Courts with a hybrid model

Syllabus: General Studies Paper 2

Context:

The Uttarakhand High Court issued a notification saying that it would resume functioning through the physical mode from August 24, and no virtual hearing will be entertained.

• A petition has been filed by the All-India Jurists Association, seeking a declaration that the right to participate in court proceedings through virtual courts via video conference is a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) and (g) of the Constitution. 
  • According to Article 19(1)(a): All citizens shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression.
  • Article 19 ( 1) (g) of the Constitution of India provides the right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business to all citizens subject to Art. 19 (6) which enumerates the nature of restriction that can be imposed by the state upon the above right of the citizens.

Key points of the litigation

• The idea of virtual courts is seen as an affordable and accessible justice system observed by the e-committee of the supreme court.
• The plea also says the use of information, communication and technology is a fundamental right available to every lawyer under Article 19(1)(a) and (g) of the Constitution of India.
• Anuradha Bhasin v Union of India (2020) case: It was held by the Supreme Court that the right to access the internet and various applications/websites is a facet of various Fundamental Rights and Freedoms available under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. 
• Swapnil Tripathi vs Supreme Court (2018): In the fast-changing globalised world, it is obligatory for the Indian Judiciary to use Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) in the most optimal manner to make Justice available at the cheapest possible price for one and all.

Advantages of virtual hearings

• During the COVID-19 pandemic, physical courts were forced to shut down. Despite some hiccups, the Supreme Court and High Courts have been able to function online due to the e-Courts project.
• Apart from facilitating access to justice from remote areas, video conferencing is cost-effective, reduces carbon footprint, and substantially reduces the attempt of employing delaying tactics by parties.
• The video-conferencing methods will also help in dealing with the issue of pendency of cases. 
• It will significantly minimise the hundreds of transfer petitions that waste the Supreme Court’s valuable judicial time while also being cost-effective for the parties. 
• Video conferencing will also be helpful in recording the evidence. 

Challenges:

• There is a big digital divide between courts, practitioners and clients in metropolitan cities and those outsides. 
• In remote areas, internet connectivity is a big issue. Many lawyers have stated that they do not have the financial capacity, especially during pandemic times, to afford expensive smartphones and broadband connections. 
• They also claim that they are technologically challenged and do not possess the expertise to operate complex video-calling software.

There is no doubt that virtual hearings enabled the administration of justice during pandemic times. However, we can’t fully rely on virtual mode and have to evolve a hybrid model for delivering justice. Our judicial system needs a Hybrid System where lawyers will be allowed to opt for physical hearing or virtual facilities. Therefore, the stakeholders of Indian Judiciary should take appropriate steps, such as the development of infrastructure, and raising technological awareness, in order to make sure that all the hurdles regarding virtual hearings are effectively dealt with.

The Hindu Link:

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/opinion/courts-with-hybrid-model-the-way-forward/article36655575.ece