to get justice at an early date. Such people adopt all nefarious means and acts of malfeasance to delay the justice or defeat the ends of justice with great sense of impunity and unfortunately there is none to check them from doing so. The whole system seems to have become hostage to the whims and fancies of such type of people. Obviously the brunt of this menace is mostly borne by the under trials whose miseries or tale or woes get further compounded every time their cases get adjourned to next day. Then again there is none to assure them that the system would not be allowed to be smitten by the bug of STRIKES OR CONTINGENCIES evolving in conflict with their right to speedy justice next time also and they stand cheated again & again by the vagaries of their hard luck. This on the one hand erodes the faith of honest, right thinking people from the system and causes them untold sense of harassment and desperation, emboldens the wrong doers to further perpetuate their wrong doings with greater ease and flourish fearlessly on the other hand. The lot of poor innocent litigants is thus left to fall a prey to money and muscle power practiced on them by the people on the wrong side of the law. No wonder there is no dearth of cases where under trials have languished in jail longer than the period of punishment they would have suffered if ever found guilty and convicted in due course of trial. There have been instances where a convict had remained in jail even after having long suffered the period of sentence pronounced against him owing to sheer apathy and negligence on the part of the justice dispensing authorities owing to ulterior motives. Once you step into any subordinate court room you can find TWO OR MORE witnesses being simultaneously examined in the different corners of the court room, while the judge seems engaged hearing arguments in some case. This makes the mockery of the whole system and gives rise to a lot of malpractices breeding corruption in the view & presence of the judge himself. In such cases the judge does not supervise or oversee the recording of the statements of the witnesses and does not know if the statements are being recorded strictly in conformity with the provisions of the Evidence Act and judgment based on such statements would not lead to injustice to the person who did not deserve it. The judge in his haste to dispose of lot many cases himself thus becomes the author and perpetrator of such gross injustice and is blissfully unaware of what transpires just below his own nose and how the canons of justice are being trampled with his unwitting connivance in such a despicable manner.
4. VITAL STATISTICS :-
There are roughly more than 16000 trial courts in our country struggling hard to cope with a huge pile of over 3 crore cases to be disposed of. Unfortunately there is no TIME BOUND SYSTEM to fill the vacant posts of judges and staff much before the vacancy occurs or is likely to occur. The system of recruitment and appointment of staff & judges is so arduous and lengthy that it takes too long to serve the desired purpose as a result of which the courts remain vacant for a pretty long time adding to the woes of the poor litigants and increasing the pendency of cases many folds. To tide over the situation, a single judge is often assigned the charge of two or more courts besides his own court which indubitably gives rise to such obnoxious situations as result into corrupting the whole system to a large extent. The blitz crazing impact of scientific and technological development on our society has given rise to an altogether new species of crime i.e. CYBER CRIME. But we have yet to develop adequate infrastructure to deal with such crimes. Our existing forensic laboratories are awfully inadequate in number even to deal with conventional crimes and also lack adequate means, resources and manpower to deal with the rush of cases which again causes delay in disposal of cases and for which the subordinate judiciary often unreasonably has to face the flak for non performance or tardy performance.
There is no provision to recruit officers in a systematic time bound manner. The prevailing practice is akin to measures often adopted to meet the contingencies of draughts or floods by the govt. The process to set up a new court initiates much longer after the need arises and the process to recruit officers also takes place in a majestically slow pace thus defeating the very purpose for which the whole exercise was undertaken. There is also no adequate provision of training of judges in the realm of fast changing crime scenario and there is no provision for research to develop and spruce up the decaying system. As a result of which the modern look of judiciary especially the subordinate judiciary appears to be archaic in the perspective of fast changing world. This shows utter apathy and callousness on the part of the Govt. towards the organ of the democracy which in real sense is the bed rock of democracy & true sustainer of democracy. Though under Article 227 & 235 of Constitution, the high courts are vested with power & authority to supervise the working of all courts subordinate there to, no notice is taken of pitiable conditions under which the subordinate courts work. The most these high courts do to discharge their constitutional obligation towards subordinate courts is often to indulge in high sounding rhetorics to exhort subordinate courts to dispose of cases expeditiously without paying any heed to their ground realities & cases of individual predicaments such as non posting/sanctioning of adequate supporting staff by the Govt., non provision of adequate budget in time, non provision of computer in a particular court for a long time or such sundry difficulties blighting their spirit & zeal to work hard. The preachings unrelated to the ground realities often fall on deaf ears & sound more didactic in nature rather than inspiring one to spur one to action and hence fail to have any impact whatsoever in sprucing up the system.
