Justice denied is justice denied


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Justice denied is justice denied

  1. 1. In vogue justice delayed is justice denied is a very smooth saying. But it isnot as easy to understand without clarification as to what actually is meant bythe delay in justice.In between seeking justice and deliverance of justice there are a lot of pre-requisites and formalities of rules and regulations and prescribed proceduresgoverning proceedings of the court time consuming but unavoidable for thepurpose.It is rather a precondition governing the procedures that the respondents incivil matters and accused in the criminal cases be given reasonable opportunityto defend themselves.Therefore, the delay in justice relates to the delay in actual deliverance ofjustice or passing of the final order into the matter after the round up of theentire proceedings in full conformity of the prescribed procedures in respectthereof.In India, we find that the working of whole of the system is not satisfactory atall. As a result, there is an inordinate delay in the disposal of cases due tohighly time consuming procedure.The number of cases in the courts is also increasing day-by-day. The time takenon average case is more than four years.The justice as such is becoming costlier, in terms of time and money. Since thecitizens are unable to apply costly lubrication to the parts of mechanismattached to the system, their work is delayed and justice goes out of theirreach. It is very shameful that as many as 30 million cases are pending in theIndian courts.As a matter of fact, the system of law courts that we inherited from the Britishrulers has grown of age and needs modification, and these modifications shouldbe such which suit our needs and convenience.The modifications should aim at shortening the period of proceedings of thecourt, amendment in the rules and regulations governing court proceedings andsimplification of the procedures, so that people’s faith in the legal system maynot finish.In order to do away with the over burden of the law courts, we should introducea scrutiny system for proposed prosecutions so that only the bonafide cases areokayed for prosecution and sent to courts.Secondly, a time limit should be fixed for the disposal of cases.The number of courts should be increased as we are the lowest in the world onjudges per million populations.The remuneration of the lawyers should be fixed after evaluation of the case bya competent court officer in consultation with a senior office bearer of the BarAssociation.Unless such steps, to ensure speedy disposal of cases, are not taken, thepresent system cannot give a desirable performance."Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that if legalredress is available for a party that has suffered some injury, but is notforthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redressat all. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similarrights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because it is unfair forthe injured party to have to sustain the injury with little hope for resolution.
  2. 2. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers who view courts orgovernments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either because theexisting system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party inquestion lacks political favour.[edit]OriginThere are conflicting accounts of who first noted the phrase. According toRespectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations, it is attributable to WilliamEwart Gladstone but such attribution was not verifiable.[1] Alternatively, itmay be attributed to William Penn, although not in its current form.The phrase may alternatively be traced to the Magna Carta, clause 40 of whichreads, "To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right orjustice." The reason one goes to court is to get justice, and "Justice Delayedis Justice Denied"As Chief Justice of the United States Warren E. Burger noted: "A sense ofconfidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered libertyfor a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and doincalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiencyand delay will drain even a just judgment of its value; that people who havelong been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily life come to believethat courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching;that people come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfill itsprimary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at theirwork, and on the public streets."[2]From Pirkei Avot 5:8, a section of the Mishnah (1st century BCE - 2nd centuryCE): "Our Rabbis taught:...The sword comes into the world, because of justicedelayed and justice denied.Justice is something meant to be handled at the present moment. This is sobecause, like Martin Luther King said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat tojustice everywhere." Therefore if someone delays something as important asjustice knowing that injustice is a threat to it, then the person is denyingjustice. If it was important to the person, then they wouldve handled thesituation right then, but since they delayed it, that means its not animportant issue to them.Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that victims ofcrime and those accused of crime deserve access to a speedy trial and,hopefully, resolution.It has several possible origins, one of which is the Magna Carta, clause 40which reads "To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right orjustice".The case of Professor Cyril Karabus, detained in Dubai for the past five months,is an egregious example of justice delayed. Dr. Karabus, a respected pediatriconcologist, practiced for many years at the Red Cross Hospital in Cape Town,South Africa where he led the oncology unit. There he cared for and saved thelives of many children with serious diseases. Care that earned him the respectand affection of his patients and their families.Dr. Cyril KarabusIn 2002 during a five-week locum stint he worked at the Sheikh Khalifa MedicalCenter in Abu Dhabi. There he treated a three year-old Yemeni girl with acutemyeloid leukemia who unfortunately died.
