NewsX Video: Swiss banks snub India

NewsX Video: Indian judiciary splits wide open

present situation in india.......

The present situation in india is not balanced......the whole system needs to be reviewed to add more meaning to   the system.OUR system is really old n stagnant i doesnt fit in the present scenario of our country many rules and regulations needs to be modified so dat it could fit in the system properly.............

    In the United States, the judicial system is the branch of government responsible for

    interpretation n application of the law.Its primary purpose is to serve the people by 

    ensuring equal justice under the law.The judicial system can also be called judiciary or a judicature.

Justice

1. The judicial system has an obligation to interpret the law fairly and with equal regard for all persons to whom the law applies. It serves the people by communicating the law through judgment and sentencing, and by upholding the principles of justice and the Constitution.

Function

2. As a branch of government, the judicial system acts as an intermediary between the legislature, which writes statutory law, and the executive, which is responsible for enforcing the law. The judicial system is responsible for interpreting the meaning of law, deciding its scope and declaring who has broken it. While the legislature writes laws on the basis of what ought to belegal and illegal, the judicial system is responsible for deciding what actually is and is not legal under those laws, and is therefore an extremely important entity in any legal system concerned with the fair treatment of those under its influence.

Courts

3. The judicial system interprets and applies the law through a hierarchical system of courts, each with a specific position and function. "Trial" and "appellate," two different categories of court, have different jurisdictions and powers of interpretation of the law. The purpose of a trial court is to find fact and pass initial judgment on a case. An appellate court does not try cases, and is instead responsible for reviewing the decisions of trial courts and lower appellate courts if they are challenged through the process of appeals. Appellate courts have broad powers in overturning the decisions of lower judiciary bodies. In the United States, the highest appellate court is the Supreme Court, which has near-absolute jurisdiction over the Constitution.

Jurists

4. Courts are made up of jurists such as judges and magistrates, who preside over cases either on their own, or as a group known as a "bench." Jurists (not to be confused with "jurors") are publicly recognized legal experts who play an important role in the judicial system. It is their job to interpret the laws of a case before them, and are either personally or collectively responsible for making the decisions handed down by their court. Jurists are required to be fair and impartial and have a duty to interpret the law with a stoic disregard for their personal opinions.

Case Law

5. Though the judicial system does not create new laws, the interpretations and decisions of the courts can have a lasting legal impact. In the interests of fairness, the same law may not be interpreted differently in two separate cases. As such, when a court interprets a piece of legislature relevant to a case in front of it, its decision must influence the adjudication of other cases involving that law until it is overturned. This is called "precedence" or "case law," and is an important part of the fulfillment of the judicial system's purpose.

Read more: The Purpose of the Judicial System | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_6687636_purpose-judicial-system.html#ixzz1AqqZzgHT

The judiciary system that is present in many western societies is extremely complex in design and created to allow justice in the variety of situations that occur both in government, as well as in day to day situations of citizens. These complex judiciary systems---such as that in the United States---come with numerous advantages and disadvantages. Understanding the inner-workings of the western judicial system helps people to understand the history, planning and intricate details that are involved.

Justice

The overall goal of the western judicial system is to provide justice, settle disputes and interpret laws within a given country. The advantage of modern judicial systems---along with what makes them sophisticated in design---is their ability to be applied to countries that are extremely large. Many western societies have populations that reach into the hundreds of millions, so a court system that can be applied over this extensive group of people is all the more useful at providing justice.

The system is designed to allow people to have a fair trial if accused of a crime, as well as allowing citizens to file lawsuits if wrongfully treated based on the country's laws. Every person accused of a crime or wrongdoing has a right to defend herself---or hire someone to defend her---in front of a judge or jury, who are required to determine whether the person is guilty based on his interpretation of the laws.

Court System

The court system is very extensive and extends into a variety of "court types"---making it much more effective. For instance---in The United States---The Federal Court System is appointed to act in matters pertaining to federal law. The United States Supreme Court system is the only one that can't be abolished according to the Constitution of the United States.