The recent statement of Hon’ble the Union minister of Law to disband existing FAST TRACK COURTS and not to sanction any budget for any more FASTTRACK COURTS to be set up is a grave pointer to the scant regard Govt. has for this institution and for the welfare of the people at large. Though legislature has passed the amendment to Article 39A of our Constitution to secure equal justice & free legal aid to the poor litigants, the purpose of this noble provision however seems to be defeating for want of adequate number of courts, infrastructure like police stations, forensic labs, other necessary wherewithals to secure speedy justice, time bound system of appointment, promotion of judges & supporting staff, machines, libraries & chambers of the lawyers as also for want of provision of litigant’s sheds with facilities of toilets & drinking water etc. etc.
5. DEFICIT SELF GOVERNANCE (INSTITUTIONAL FLAWS)
While Governmental apathy & neglect is arguably the most damning cause for the dismal state in which the subordinate judiciary in our country finds itself embroiled today, it would however be too presumplious & ludicrous to hold it alone squarely responsible for the messy situation and say otherwise everything is hunky dory in the subordinate Judiciary.
A close & dispassionate peep into the working mechanism of subordinate judiciary would reveal that it is deeply shackled within a mesh of its own self designed cobwebs that gives it a countenance of over burdened slow moving institution rather than a vibrant dynamic institution. There appears to be a dire need of harnessing modern techniques and procedures to keep the great institution in fine fettle to meet the growing challenges of modern times. A slew of suggestions given below, if taken care of, could give it a smart make over by bringing it out from the morass it is in today:-
· “CONCILIATION AND NOT LITIGATION” should be adopted as the working MOTTO and judges must exert themselves to impress upon the litigants the virtue & merit of the provision of ALTERNATIVE RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES mechanism. While this would lessen the pendency of cases in courts, it would provide speedy justice to the parties too to their entire satisfaction.
· The time worn practice of preparing DAILY CAUSE LIST should be thoroughly revisited to make it more practical & viable one. Instead of listing too many cases only to be adjourned to some next day ultimately serves no purpose. Neither the parties get fairly good time to present their cases nor the judges seem adequately poised to give proper attention to such cases. Only as many cases should be listed as are feasible to be taken up for hearing and are not fated to be adjourned ultimately owing to paucity of time, care should be taken to ensure equitable time slot to each case listed for hearing. While doing so due priority be accorded to older or serious cases over and above relatively newer simpler cases.
· Judges should personally supervise the working, conduct and integrity of the subordinate staff especially those dealing with the issuance of processes, copies etc so that SUMMONS, WARRANTS, NOTICES, ORDERS etc are issued with desired promptitude as per the directions of the court and are not unduly delayed. It would be appropriate to take the party to task found wanting in carrying out the directions of the court without any good reason simply to delay the proceedings. Similarly member of the staff found guilty of not carrying out the direction without any reasonable cause/reason should also be severely censured to mend his ways. There should be some mechanism to reward good performers also to boost up their morale and encourage others also to follow suit.
· The practice of hearing lengthy arguments should be shunned and filing of WRITTEN ARGUMENTS should be strictly enforced. ORAL ARGUMENTS could be permitted only for the purpose CLARIFICATIONS or for rounding off the opponents arguments.
· The Examination of witnesses should also be properly watched by the judges to see it remained focused to the issues at hand and does not prolong unreasonably long simply to harass the witnesses.
· Judges should cultivate a habit to write brief, concise but fully reasoned judgments which not only betray their judicious approach and legal acumen but also reflect their analytical bent of mind.
These steps though seem to be too small in nature, if taken sincerely, it is hoped, would prove to be great leaps in the progressive saga of subordinate judiciary to help sustain the faith of the public in the INSTITUTION and savage the situation to a considerable extent.
SYNOPSIS:-
The dismal state of affairs could improve if and only if there is a strong will power of the Govt. to address to the aforesaid problems of the subordinate judiciary in right earnest & take prompt & adequate realistic measure to revamp the whole system from the grass root level to enable the subordinate judiciary to successfully combat with the mighty monster of ever growing backlog of cases so that it could come up to the hopes, aspirations & legitimate expectations of the people in real sense. It is indeed regrettable that Hon’ble the Supreme Court while expressing its anguish on the prevailing dismal state of affairs was rsather impelled to bemoan the other day (11.02.11) that no Govt. wants a strong judiciary. If no timely measures were taken to improve the decaying situation and no adequate budgetary provision was made for the judiciary which at present is awfully low (less than 1% of total budget) we are destined to be doomed sooner than later. And people would hold the Govt.’s apathy & nonchalance responsible for this if God forbid, it ever so occurred. Let us hope Govt. takes this to be a clarion call to immediately mend affairs before everything goes haywires.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

