The reform of civil and criminal justice systems is a contentious issue and has become the top priority for the international community in re-establishing the rule of law. The justice systems in many common law jurisdictions are perceived to be ‘in crisis' deformed by exorbitant delay, cost, and complexity in proceedings. The level of resources engulfed in the judicial system has very little or no impact on judicial performance. Comparative and comprehensive analysis of the law not only leads to a better realization of the foreign laws, but also it aids with law unification. This chapter will attempt to highlight the issues in the civil and criminal justice system and comparatively analyze the scenario in England, Singapore, and India. In furtherance, the authors explore the possible methods to curb the delay in justice systems and canvas the modern trends in civil and criminal justice policy.
TopIntroduction
Justice systems across the globe are perceived to be in crisis (Blankenburg, 1999). The prime motive of the authors taking a comparative analysis of the said issue is, it not only leads to better recognition of the foreign laws but also it is lucid with commerce universalization and law unification. Most of the reforms that emanate in the present aeon are based on comparative studies (Dodson, 2009). Civil and Criminal cases take ages and cost too much, and dishonest judges torment the systems. There are different organizations engrossed with a variety of activities across the globe aimed at rebuilding the justice systems. Chronic judicial quiescence calls for streamlining the procedures and reinforcing flexibility. The reform of Civil and Criminal justice systems has become an utmost priority for the international community in its efforts to assist transitional and post-conflict societies in re-establishing the rule of law. A comparative analysis of the civil justice reforms unveils the continual efforts to augment access to Justice through adopting the Alternate Dispute Resolution process. The concept of Rule of Law is an animation of natural law and remains as a historical ideal that makes a powerful appeal to date, i.e. to be ruled by law and not by a powerful man.
James M. Buchanan distinguishes between ‘law’ and the ‘rule of law’ (Buchman, 2001). All primitive and non-democratic societies have ‘law’, but all liberal and progressive societies having ‘rule of law’ are not necessarily lawless societies. According to him ‘generality’ is at the centre of the rule of law, besides fairness, prospectivity and due process.
The United Nations Secretary-General defines the “rule of law” as follows:
The rule of law is a concept at the very heart of the United Nations’ mission. It refers to a principle of governance in which all persons, institutions and entities, public and private, including the State itself, are accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced and independently adjudicated, and which are consistent with international human rights norms and standards. It requires, as well, measures to ensure adherence to the principles of supremacy of law, equality before the law, accountability to the law, fairness in the application of the law, separation of powers, participation in decision-making, legal certainty, avoidance of arbitrariness and procedural and legal transparency. (UNSC Report, 2004)
Practitioners and policymakers have widely accepted this definition in the rule of law community.
TopAn Overview Of The Justice Systems
Every civilized system of the government requires that the State should make available to all its citizens a means for the just and peaceful settlement of disputes between them as to their respective legal rights. Criminal Courts, along with other criminal institutions, are facing a hard time providing security and operate under intense scrutiny from politicians and the media. Justice systems across the globe are often under-resourced, have low-capacity, and lack basic infrastructure. Civil and Criminal matters take too long, and it is never cost-effective compared to alternate methods that have been emerging in the present aeon. The structure of the Courts varies depending on the legal system in place. Data from the United States and countries in Latin America and the Caribbean show no correlation between the overall level of resources and the time of disposition of cases (Buscaglia & Ulen, 1997). Judicial and legal institutions in Asia, in general, and Singapore, in particular, have been criticized on the ground that they are not independent of the government. Both Civil and Criminal Justice Systems in many common law jurisdictions was reportedly ‘in crisis’, crippled by excessive delay, cost and complexity in proceedings and out of reach of ordinary people (Woolf, 1995). As rightly stated ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’. Per contra, the term ‘Justice’ is not just convicting the wrong-doers. It is also the enforcement of individual rights and protection. The judicial systems are afflicted by corrupt and dishonest judges. This paves the way for judicial inefficiency that destabilizes the growth of the economy and wealth of the nation.