  3. 3. After his locum he returned to Cape Town and never heard anything further. Hewas not informed and did not know that in 2003 he was tried and convicted inabsentia of manslaughter for the death of the child, and sentenced to prison.August 18, 2012 Dr. Karabus was arrested in Dubai while in transit to SouthAfrica from a family wedding in Canada. Following arrest the 2003 verdict wasset aside but he was recharged with manslaughter and held in prison.After almost eight weeks and five court appearances, in each of which Dr.Karabus arrived in shackles, bail was granted October 11. He was required toremain in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).A panel of medical experts was appointed to consider the evidence. There havebeen several subsequent hearings scheduled but postponed. One of the stumblingblocks has been the inability of the prosecution to produce the original recordsin the case.Dr. Karabuss lawyer Michael Bagraim calls it a "horror story". Records providedto the defense were incomplete. Missing were the crucial records during the weekwhen Karabus was ministering and the child died.Thursday, January 31, the case against Dr. Karabus was postponed for the 17thtime until February 27. At that time, according to Mr. Bagaim, the judge isexpected to withdraw a fraud charge and hear a request for the manslaughtercharge to be withdrawn.Dr. Karabuss case has drawn attention around the world.The South Africa government has appealed repeatedly to the UAE government toexpedite the case.The World Medical Association (WMA) General Assembly in October 2012 called onthe authorities of the United Arab Emirates to ensure that Professor Karabus isguaranteed a fair trial according to international standards, and has access tothe relevant documents or information he may require to prepare his defense.The British Medical Journal (BMJ) published an article in October with detailsof the case and headlined "The Imprisonment of Cyril Karabus is Deplorable".The South African Medical Association (SAMA) has warned local healthprofessionals against applying for positions in the UAE and similar countries. Aformal statement to this effect from SAMA read:"We advise South African doctors and other health professionals to avoid workingin the UAE and would ask that those already there, consider withdrawing theirservices in the interest of their own safety."Justice delayed, justice denied.Dr. Karabus deserves better.And doctors and other health professionals considering working in countriesoutside their own should investigate to determine whether courts in thosecountries operate in a manner that assures fair and speedy justice. They shouldalso learn the degree to which medically related injuries and death are tried incriminal instead of civil courts - putting them at greater risk.Actor Sanjay Dutt was today sentenced to a five year jail by the Supreme Courtof India in a case which has spanned nearly 2 decades. I wholeheartedly agree
  4. 4. with the decision but my question is that can a man be jailed for an offence hehas committed 20 years ago and is repenting his crime.In 1993, Mumbai was rocked by serial blasts in major junctions and business hubslike Plaza Cinema, Century Bazar, Bombay Stock Exchange, Air India Building,Passport Office, Zaveri Bazaar etc. 257 people were officially declared dead,nobody knows the unofficial count. More than 2000 people were injured on thatsinister day.Sanjay Dutt who was then in his 34 years old and had kept a AK 47 assault rifleand a 9mm pistol illegally with him which he had acquired from the accused of1993 Mumbai Blasts. The TADA Court had acquitted him from any involvement inthe bomb blasts. He has already served 18 months in jail from 1993 to 2007.Though it has been categorically proved that Sanjay Dutt is guilty of thepossession of illegal arms. But the man has been repenting his guilt for pasttwo decades. The jail term is given in a civilised society to criminals so thatthey can repent their crimes and turn into a new leaf to return back tocivilised society. Every where in the world the jail is known as correctionfacility. This means that the convict is given a chance to correct him orherself and make him/her a better individual. Once the person is deemed to havecorrected himself and is no longer considered a danger to the society he or sheis let out of the jail to live a normal life. The prison term is often awardedbased on the seriousness of the crime and it ensures that a criminal isreformed and becomes a better civilised individual who can behave responsibly ina civil society and is no longer deemed to be harmful to the society as a wholeafter he/she is released.In Sanjay Dutts case the justice has been delivered by the Supreme Court ofIndia all right, but way too late. The man charged of guilt against the civilsociety is already repenting it and accepting that he had done something wrong.So without questioning the wisdom of the Hon Supreme Court, plainly from ahumane point of view sending a person to jail for the crime which he is alreadyvery shameful about and cursing himself for committing it, the justice came farfar late. If this sentence would have been given to him 15 years ago, may be itwould have made sense in making him a better individual.