JUDICIAL REFORMS: WHY?

"Tariq pe Tariq, Tariq pe Tariq"(Postponement after Postponement, Postponement after Postponement). A stunning dialog from movie "Damini" that captures the essence of frustration. Frustration that starts with moral greyness of Judiciary, derived from the culture of non-commitment and resulting delays. Entering into the individual psyche, and eventually destroying his concept of justice itself. Justice not only at institutional level, but in day-to-day decision making. Deprecating the judgment one would otherwise have made with respect to character of persons, values, one's actions... Scoping upto all spheres open to choice.

Abysmal productivity leading to huge backlog, and latter further degrading the former. Ambiguity of laws is another factor. More pressing though is the lack of application on existing ones. Primary cause being the inability to enforce the timely punishment on breach.

As a consequence, primitive tribal rule has come back to haunt us. One gang against the other, more forceful taking the harvest. Shivsena to the Naxals to shoes flowing past, impact is for all of us to see.

Government(including Legislative, executive and Judiciary) is an institute to which an individual delegates his right to self-defense, for this cannot be directed by whim. Therefore, Government is an institute that holds "LEGAL MONOPOLY" over the use of "Physical force". And its nature demands that its used only against those who initiate the use of physical force(and most importantly used appropriately as delimited by objective laws). Physical force referring to violence, wrongful confiscation of property, frauds, or breach of legal contracts. Each in variety of degrees. If government defaults in this fundamental function, as is Judiciary today, anarchy thats creeping around is inevitable.

The nature of Life demands response, and concurrency demands effective use of technology. From Bill payments, to travel, to entertainment, all has gone online. So should the governance, not just in trivialities, but in essence.

With blogs in orkut community discussions, youtube and video-cons as template to be customized, and usage of encryption and passwords to protect accesses, lets take court cases to the virtual world. Both lawyers argue their case in blog(with adequate references to laws), affected parties having read permissions and judge as the moderator of the case. Scope rigorously defined therefore(in pre-hearing discussions), so that the decisions can be reached quickly when hearings do start. As a sidenote, same template can be used in executive decision making and legislative arguments.

Consequences are fairly tangible. Numerous cases can be petitioned upon and most arguments made within a timespan that would otherwise have allowed legal machinery only in few cases. Productivity boosted exponentially therefore. Maybe smaller burglary like cases to start with (where almost every time justice delayed becomes justice denied) to civil cases and eventually criminal.

Streamlining system and software for such an enterprise would no doubt be a huge effort. It will require herculean political will power, close co-operation with Best Legal minds, and quite alot of executive database convergence.
Still the step is small compared to the Giant leap in "Justice for All" it promises.

Man is NOT a social but a CONTRACTUAL BEING. From smallest daily trade(through money a contracted entity) to jobs through appointment letter, marriage, property leases.... or even promises made verbally, through email or SMS. Every action of his requires long term planning and complex thought process involving many entities. And therefore concept of Justice has a negative and a positive connotation. To protect plunge into insanity from an arbitrary breach, and enable an enterprise of towering proportions.