Legal Practitioners Act draws a flak all over India


Bar Councils across different states have opposed the draft Legal Practitioners (Regulation and Maintenance of Standards in Profession, Protecting the Interest of Clients and Promoting the Rule of Law) Act 2010.
The Bar Council of the North East states today expressed its concern and in a press conference stated that the Bill introduced by the central government clearly demonstrates the autocratic tendency of the Government of India and is an attempt to destroy the autonomy of the Indian Bar by creating divisions amongst the legal practitioners. The Council maintains that the Bill further seeks to make the central government the overall authority to control and regulate the affairs of the Bar Councils both at the central and the state level which directly amounts to interference with the Bar Councils.
According to the Council, the Bill is in direct conflict with the Advocates Act 1961 and is an anti-advocates Bill. The Council expressed its concern that this amounts to curtailing the autonomy of Bar Councils constituted under Advocates Act and also amounts to converting the legal profession into a trade and business by allowing entry of unqualified persons to practice law. This will eventually adversely affect the public in general. The Council also expressed that the Act would make the government a super imposing authority and to ensure that the advocates also follow the philosophy of the government. The Council further highlighted that this was a ploy for allowing foreign lawyers to practice in India.
The Bar Council of the Northeastern States called upon all the Bar Associations of the region from sub-division level to state level to send representation to the Union Law Minister demanding that the Bill be scrapped. The Council resolved to observe Protest Day on 24 March, 2011 by way of sit-in demonstration and wearing protest badges, which is in tune with the resolution adopted by the joint meeting the Bar Council of India and state Bar Councils held in Jaipur on March 12 last.
The sit-in demonstration shall be held in the Bar Association premises in each and every district and sub-divisions in the N-E states including Sikkim by the advocates.
Similarly the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh will also be observing March 24 as national Protest Day, as stated by YS Chandel, acting Secretary, of the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh. The advocates are opposing the Act and the hidden agenda of which according to them is to attack on the unity, solidarity and independence of the Bar and to undermine the legal profession in the country.

The draft bill, according to the Government aims to provide for "the establishment of the Legal Services Board and in respect of its functions; to make provision for, and in connection with, the regulation of persons who carry out the activities of legal practitioners; to make provisions for the establishment of an ombudsman for complaints against the professionals and for a scheme to consider and determine complaints against the legal practitioners; to make provision in respect of providing legal services free of charge and for connected purposes".
The draft law defines the term 'legal practitioners' in a wide and comprehensive manner to include not only those appearing before courts but also includes the qualified lawyers engaged in legal practice confined to their chamber, engaged in drafting and conveyancing, practitioner of income tax and sale tax and those appearing before the relevant authorities, giving advise to the clients for a fee, gain or reward in the areas of customs, immigrations, trademark and patent services and all other professional services where legal issues are involved.
 
Further, the draft law also provides for the professional principles which it obliges the legal professional to follow, which are mainly, to act with independence and integrity, maintain proper standards of work, act in the best interest of their clients, act with the interest of justice and to keep the affairs of clients as confidential.
Further, the aim behind enactment of this proposed law is also provided for in the draft bill itself wherein the reasons have been enumerated as the regulatory objectives as under;
(a) protecting and promoting the public interest; 
(b) supporting the constitutional principle of the rule of law; 
(c) improving access to justice; 
(d) protecting and promoting the interests of the clients of the legal practitioners; 
(e) promoting healthy competition amongst the legal practitioners for improving the quality of service; 
(f) encouraging an independent, strong, diverse and effective legal profession with ethical obligations and with a strong sense of duty towards the courts and tribunals where they appear; 
(g) creating legal awareness amongst the general public and to make the consumers of the legal profession well informed of their legal rights and duties; 
(h) promoting and maintaining adherence to the professional principles.


The Karnataka State Bar Council today opposed the proposed Legal Practitioners Act 2010, terming it as "totally unnecessary" and said they would join the March 24 nationwide protest against it.
"The proposed Draft Bill is totally unnecessary as every one of the subject matters sought to be covered by the Draft Bill actually is the subject matter for which Advocates Act, 1961, has been enacted and Bar Council at the State level and Bar Council of India have been established," State Bar Council President Jayakumar S Patil told reporters here.
This, along with creation of a Legal Services Board as a super regulatory body would interfere with independence of the Bar, he said.
Under the proposed Act, legal professional is defined to include anybody dealing with legal issues though they are not enrolled as advocates, which is a "dangerous trend", he said.
The draft legislation was intended to cover persons coming from abroad practicing legal profession. Other clauses clearly indicate this is not a legislation proposed to control and regulate working of legal professionals coming from other countries, Patil said.
The Legal Services Board as contemplated is supposed to be constituted by appointment of Chairman and Members in consultation with Chief Justice of India and Chairman of Bar Council of India "which definitely gives an indication that persons to be considered for appointment are retired judges."
The Bar, Patil said, strongly feels any control of the profession should be by professionals themselves and bringing in Judicial Officers, whether serving or retired, "is totally against the concept of independence of Bar".
So if Legal Services Board is to be constituted, persons in the Board should only be from among advocates, Patil said.
He opposed the concept of appointment of Ombudsman i.e. a retired High Court Judge or retired Judicial Officers, describing it as "anathema to independence of the Bar".
Instead of creating another top heavy body, it is better that existing structure under the Advocates Act be reinforced, if necessary through appropriate amendments, to provide infrastructure as well as funds, he said.


JAIPUR: Lawyers across the country will boycott courts on March 24 in protest against the proposed Legal Practitioners (Regulation and Maintenance of Standards in Profession, Protecting the Interest of Clients and Promoting the Rule of Law) Act 2010.
A decision in this regard was taken at the end of a day-long conference of state Bar councils organised here by the Bar Council of Rajasthan (BCR) on Saturday. Eight members of the Bar Council of India (BCI) and chairmen and members of Bar councils from nearly a dozen states took part in the conference.
During the conference, Bihar State Bar Council chairman Baleshwar Prasad Sharma and Suresh Chand Srimali, member and former chairman of the BCR, had demanded action against BCI chairman Gopal Subramaniam for allegedly supporting the government on the proposed Act, which the lawyers believe would curtail powers of the Bar Councils and "commercialise" their profession. Subramaniam was not present at the conference.
The lawyers alleged that the proposed Act would enable formation of a legal service board comprising a chairman, a member secretary and five members who would usurp the powers of the BCI and other state Bar councils.
The participants were concerned that the board would appoint ombudsmen for each state to deal with the complaints against the law professionals and, thereby, interfere with the freedom of lawyers.
"The conference unanimously decided to oppose the proposed Act as it derogates and condemns the provisions of the Advocates Act 1961," said Sanjay Sharma, a BCR member and co-convener of the conference.
"The proposed Act will work as a body giving entry tickets to foreign law firms/consultancy firms and legal practitioners, thus commercializing the noble profession of litigation," said Ram Manohar Sharma, president of the Bar Association of Jaipur.
The participant Bar Councils resolved to form an All India Advocates Action Committee to decide on the further course of action on the issue.
"BCR chairman N S Chaudhary has been nominated chairman of the committee and BCI member M Rajendra Reddy as its co-convener. All BCI members and chairmen of the state Bar councils shall be the committee members," Sanjay Sharma said.
The committee would submit a representation opposing the proposed Act to the Prime Minister and the Law minister.
The state Bar councils also resolved to demand a transfer policy for judges to bring transparency in the judiciary. They also demanded that the state governments should pay a "matching grant" to the respective Bar councils for the welfare of lawyers.


Monday, March 14, 2011

CJI Kapadia laments lawyers' disinterest in law - Times of India


Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia on Saturday rued the fact that neither senior lawyers nor students of law take any real interest in their subject - law.
"Senior lawyers are not contributing to development of law, as they used to do in the past. Even young students do not take interest in this pursuit. Earlier in the Supreme Court, such students used to come, sit in courtrooms and take notes. But now they disappear in five minutes. They are more interested in transaction matters. There is nothing wrong in it. But how many can now argue on reasonableness?," said Justice Kapadia.
The CJI was speaking on 'Constitutional Morality' at the sixth Justice P D Desai Memorial Lecture organised by the Praleen Charitable Trust here.
Justice Kapadia advised students from various universities present at the function not to rely totally on information downloaded from internet. "Please do not go by guides and internet. You have to put in hard work. Money will not make you happy, but it's the learning that will," he said adding that the future generation of lawyers should be able to argue on doctrine of reasonableness and principles.
The CJI praised India for its vastness of opportunities by citing his own example as how he began his career as a peon in a Parsi trust and how he reached the top post of judiciary. "Ability may take you to the top, but you require character to remain on the top," he said advising young lawyers to maintain integrity in their profession.
Justice Kapadia also advised judges not to lecture society. "The problem is that sometimes we judges impose our own values, our own likes or dislikes on the society. The judges should keep in mind that we cannot judge the wisdom of legislatures. We have to work for constitutional principles. I have no right to say what others should do, but I have to perform the duty on constitutional principles," he said.