Other court systems within the United States includes the U.S. Court of Appeals. The court dates back to 1891 and has 12 regional circuit courts that can review district courts in their regions. This creates a balance of power, making the courts run more effectively over such a large population.

The court system then branches out further into District Courts, which are made up of judges that conduct individual trials and cases within their individual district.

Disadvantages

The disadvantages of western judicial court systems are present as well. As with other forms of organization, the judicial system is not flawless due to the vast size and number of laws that are present in most countries.

Read more: Advantages & Disadvantages of the Western Judicial System | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_6031333_advantages-disadvantages-western-judicial-system.html#ixzz1AqqAjN7O

disadvantages of indian judiciary

The Indian judicial system is descended from British colonial rule, and many of its characteristics appear on the surface identical to those of British courts. This British system of law, however, was unsuited to the needs of the Indian people. Even the last colonial administrators of India so acknowledged in 1945, three years before India gained full independence. Though it has come a long way, the Indian judicial system still lacks the resources to meet the needs of India's more than 1 billion citizens.

Backlog of Cases

The Indian Supreme Court had almost 46,000 cases left to hear in December 2009. For lower, more local courts, that figure ballooned to more than 29 million cases. Minor corruption, limited staffing and an acute shortage of accomplished judges are among the reasons. In December 2009, the Law Commission of India said there were only 10 judges for every 1 million Indian citizens.

Complexity

For many rural Indians, the Indian legal codes and justice system are too heavily laden with complex jargon and arduous demands of time and money. Traditional methods of conflict resolution, called "panchayats" or "dharmasatra," were discarded during British colonial rule and never reclaimed after independence. These dispute-resolving mechanisms were inexpensive, required little specialized legal training, and worked in a cultural context that many Indians could understand. They are no longer part of the Indian judicial system.

The Mumbai Attacks Trial

The trial of the lone surviving gunman in the November 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, to many Indian critics, underscored some of the weaknesses in the Indian judicial system. The defendant, Mohammed Ajmal Amir, confessed midway through the trial, but the judge let the trial continue. No Indian lawyer wanted to represent Amir, and his counsel had to be replaced midway. Also, many said Amir's trial was expedited for political reasons.

Bureaucratic Battles

Lawyers, justices and journalists frequently fight in Indian courtrooms over access to information, the overzealous use of contempt-of-court laws, and endless allegations of bribery coming from almost every participant in the average court case. The process for removing bad judges from the bench is rarely successful. To allege bribery of a judge requires the written consent of the nation's chief judge, a historically unprecedented occurrence in India.

Read more: The Disadvantages of the Indian Judicial System | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_6593960_disadvantages-indian-judicial-system.html#ixzz1AqpfS3Y3

