Judicial Administration Reform

IASbaba

March 28, 2020

JUDICIARY

Topic: General Studies 2:

Structure, organization and functioning of the Judiciary

Context: Criticism on Supreme Court about delay in hearing of crucial cases due to its inefficient administrative functioning.

Allegations on Supreme Court

Critical cases like those concerning personal liberty, law and order and Democratic functioning, are posted after long intervals
The Government is being granted a luxury of time to respond.
Example: Kashmir notification (Article 370), Citizenship Amendment Act, Electoral bonds

Impact of Judicial inaction on significant cases

Fait accompli can be created due to lack of judicial action in such cases where immediacy is pre-eminent.
Adds fuel to perception that judicial inaction is due to executive influence
Erodes public trust on apex court
Increases backlogs in Judiciary

What are the possible reasons causing this situation?

CJI has been given the onerous dual charge of heading both the administrative and judicial functions of the court.
Increasing number of cases has made handling both these tasks difficult
Some of the administrative functions carried out by CJI includes:
- All service-related matters of the SC’s 2,500 employees
- Issue office orders to streamline the registry
- Supervise measures for security and infrastructure
- Chair committees
- Interview candidates for the various courts, etc
Inadequate capabilities & training of Junior officers under CJI who handle these tasks

Possible Solution – CEO

A chief executive officer – an independent professional who is equipped with the day-to-day management of the Court and is not beholden to the judges in any way
CEO will be charged with the entire mission of running the Court, so that the judges can concentrate on adjudication of cases
It will reduce the burden on CJI which will lead to faster resolution of cases.

Challenges ahead

CEO needs to be given adequate operational autonomy to ensure efficiency in management of Court’s administrative functioning
He/she should be answerable to a committee of the Court, comprising judges and bar representatives

Conclusion

Resolution of significant cases in a time-bound manner is crucial for robust functioning of Democracy

Connecting the dots: