Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil.
Credit: DH File Photo
Karnataka has proposed ambitious reforms in justice delivery and administration under the new ‘Law & Policy’ document. Law & Parliamentary Affairs H K Patil, who is anchoring this, sits with DH’s N B Hombal and admits that intervention is needed due to shortcomings in the system. Excerpts:
What prompted this policy?
If any government is framing policy, it’s based on current needs. Policies are generally intended to correct systemic follies by framing suitable laws, rules and regulations. The whole policy is meant to bring better governance by creating such an environment. We plan to set up a Directorate of Legal Education and a training academy for lawyers in north Karnataka to improve the quality of legal education. Witness lounges are some of the facilities that can be created. Awareness programmes to educate citizens about the Constitution can also be imparted besides providing free legal aid to the poor in the state.
A new law is proposed to make officials adhere to laws. A law to follow the law? Is this not an admission of the government's failure in administration?
If everything was functioning correctly, there was no need to think about administrative reforms. Among the primary duties of the government is to identify lacunae within and outside the existing system and introduce reforms. We’ve brought this policy only after identifying problems existing in our system. One example is that timely delivery of services is not happening. Should we not hold officials accountable? Therefore, we need to have stronger enforcement laws to make officials deliver on time, which is one of the ways to bring transparency and accountability while reducing corruption in the process. Besides, we’ll also make officials move files online as this will cut down delays in services.
The policy talks about Vyajya-mukta Grama (litigation-free villages). How do you plan to achieve this?
It might be a very difficult thing to achieve at the first instance for those who live in cities like Bengaluru, and not for those who know the village life. The policy intends to bring the government, judicial system, lawyers, society and local bodies together to make this happen. I agree it’ll take a lot of persuasive methods to achieve this. Already, there’s Lok Adalat, a free legal aid system and legal clinics functioning in most of the law schools across the state. If all these mechanisms work in cohesion, then it’s possible to achieve it. Perhaps, Karnataka is the first state in the country to dream about this and take the first step through this policy.
The policy wants to end the age-old system of calling the names of witnesses and accused persons in courtrooms without prefixes. How will this work if an accused is a dreaded criminal?
I’ll make a law about the procedure and communicate the government’s mind that nobody will be less respected. Even an accused deserves respect. It’s a basic human right. Our law states that an accused is innocent till s/he is proven guilty. Therefore, the policy intends to reform this archaic witness-calling system. We can use prefixes like Manya or Sri to call witnesses. When ministers, judges and lawyers can have prefixes like Honourable, Milord and Your Honour, why not witnesses?
How will the pendency of court cases come down as the policy intends?
Recently, the government has amended the High Court Act and Code of Civil Procedure Act. The intention of bringing these amendments was to reduce pendency in courts. The financial jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) courts was raised from Rs 15 lakh to Rs 50 lakh. This simple amendment not only reduced pendency in the High Court, but also provided more powers to the lower courts. This is just one small step, but there are several such methods with which we can reduce caseload in the High Court. We plan to introduce at least 20 legislations during the forthcoming legislature session starting Monday. Once these legislations become law of the land, one will automatically see changes.
Can you elaborate on what the proposed Victim Ombudsman will do?
The existing legal system stresses more on punishing the accused while it is weak on the victim getting any compensation. For instance, if the victim in a fight loses or damages his or her limbs permanently, s/he should get compensated as mere punishment for the accused won’t be enough. The ombudsman system will help victims secure free legal aid besides compensation. This system will be operational soon.
A new law to prevent theft of voters’ information is proposed.
Not long ago, we know what happened in Bengaluru and how voters’ information was misused. Should the government not think of preventing such incidents? Everytime a new challenge comes up, the law should also be amended to prevent such crimes from occurring. Present laws on this matter are very weak. So, we need to have stronger laws.