National 1 (Spotlight Weekly)

Ruling Vs. Rhetoric

Judges need to focus more on delivering judgments

By KESHAB POUDEL

As the number of petitions pending before the apex, appellate and district courts continue to pile up, judges are spending more time preaching the importance of judgments rather than on delivering verdicts.

The judges often use public forums to complain about scarcity of manpower and the rush of petitions in front of them. In practice, they are too busy talking about the judiciary. The fact that citizens find themselves behind bars because they cannot post the outrageously high bail amounts demanded and that unaccountable state authorities are enjoying enormous power seems to be nobody's business.

From district to appellate and apex court, judges find so many forums to preach about the judiciary and judgments. However, much remains to be done in terms of improving the quality of judgments. The Judicial Council holds different conventions for district, appellate and apex court judges. Besides, the Nepal Bar Association and other NGOs and INGOs organize various seminars and conferences on boosting the efficiency and quality of judgments. In many cases, the judges have to follow the agenda of the organizers.

"The efficiency and quality of the judges can be seen in their judgments rather than in their preaching. How many precedents have been set by the judiciary on the question of arbitrary demands of bail by the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA)? Or how effective has the judiciary been in terms of checking the arbitrary actions of the anti-corruption body and protecting individual freedom?" asked a lawyer." We have to accept that our judges are effective and strong to check the arbitrary decisions of the state but too little is being done."

When the CIAA is locking its horns with the judiciary on the issue of judicial proceedings, the global anti-corruption body Transparency International and the Judicial Council organized a meeting paving a way for the judges and the CIAA commissioners to express their grievances against each other.

Inaugurated by Supreme Court Chief Justice Kedar Nath Upadhyaya, the two-day seminar turned into yet another forum that sidelined the major agenda to discuss procedural questions.

Organized to debate the effectiveness and role of the judiciary in good governance, CIAA commissioners used the seminar to blame the judges for their role in recent decision to release suspects on bail. The judges, on the other hand, defended their decision and urged the CIAA to bring cases after thorough investigation and with adequate evidence.

"Did the judges ask any question regarding the judgment on the bail and other principles and matters of the judgments?" asked a lawyer. "I believe that the judges must be judged on the basis of their delivery of judgments."

Four papers were presented at the seminar by Supreme Court judge Govinda Bahadur Shrestha, Nepal Bar Association chairman Sindhunath Pyakurel, CIAA chief Suryanath Upadhyaya and advocates Sunil Adhikary and Ramesh Nath Dhungel. Adhikary and Dhungel stressed the need for transparency in the judicial process.

At a time when the country does not have elected representatives to protect the rights of the citizens, the judiciary is the only body through which the people can secure justice against the arbitrary decisions of the executive. When the excessive authority provided to the CIAA seems to have been used to harass common citizens and civilian authority, the court must be watchful and deliver justice accordingly.

In the name of seeking bail, the anti-corruption body is demanding huge amounts of money with an intention to put the suspect in custody. As a precedent and practice, bail is not jail. How our judges deliver their rulings and how they debate such matters while delivering them becomes very important.

The judiciary in Nepal has always stood for liberalism and individual freedom. The present judiciary, many hope, will maintain the institution's glorious history. For this, judges need to spend more time on improving the delivery of judgments than on preaching the virtues their verdicts.