THE THREE BEST THINGS ABOUT THE INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM
By
PORFESSOR (DR.) GURJEET SINGH
VICE-CHANCELLOR
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW,
PATIALA (PUNJAB) INDIA
Broadly speaking, the legal system of a country is a part of its social system and as
such reflects the social, economic, political and cultural characteristics of that society.
Therefore, the legal system has to be understood in the context of socio-cultural
milieu in which it operates. A legal system consists of certain basic principles and
values, a set of operational norms including rights and duties of the citizens spelt out
in the laws - central, state and local, institutional structures for the enforcement of
those laws and a cadre of legal personnel, endowed with the responsibility of
administering the system.
The Indian legal system is, by and large, the gift of the British rulers. Originally an
English transplant with Anglo Saxon roots, the legal system in India has grown over
the years, nourished in the Indian soil. As a matter of fact, what was intended to be an
English oak, has turned into a large, sprawling Indian banyan tree, whose social roots
have descended to the ground to become new trunks. According to one view, the legal
system in India is still an alien one to the majority of its citizens whose legal culture is
more indigenous and whose contact with the formal legal system, that is, the imported
British Model, is marginal, if not altogether non-existent. That is why it is widely
believed that the language, technicality and procedure of the inherited legal system
are indeed some of the factors that limit access to justice for a vast majority of
illiterate, ignorant and impoverished people of the country. Notwithstanding all this,
the rights and benefits conferred by the Indian Constitution and various other laws
enable people to enjoy the glow of freedom in a highly democratic set up. In the
paragraphs below, I would like to highlight atleast the Three Best Things about the
Indian legal system. These are: (1) The Written Constitution; (2) The Rule of Law;
and (3) Independence of Judiciary. I would like to deal with each of these points
briefly.
(1) THE WRITTEN CONSTITUTION
The constitution of a country is the fundamental law of the land and it is variously
described depending upon the nature of the polity and the aspirations of the people in
a given society. Constitution is generally a written document and it assumes the
character of a unitary or a federal form of government. The Indian Constitution, that is
often considered to be one of the most well written documents, declares India to be a
sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic and represents the collective will of
the entire nation, and is, as such, the reservoir of enormous power. It is the
cornerstone of our republic. The Indian Constitution, which is a unique blend of
rigidity and flexibility, also describes the methodology by which this power conferred
on the State is to be exercised for the greatest benefit of the greatest number of
people. It is a political document, sometimes also called as the ‘Bag of Borrowings’
that distributes power of the State amongst different organs, that is, between central IALS Conference
Learning from Each Other: Enriching the Law School Curriculum in an Interrelated World
 ___________________________________________________________________________________
112
and state governments; legislative, executive and judicial wings of each government
and regulates its exercise in its incidence on the people. Our form of government is
democratic and republican and the method is parliamentary through the adult
franchise. With ninety four amendments in it, the Indian Constitution is one such
vibrating document in accordance with which our republic has systematically been
governed since independence. One can proudly say that we in India are enjoying the
60th glorious year of our freedom and the one document that has not failed is “Our
Indian Constitution’ and further that it is our sacred constitution only that we Indians
have survived as a single united nation and that is perhaps the greatest thing about the
Indian democracy as well as about the Indian legal system.    
(2) THE RULE OF LAW
The second important component of the Indian legal system is ‘Rule of Law’.
Though the term ‘Rule of Law’ is derived from the French phrase la principe de
legalite (the principle of legality) that refers to a government based on the principles
of law and not of men, in India, the concept of ‘Rule of Law’ can be traced to the
ancient scriptures. According to them, Law is the ‘King of Kings’ and that there is
nothing higher than the law. In case of Indian democracy in particular, the concept has
assumed different dimensions and means that the holders of public powers must be
able to justify publically that the exercise of power is legally valid and socially just.
In India, the concept of ‘Rule of Law’ has developed many facets that are not only
negative, providing constraints on governmental action, but affirmative, too, imposing
an affirmative duty of fairness on the part of government. In the first place, it is
obligatory that power should not be exercised arbitrarily, meaning thereby that, it
should be exercised within the statutory ambit; and the purported exercise of it would
not just be ultra vires, but shall, in a true sense of the term, arbitrary. The law courts
in India have gone a step further to insist on the specific positive content of the rule of
law obligations. These include the rules of natural justice that have to be followed not
just in a quasi-judicial action but often also in purely administrative action. Very
fortunately, the courts in India have been able making concerted endeavours to
establish a ‘Rule of Law Society’ by insisting on ‘fairness’ in every aspect of the
exercise of power by the State. It goes without saying that the principle of rule of law
runs though the Indian Constitution like a golden thread.
(3) INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY
The third important feature of the Indian legal system is independence of judiciary
that is the logical concomitant of the broad adherence to the ‘Doctrine of Separation
of Powers’, a doctrine that is traceable to Aristotle, but to which the writings of the
thinkers like John Locke and Montesquieu have given a base on which modern
attempts to distinguish between legislative, executive and judicial power is grounded.
The theory of separation of powers signifies three formulations of structural
classification of governmental powers: (i) that the same person should not form part
of more than one of the three organs of the government. For example, ministers
should not sit in Parliament; (ii) that one organ of the government should not interfere
with any other organ of the government; and (iii) that one organ of the government
should not exercise the functions assigned to any other organ. In India, though thedoctrine has not been accorded a constitutional status in the strict sense, one of the
articles in the Indian Constitution (Article 50) enjoins separation of judiciary from the
executive. The Supreme Court of India, in one of the leading cases, has held: “Indian
Constitution has not indeed recognized the doctrine of separation of powers in its
absolute rigidity but the functions of the different parts or branches of the government
have been sufficiently differentiated and consequently it can be very well said that our
Constitution does not contemplate assumption by one organ or part of the State of
functions that essentially belong to another.” In India, the system of checks and
balances operates so as to confer independent jurisdiction to all three organs of the
state including judiciary. Under the constitutional framework, judiciary in India has
been vested with sufficient powers to act independently and also to step in where
other two organs of the state fail to perform the powers assigned to them. The modus
operandi adopted in appointments, the fixed tenure of the judges and the power to
punish for the contempt are some of the important features of the independence of
judiciary in India. It goes without saying that an independent judiciary is the backbone
of a successful democracy and we are fortunate that our judiciary is independent and
its example is to be emulated by the world.
In the light of the above, one reaches an inescapable conclusion that the Indian
Constitution stands tallest amongst all the constitutions of the world as its underlying
objectives are the promotion of rule of law that runs like a golden thread through the
entire fabric of the Indian Constitution and maintenance of the independence of
judiciary.

