The justice system is the most important tool for carrying out the Constitution's promises.
The general public has a higher level of trust and confidence in the judiciary.
Maintaining the rule of law and providing good government necessitates quick justice.
As a result, judicial reform should be prioritised on the development agenda.
Current Concerns:
Delay in the administration of justice:
India's low performance on ease of doing business is attributed to a delay in 'contract enforcement,' which is mostly attributable to an ineffective court system.
According to the National Judicial Data Grid, subordinate courts have 2.54 crore cases pending.
The system is unable to keep up with the influx of new cases in our complex economy.
Most subordinate courts, with the exception of metropolises and state capitals, lack basic facilities for judges, court employees, and litigants.
The judicial system is difficult and expensive, putting the poor at a disadvantage.
Overreach by the judiciary:
For the past several months, six of the country's High Courts have been without regular Chief Justices.
Judicial ineffectiveness is to a large measure to blame for the rise un crimes such as rape, murder, looting, and cheating.
The government's proposal to establish a National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) to speed up the appointment process was thrown out by the Supreme Court.
The impasse between the judiciary and the executive can only cause public anxiety.
The legal system has not been adequately funded.
The surge in the workload of the judiciary has been attributed to an increase in crimes against women and increased reporting of illegal activity.
As a result, reforms at both the lower and higher levels of the court are urgently needed to keep democracy's pillars robust and powerful.
Recommendations:
There is a pressing need for justice to be delivered quickly and for higher courts to be unburdened.
Making the justice system more accessible and effective for the poor, as well as judicial accountability and transparency
Time restrictions for making decisions should be established, like in the Slovak Republic, where issues are resolved in less than 60 days.
To reduce delays and expenses, more judges should be appointed, procedures should be streamlined utilising information technology, and the judge-to-population ratio should be increased.
Artificial Intelligence-powered automation is already assisting doctors, and it can now be used to assist courts and lawyers.
State and federal governments should cooperate together to solve the lack of fundamental infrastructure, such as courtrooms and other critical judge facilities.
Create a Performance Commission with the authority to take corrective action.
Many states in the United States have similar commissions that investigate complaints concerning judges' behaviour.
To speed up the enforcement process, create specialised commercial fast track courts.
The judiciary should be held accountable for documenting and presenting its own financial demands in a professional and competent manner.
There should be a process in place to control frivolous lawsuits.
A well-thought-out litigation strategy will be extremely beneficial.
The civil court fees structure must be appropriately changed, and state governments must be required to spend all fees earned on judicial infrastructure.
Appointment of ad hoc or additional judges to expedite the resolution of ongoing cases
To investigate complaints against judges, a transparent, full-time impartial judicial complaints commission should be established.
Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms, such as Lok Adalats, should be investigated on a larger scale to relieve the judiciary's burden at all levels.
Recommendations of the Law Commission:
In the appointment of judges, the judiciary and the executive should play an equal role.
The Chief Justice's post should not be transferable.
Judges must issue decisions in a timely manner.
These improvements must be implemented as soon as possible, because justice delayed is justice compromised.