Saturday, March 12, 2011

Of mutinies and a monkey fable - By M. Veera Pandiyan from thestar.com


The neglected understanding of political power by dictators and tyrants results in rebellions by the people. IT’S truly the year of revolutions, with dictators and despots finally getting their just desserts.
The regime of Libya’s erratic and feared ruler Muammar Gaddafi appears to be next in line to be overthrown after the fall of Tunisia’s strongman Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and Egypt’s autocrat Hosni Mubarak in the spreading Jasmine revolution. But Gaddafi, the 68-year-old self-styled “King of Kings” who has ruled the country for 42 years, has shown he has no qualms in resorting to genocide to cling on to power.
Bullet-ridden corpses now litter the streets of Tripoli, the ghastly results of his brutal response. Libyan protesters were killed by air strikes and death squads of foreign mercenaries. They were reported to be still shooting at random and preventing relatives of the slain from removing the bodies for burial. There have also been appalling reports of massacres at funerals and shootings of the injured in hospitals. In a rant over state TV on Tuesday, Gaddafi practically declared civil war – threatening to unleash mob rule and “cleanse Libya house by house” until he has crushed the rebellion. But many of the country’s diplomats have broken ranks with the regime and military units, refusing orders to fire on demonstrators and pilots defecting. Among the units that joined the anti-regime forces was the Thunderbolt Battalion, which is the Presidential Guard, the personal force of Gadhafi in Benghazi – the second largest city in the east which has since fallen to the rebels along with Al Bayda and Tobruk. Gaddafi’s remaining loyalists are his Presidential Guard and units comprising foreign mercenaries, many from the former Soviet Union and African countries.
While we can also suppose that his bevy of female Ethiopian bodyguards and his long-time Ukrainian nurse Galyna Kolotnytska are still with him, Gaddafi’s regime is doomed and his days seem to be numbered. But when he goes, Libya would be a scorched and destroyed desert country without basic structures for transition into democracy for its six million people. With no organised opposition, the vacuum is likely to raise tensions between the military, the Islamists, liberals and more importantly, the various tribes in the country.
Unlike other countries in the region, Libya does not have extreme poverty. Its per capita GDP is US$13,400 (RM40,850), almost close to Malaysia’s US$13,800 (RM42,000). But like other Arab countries, instead of economic diversification and creating job opportunities for the educated young, it has been overly dependent on its oil reserves. Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa, with 42 billion barrels of oil and over 1.3 trillion cubic metres of gas. And that, too, with only 25% of Libya’s surface territory explored.
As Europe’s single largest oil supplier, the second largest oil producer in Africa and fourth largest gas supplier, it dominates the petroleum sector in the southern Mediterranean with more than 50 international oil companies operating in the country. Libyans may not be as poor as their neighbours but the Jasmine revolts in Tunisia and Egypt helped them realise that 42 years under a despot was enough.
Dr Gene Sharp, Professor Emeritus of political science at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, whose brilliant work From Dictatorship to Democracy is credited for empowering people around the world to overthrow dictatorships, including the newest rebellions, said in a recent interview: “Once a regime is no longer able to frighten people – to terrorise them into passive submission – then that regime is in big trouble.” Among the chapters in Dr Sharp’s book is the “Monkey Master” fable, a 14th century Chinese parable by Liu Ji which outlines the neglected understanding of political power.
In the feudal state of Chu, an old man survived by keeping monkeys in his service. The people called him ju gong (monkey master). Each morning, the old man would assemble the monkeys in his courtyard, and order the eldest one to lead the others to the mountains to gather fruits from bushes and trees. It was the rule that each monkey had to give one-tenth of his collection to the old man. Those who failed to do so would be ruthlessly flogged. All the monkeys suffered bitterly, but dared not complain. One day, a small monkey asked the other monkeys, “Did the old man plant all the fruit trees and bushes?” The others said, “No, they grew naturally.” The small monkey further asked, “Can’t we take the fruits without the old man’s permission?” The others replied, “Yes, we all can.” The small monkey continued, “Then, why should we depend on the old man; why must we all serve him?” Before the small monkey was able to finish his statement, all the monkeys suddenly became enlightened and awakened. On the same night, after the old man had fallen asleep, the monkeys tore down all the barricades of the stockade in which they were confined, and destroyed the stockade. They also took the fruits the old man had in storage, brought all with them to the woods, and never returned. The old man finally died of starvation.
Liu Ji said, “Some men in the world rule their people by tricks and not by righteous principles. “Aren’t they just like the monkey master? They are not aware of their muddle-headedness? As soon as their people become enlightened, their tricks no longer work.”
Associate Editor M. Veera Pandiyan likes Martin Luther King Jr’s take on rebellion: “A riot is the language of the unheard.”
Source - The Star.com

Friday, March 11, 2011

Manupatra Offers a Complete Law Library of Indian Case Laws


Manupatra Offers a Complete Law Library of Indian Case Laws 
Available since 1844 on Manupatra Case Locator - CD ROM

-- COMBO comprising of Supreme Court & Any One High Court @ Rs 5000/- + tax
-- FULL SET comprising of Supreme Court & All High Courts @ Rs 15,000/- + tax

Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd., the fastest growing company in comprehensive law publishing and pioneer of online legal research in India, today announced an exciting promotional offer where one can own a Complete Law Library of Indian Case Laws since 1844 or inception of respective courts till date at a discounted price. The judgments are on all subjects of law and available in full text with case notes. The information on the CDs will give access to all the important information which will help lawyers and students with a unique, hands-on opportunity to further their professional and personal growth. 

The offer, which is valid till March 31st 2011, includes a Combo of Supreme Court and any one high court which is available at Rs 5000/- plus tax (list price of Rs 15000/- + tax) and the full set of CD ROM of Supreme Court and all High Courts is available at Rs 15,000/- plus tax ( List price of Rs 60,000/- + tax) only. The Special Offer becomes available each time 4 people register under the scheme and a group of 4 is formed. Manupatra with this offer has brought the benefits of the Collective bargaining concept to the lawyers. 

Deepak Kapoor, CEO, Director and Founder, Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd said, “This initiative is a step towards reinforcing the company’s commitment in developing innovative products & services for our customers. This offer will give enormous exposure to lawyers & students about information on the past cases and judgments with valuable insights into the rapidly evolving business of law. Lawyers will get practical experience and broader perspectives by case notes and the special features will enable lawyers to serve their clients more knowledgeably and more effectively.” 

The set provide wide range of features like Nominal, Chronological and Subject wise Index, Legal Search on parameters such as Name of Appellant, Respondent, Judges name, Date of decision, Advance Search using Boolean Operators (AND, OR, NOT etc) and also with advance search options like phrase search, Basic Text Search, Citation Search. One of the USP of the Manupatra case locator is that a user can Search on two or more courts simultaneously even if the data is on more than 1 CD ROM. 

