Kaustav Ghosh
“The most advanced justice system in the world is a failure if it does not provide justice to the people it is meant to serve. Access to justice is therefore critical.”
– Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin, J.1
Abstract:- Law and justice are co-related to and with each other because “Law without justice is blind and justice without law is lame.”2 Nani Palkhivala said:-“the greatest drawback of the administration of justice in India today is because of delay of cases..The law may or may not be an ass, but in India, it is certainly a snail and our cases proceed at a pace which would be regarded as unduly slow in the community of snails. Justice has to be blind but I see no reason why it should be lame. Here it just hobbles along, barely able to work.”3 Any legal system is futile if its citizen has limited access to justice. Framers of our constitution want to constitute India as a nation where none shall be denied and discriminated on the ground of caste, creed, religion and economic status. Right to a speedy trial is not only part of right to life but also necessary element for access to justice. It is unfortunate to note that India is suffering from huge backlog of cases from the time immemorial. Mediation and its cost friendly approach not only helped to reduce the backlog of court cases but also for its time saving, efficient mechanism helped public to settle their dispute efficiently.”Not only must Justice be done; it must also be seen to be done”4 from every aspect and side. In this article I have tried to explain the role of mediation for the better administration of justice in Indian context.
(First Edition is quite small because for many its a complex issue. For this reason it may be elaborated part by part in the upcoming editions. It is another experiment of mine to write legal articles in small part. Thank you)
—————————————-
- https://lawsocietyontario.azureedge.net/media/lso/media/legacy
- http://14.139.116.20:8080/jspui/bitstream/10603/235302/12/chapter%207.pdf
- ‘We the nation…lost decade’ (1994) UBS Publications, p 215 by Nani Palkhivala
- R v. Sussex Justices, Ex parte McCarthy ([1924] 1 KB 256, [1923] All ER 233) retrieved from https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cg
Leave a Reply