Inclusive Justice: Shared Efforts Matter in Legal Reform

The role of the judiciary has long been a subject of intense public scrutiny and scholarly research, but one cannot move forward with an effective and honest analysis of the situation without digging deeper into the very concepts of separation of powers, rule of law, and the independence of different organs of the state.

This very nature of governance by an established set of rules and principles created by a just procedure established by law and a very structured and partitioned mechanism to create, implement, and interpret the law is a relatively new phenomenon when viewed against the long trajectory of human societal development. The English Civil War and the tussle between monarchy and the Parliament, the independence of the American colonies, and the creation of the French Republic all happen to be comparatively recent societal and political developments when contrasted against the disorder, anarchy, and barbarism that dominated human social regulation for many centuries. Instruments such as the Magna Carta accorded certain rights to the ‘subjects’ and established that the monarch’s power remains ultimately limited. Of course, democratic evolution was a gradual process that took place over centuries.

But the very fallacy of human nature presents itself in the most wicked ways. The deep human desire to stay close to power and attain power or to be able to exercise an unfair or advantageous position by way of abuse of the said position of power remains the primary driver of actions that jeopardize the integrity of the system. Therefore, there must exist guardrails in the system for ensuring minimal damage just as safety mechanisms are inherently built into cars during the manufacturing process to ensure foolproof protection. It also does not need separate mentioning that the idea of judicial infallibility comes with its own package of drawbacks.

All this is just to project the reality that the intricacies of governance remain a complex issue of societal and political importance with repercussions impacting areas that define social harmony and broader stability of various social factors.

The Need For Reforms in the Legal Field

While procedural complexities ensure compliance with a set of regulations for the sake of maintaining uniformity and predictability, for the lower strata of society it very often translates into barriers that cannot be easily overcome without considerable financial or institutional support. These procedures, sometimes meant to uphold due process or mostly intending to streamline administrative aspects, inadvertently create an intangible barrier to justice accessibility for the less resourceful and unaware section of society. Additionally, the perception of judicial authority elevated from the rest of society complicates the problem. But a certain cross-section of the population very wrongly comes to the conclusion that higher judicial authority is an imperial relic or a symbol of the bygone colonial epoch and needs complete overhaul and rethinking. Things are more murky. The ideal design of insulation of the judiciary not only from the common populace but also high-ranking administrative and government officials and the highest corridors of power is directed toward making the judiciary fair, unbiased, and impartial in its process of reasoning, analysis, work, and coming to its interpretative conclusion.

The existence of systemic guardrails, therefore, is a condition present to maintain requisite insulation from unfettered external influence. However, in cases where questions of judicial accountability arise, fostering collaborative reforms requires shared commitment and political will. The overlapping of jurisdictions and the competency of international conventions and laws to influence domestic policy and national direction of a country also happens to be a very interesting issue (Garnett M, 2014). Brexit, for instance, was a clear demonstration of an underlying discontent and a feeling for “taking back control.” Given just how weak the power of international courts is pertaining to forcing an actual implementation of its decision or mandate, many do not realize how things differ in a different system. The European Union, which initially began as a project to promote economic interdependency and integration, eventually evolved into a broader political and social union centered around collective values of democracy, free speech, and the rule of law. It warrants a separate analysis of its own in a different piece of work, but for now, it’d suffice if I were to say that the European Union remains one of my most favorite models of societal, political, and economic integration (the successes or failures of the European experiment can be evaluated separately). International organizations such as the EU possess the actual capacity and authority to formulate policies and laws and actually go ahead with their implementation within member states, form treaties and conventions that member states commit to, and issue non-mandatory directives.

That the efficiency of economic policy implementation is at odds with the due process of review, approval, and intervention of the judiciary is a very laughable proposition pushed by so-called “pro-growth” politicians. The synergy and proper coordination of the political, economic, and legal factors of social governance alone will ensure delivery of results along with respect for upholding due process. It is a teamwork and shared effort for better legal outcomes in a democratic setup rather than a dogfight for claiming a greater and higher arena of power for one of its constituent units (such as the legislature or the judiciary).