The CD set can be ordered by sending an E-mail at contact@manupatra.com or by calling at the following numbers:
0120-4014514/515 Toll Free 1-800-180-3550 (Mon- Friday 9am to 6 pm),
Or you may register online at www.manupatra.com 

About Manupatra:


Manupatra is a leading law publisher and provider of Legal, Taxation, Corporate and Business Policy databases in India. It is the fastest growing company in comprehensive law publishing and is reckoned as the pioneer of online legal research in India. Ranging from primary documents and proprietary analytical content covering commentaries, treatises, digests, editorial enhancements, Manupatra has created the largest and most comprehensive online resource of information that can be accessed quickly and effortlessly. The company is head quartered in NOIDA with sales offices spread across India and distributors in International markets.

Manupatra started operations in 2000 and launched their flagship product, www.manupatra.com in August 2001. The website is an online database that gives privileged access to its users and empowers them with in-depth legislative, regulatory and procedural information critical for decision making, all in one place.

      
For press backgrounder on Manupatra click here

Media contact details

Tanya Singh,
20:20 MSL,
+91 9910085036,
tanya.singh@2020msl.com

Pallavi Sharma,
20:20 MSL,
+91 9999667943,
pallavi.sharma@2020msl.com

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

World justice on trial - REFLECTING ON THE LAW By Prof SHAD SALEEM FARUDI


Source - The Star.com
Malaysia must take note of the strengths and failings of the International Criminal Court and inquire if it is a candle in the dark or a tool of colonialism and imperialism.
OFFICIALS of the International Criminal Court (ICC) are in Kuala Lumpur to convince Malaysia to ratify the Rome Statute to make Malaysia the 115th country to join this historic institution that heralds a new era of international justice. The ICC was set up in 1998 and began operating in 2002. It provides a permanent international forum to prosecute those responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and crimes of aggression. It seeks to end impunity and to send a strong message to perpetrators of mass atrocities. Since its inception, it has succeeded in extending the international ban on certain weapons like poisonous gases and internal armed conflicts. Its crowning achievement is the creation of domestic laws in many countries to prosecute grave breaches of humanitarian laws. It has opened five investigations, issued charges against 12 people and secured custody of four accused. It has indicted the serving President of Sudan. In considering whether to join the ICC, Malaysia must take note of the strengths as well as the failings of this international tribunal.
First, all prosecutions by the ICC up to now are against African leaders in Uganda, Congo, Kenya and Sudan. There may be one soon against Muammar Gaddafi of Libya. This “African centredness” is surprising because we know that similarly grave or even worse offences have been committed elsewhere. Second, despite the ICC’s existence, superpowers like the United States, Britain, France and their allies are not at all deterred. They are still attacking the weak. Pre-emptive and unilateral wars of aggression are being waged. Genocides are raging. New holocausts are being perpetrated. Nuclear threats are being issued against nations like Iran that refuse to bow to the hegemony of the West. The ICC is selective in its prosecutions. For instance, war criminals in Britain and Australia belong to a ratifying state and as such are subject to the ICC’s jurisdiction. The ICC has been approached by 240 complainants from Iraq. Its chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo has amazingly ruled that the complaints do not have “sufficient gravity” to merit the initiation of a prosecution.
No indictments have been served on former US president George Bush and Secretaries of Defence Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, former British prime minister Tony Blair, Israeli prime minister Benja­min Netanyahu and his predecessor Ehud Olhmert, former Australian prime minister John Howard, leaders of Sri Lanka, Ugandan president Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, Congo rebel leader Laurent Nkunda, and Rwandan president Paul Kagame despite their complicity in the murder of millions. Cluster bombs, phosphorus, depleted uranium and chemical agents have been used by these leaders in some of these conflicts. American professor Francis Boyle points out that despite the fact that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC two years ago, the ICC prosecutor has refused to investigate the crimes against humanity inflicted upon Palestinians by Israel. Third, countries like the United States, Israel, Russia, China and India remain outside the ICC. Under Bush, the United States derecognised the Rome Statute. As such, Washington is not obliged to surrender any US perpetrators for trial before the ICC. In fact, it has gone so far as to adopt measures that would allow it to use force to retrieve its nationals detained by the ICC. This reality renders the ICC as a body that can only pursue cases against weak states. Fourth, for a crime to be prosecuted before the ICC, it must be committed on the territories of a member state of the ICC. Iraq and Afghanistan are not parties to the ICC Statute and the bestialities committed there by the American allies are therefore exempt from the ICC’s jurisdiction.
Fifth, Article 98 of the Rome Statute provides that a country need not hand over a foreign national to the ICC if it is prohibited from doing so by an agreement with the national’s country. The American government has forced nearly 100 countries to sign such “Article 98” agreements, thereby making its war criminals immune from international prosecution. Sixth, the UN Security Council (UNSC) has the power to refer crimes committed by a non-signatory to the ICC (as it did for Darfur). But due to its geopolitical, racial and religious bias, the UNSC is unlikely to refer wrongdoers in the United States, Israel, Russia and China to the ICC.
Seventh, the ICC can investigate a case only if national courts fail or are unable to investigate a case. Major offending states like the United States, Israel and Britain put up the charade of prosecuting low-ranking soldiers but ignore compelling evidence that the massacre of civilians, tortures and other crimes against humanitarian law were authorised by top politicians. Eighth, before mounting the Iraq invasion the US president had threatened the use of nuclear weapons. During the war, the United States and Britain used many weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that are banned in international law. Use of these WMDs is not a crime under the ICC Statute. India had asked for inclusion of nuclear weapons and WMDs as a crime against humanity but the United States disagreed. Ninth, the ICC is to some extent a tool of national leaders who report rebels and oppositionists to the ICC. It is noteworthy that three of the four active cases in Africa involve opposition figures referred to the court by their own governments.
One should therefore ask whether the ICC is a candle in the dark or a tool of colonialism and imperialism. It is undeniable that because of its link with the UNSC, the ICC is indeed a Western tool that reflects the racist and colonial nature of the UNSC. Its silence in the face of heinous crimes in occupied Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine (especially Gaza) is deafening.
Malaysia should stare the ICC officials in their faces and ask them why is there such unequal harassment under the law, and why is there such callous indifference to the barbarism, slaughtering and stealing in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Gaza. Nevertheless, our fidelity to human rights demands that we subscribe to a system of international justice against mass murderers. It must also be remembered that many of the failings of the ICC are the failings of the UNSC. Despite many reservations, it would be a folly not to join hands with this historic institution of international criminal justice. As Eleanor Roosevelt said: “It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.”
> Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM and Visiting Professor at USM.

