India needs humane, well-equipped Judiciary: PM

New Delhi, Aug 19: Acknowledging growing concerns over litigation costs and lack of probity in ''some sections of the judiciary,'' Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called for ''a humane and a well-equipped judiciary.'' Inaugurating the 1st All India Interdepartmental Cooperation Dialogue and Meeting on Social Justice, Dr Singh stressed making ''our justice delivery system more sensitive to the needs of the poorest of our people.'' ''Sensitising each of the institutions of our democracy to the needs and concerns of the under-privileged is one of our top policy priorities,'' Dr Singh told the conference presided over by India's Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal.

''For this we need a more efficient and more effective judicial machinery. A humane and a well-equipped judiciary. This is the responsibility of each of the pillars of our democracy-- the executive, the legislature and the judiciary itself.

''I assure you that our Government will extend full support to the judiciary to realise these shared objectives of good governance,'' he said.

''Our Government believes that democracy has no meaning for the citizens unless the citizen is able to secure his basic human rights, namely education, employment and the right to live a life of dignity and self-respect.'' The meet, sponsored by the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), was also attended by Law and Justice Minister Hans Raj Bhardwaj, Justice K G Balakrishnan, who is Supreme Court Legal Services Committee Chairman, and other senior Judges, Chief Ministers and legal luminaries.

Critics say delays in adjudication and unbridled costs pose serious hurdles in access to justice for those who have limited means. The government has tried to help needy litigants through legal aid-- without much success. India's poor litigants see legal aid provided by the NALSA as "mere eyewash," a Parliamentary panel recently reported. As Law and Justice Minister Bhardwaj put it, the government effort to overcome the challenge of expensive justice by enforcing the NALSA Act 1986 had not produced ''any spectacular success.'' Dr Singh said ''the rule of law can become a living reality for millions and millions of our people, only if the rights of law-abiding citizens are effectively protected and safeguarded.

''Only if justice is seen to be delivered and delivered in time only if the rights of the weak and the dispossessed are protected.'' Dr Singh said the greatest challenge ''is in fact at the bottom of the pyramid where most of our citizens come in contact with the judiciary.

''The lower courts, the district courts, the courts that deal with petty offences, these are the ones that must be sensitised most to the concerns we are dealing with today. They are at the cutting edge of our governance.'' He cited concerns often voiced in various quarters about delays in disposal of cases and the consequent backlog built up over the years, the cost of litigation and the cost of obtaining justice and the growing concern also probity-- or the lack of it - in some sections of the judiciary.

''I have said this before, and I say this again, that we take great pride in the quality and effectiveness of our judicial system.

''But in the larger scheme of governance, it is incumbent upon any healthy institution to continue to reflect from time to time on its role, on the expectations from it and on the scope for improvement,'' he said.

Dr Singh said this would make India's justice delivery system more sensitive to the needs of ''the poorest of our people. Especially those who are most discriminated against in our society.'' Justice Sabharwal said NALSA's prime mandate was to safeguard and promote the right to justice-- the most comprehensive right one can secure in civil life.

He said legislators, judiciary and the executive ''have to work together in making the right laws and provide the guarantee of competent and free legal aid to all the poorest and poor citizens.'' Justice Balakrishnan cautioned that ''the existence of an independent accountable judiciary by itself is not enough to protect citizens against abuse of power.'' He said people's legal rights remain theoretical if the institutions charged with enforcing them are inaccessible.

''Accessibility depends on how compatible laws are with the norms and understandings that shape people's lives.'' He said legal institutions needed to be physically and economically accessible and people need to have the knowledge and capacity to claim their rights.

''Even when formal systems do exist, they often lack adequate infrastructure facilities. There is a need for the legal movement in this direction.'' On suicides by farmers caught in debt traps, Justice Balakrishnan wondered whether the victims were ''not getting any legal aid or legal services.''

UNI