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Indian Government Plans To Regulate Online Content & Blogs - Medianama.com


As a part of the rules being finalized to supplement India’s Information Technology Amendment Act 2008, rules are being included that will indirectly allow the Indian government to control content being published on the Internet. This is hardly surprising: last week, at the CII Content Summit, three government functionaries – Information & Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Ambika Soni, TRAI Chief JS Sarma and I&B Secretary Raghu Menon, had all mentioned concerns about content on the Internet, even as they tried to downplay content regulation:
- Sarma said that “How do you control the Internet? That is baffling and challenging, and it is fraught with issues of freedom and security. Security in terms of physical security and others. This will have to be studied over the course of next few months or the next year or so.”
- Menon pointed towards the UK and issues of pornography, saying that the IPTV Association in the UK is in contact with the ISPs to ensure that the ISPs provide regulated content. People who are concerned about this, they’re approaching the ISPs for what is appropriate or not. This is a subject which is outside the purview of the ministry I work in.”
Menon works in the I&B Ministry, and this modus operandi of dealing with ISPs would be the mandate of the Ministry of Information Technology, which is putting into place these rules for regulating content through ISPs. A few things to note from the rules (download) that have been drafted:
1. Definition of Blogs, Bloggers & Users: This is tricky: blogs do two things – they publish content, and have user generated content in the form of comments. at one level, they are a publisher, and at another, an intermediary. The guidelines however, clearly define a blogger only as a user, and that a blog is  ”a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary, descriptions of events, or other material such as graphics or video.” This is generic, and could mean any online publication, including ours, and online publishers would also come under the ambit of the definition of the term ‘users’. What is odd, is that the rules specifically define blogs and bloggers, when there is no apparent reason for doing so.
2. What can they block you for? There’s a problem with how wide the offenses under which you can be blocked, are defined. ISP’s and other intermediaries have to notify users (including online publishers and bloggers) not to use, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, update, share or store any information that:
- (a) belongs to another person; (d) infringes any patent, trademark, copyright or other proprietary rights;
Our Take: this should be covered under the Copyright Act, not IT Act.
- (b) is harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, blasphemous, objectionable, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, pornographic, paedophilic, libellous, invasive of another’s privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable, disparaging, relating or encouraging money laundering or gambling, or otherwise unlawful in any manner whatever; (g) causes annoyance or inconvenience or deceives or misleads the addressee about the origin of such messages or communicates any information which is grossly offensive or menacing in nature;
Our Take:
 There goes most of the Internet. Using phrases like ‘objectionable’, ‘disparaging’, annoyance and inconvenience, which are highly subjective, the government has given itself the power to block anything they want. Remember that if someone publishes a libelous comment, or a hateful comment, for which an online publisher should be an intermediary, the Government has the power to block the publisher. This post might annoy the government, so there goes MediaNama.
- (j) threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states, or public order or causes incitement to the commission of any cognisable offence or prevents investigation of any offence or is insulting any other nation.
Our Take: Clearly, a move that seeks to ensure that gives the Indian government has the same powers as a Hosni Mubarak had in Egypt, and was in a position to block access to any site that might be used to organize demonstrations. Again, remember that telecom operators are also intermediaries, so it impacts all mobile connections.
- (f) discloses sensitive personal information of other person or to which the user does not have any right to”
Our take: what happens to social networking sites, which are full of such information (particularly photographs published without explicit consent)? What of whistleblowing blogs or sites – does this give the Indian government, for example, the right to block Wikileaks in India, if they find that details of Swiss Bank account holders has been disclosed?
How they’ll block sites
The government has taken adequate measures to ensure that the process by which a request for blocking of sites goes through several check-points (page 29 onwards of these rules; pdf): Any complaint that has been sent to a Nodal officer can only be forwarded to a Designated Officer after it has the approval of the Chief Secretary of the concerned State or Union territory. Then the request is looked into by a Committee, which has a Designated Officer as its chairperson, and representatives not below the rank of Joint Secretary in the Ministries of Law and Justice, Home Affairs, Information and Broadcasting and the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team. An order can be issued by the Secretary (Department of IT) to intermediaries (ISP), via the designated officer, to block access to the sites.
However, in case of an emergency (page 31 of these rules; pdf), the Designated Officer can expedite the blocking of any site by submitting a specific recommendation to the Secretary, Department of Information Technology, though this will have to be examined by a committee within 48 hours. The other instance is in case a court issues orders blocking of certain information on the web.
So, what does this mean?
It means that given that the Indian government is unable to control content on the Internet, it is giving itself enough powers to control access of its citizens to that content, by controlling the ISPs. The process by which it can block sites is fairly bureaucratic, and it will be difficult for a request from a normal citizen to be entertained. But what is alarming is that the government itself has enough opportunity, given how vague the reasons for blocking are, to block anything it wants to block. While you can hope for some maturity, we’d like to remind you what can go wrong if any entity in that chain of command is incompetent, or has malicious intent: in 2006, following orders to block certain sites, access to all blogs was blocked.


By Nikhil Pahwa at http://www.medianama.com/2011/02/223-indias-draft-blogger-guidelines/



Draft rules proposed by the Indian government for intermediaries such as telecommunications companies, Internet service providers and blogging sites could in effect aid censorship, according to experts. Under the draft rules, intermediaries will have to notify users of their services not to use, display, upload, publish, share or store a variety of content, for which the definition is very vague, and liable to misuse. Content that is prohibited under these guidelines ranges from information that may "harm minors in any way" to content that is "harmful, threatening, abusive." Some of the terms are so vague that to stay on the right side of the law, intermediaries may in effect remove third-party content that is even mildly controversial, said Pavan Duggal, a cyberlaw consultant and advocate in India's Supreme Court.  While the definition of some of the terms like obscenity have been ruled on by India's Supreme Court, some of the other terms do not have a precise legal definition, said Pranesh Prakash, program manager at the Centre for Internet and Society, a research and advocacy group focused on consumer and citizen rights on the Internet. "Would creating a Facebook profile for a minor, for example be considered as harming a minor ?" Duggal said.  The draft rules are secondary legislation framed by the government under the country's Information Technology (Amendment) Act of 2008. Under the IT Act, an intermediary is not liable for any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted by him, if among other things, he has observed due diligence under the draft rules. The new rules will give rise to subjective interpretations, thus giving a lot of discretion to non-judicial authorities in the country to decide whether the intermediary has observed due diligence or not, Duggal said. 
According to the draft rules, an intermediary has to inform users that in case of non-compliance of its terms of use of the services and privacy policy, it has the right to immediately terminate the access rights of the users to its site. After finding out about infringing content, either on its own or through the authorities, the intermediary has to work with the user or owner of the information to remove access to the information.  

Rather than recognizing the diversity of the businesses of intermediaries, the draft rules use a "one-size, fits all" set of rules across a variety of intermediaries including telecom service providers, online payment sites, e-mail service providers, and Web hosting companies, Duggal said.  
An intermediary such as a site with user-generated content, like Wikipedia, would need different terms of use from an intermediary such as an e-mail provider, because the kind of liability they accrue are different, Prakash wrote in his blog.  
he draft rules also add new provisions that appear designed to give the government easier access to content from intermediaries. Intermediaries will be required to provide information to authorized government agencies for investigative, protective, cybersecurity or intelligence activity, according to the rules. 
Information will have to be provided for the purpose of verification of identity, or for prevention, detection, prosecution and punishment of offenses, on a written request stating clearly the purpose of seeking such information, the rules add.  
The IT Act already has specific procedures in this connection for very specific information requirements, but the draft rules have broadened this to a general requirement for intermediaries to provide information, Prakash said. The new rule could in fact be a way of circumventing the earlier laws, he added. 
The draft rules assume significance in the context of recent moves by the Indian government to get Research In Motion to provide access to information on BlackBerry services in India. While providing lawful access to its consumer services like BlackBerry Messenger, RIM has declined to provide access to its corporate service, BlackBerry Enterprise Server, claiming that it does not have access to customers' encryption keys. 
The Indian government has previously also said it would demand lawful access from Google's Gmail and Skype, but has not taken any action so far in this direction. 
The draft rules will require compliance from a number of entities who until now had thought they were outside the ambit of compliance, Duggal said.

Google did not immediately respond to e-mailed requests for its comments on the new rules. Microsoft said that the government should set the policy objectives and provide directional framework, and still allow flexibility to intermediaries to set the data protection measures as they deem fit for different situations and services. 
"We believe that the intermediary should be obliged to take down non-compliant content on being notified of the same as well as terminate access rights for those who use these platforms for dissemination of non-compliant content," Microsoft said in an e-mailed statement. Non-compliance include, but is not limited to, copyrights, it added.
John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address isjohn_ribeiro@idg.com