bhopal gas verdict

THE MUCH awaited trial-court verdict after a quarter century is not only justice denied because of being late, but is otherwise also justice denied in real sense when people responsible for world’s biggest industrial disaster killing over 15000 persons were ordered to be mildly punished. And they were granted bail at a supersonic speed as if they the conviction was a mere formality.  Slow pace of judicial proceedings in the matter may hardly see any guilty person face the punishment even big or small till the case gets ultimately decided by Supreme Court.

 

It is regretted that despite all the concerned people calling for modifying the system and even Union Law Minister mincing no words in criticising such verdicts by confessing flaws in system, yet no concrete step is taken to plug out loopholes to ensure really just and speedy court-trials. This verdict is a challenge for Union government to ensure passing of complete package of reforms in judicial and legal system in forthcoming monsoon session of Parliament.

THE INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM

Courts Structure:

India has a quasi-federal structure with 29 States further sub-divided into about 601 administrative Districts. The Judicial system however has a unified structure. The Supreme Court, the High Courts and the lower Courts constitute a single Judiciary.  Broadly there is a three - tier division. 
Each District has a District Court and each State a High Court. The Supreme Court of India is the Apex Court.  Each State has its own laws constituting Courts subordinate to the District Courts.  Besides, a number of judicial Tribunals have been set up in specialized areas. The significant Tribunals are:  Company Law Board; Monopolistic and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission; Securities Appellate Tribunal; Consumer Protection Forum; Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction; Customs and Excise Control Tribunal; Tax Tribunal; etc.   These Tribunals function under the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court where they may be situated.

The Judiciary:

The Indian judiciary has a reputation of being independent and non-partisan. Judges are not appointed on political considerations. They enjoy a high standing in society.

The Bar:

India has a unified all India Bar and an advocate enrolled with any State Bar Council can practice and appear in any court of the land including the Supreme Court of India.  However for doing any acting work in the Supreme Court a qualifying examination (called an ‘Advocate on Record’ exam) needs to be cleared. 
Foreign lawyers are not permitted to appear in Courts (unless qualified), though they can appear in arbitrations.

Practice and Procedure:

The influence of the British Judicial System continues in significant aspects. The official language for Court proceedings in the High Court & the Supreme Court is English.  Lawyers don a gown and a band as part of their uniform and Judges are addressed as “My Lord”. 
The procedural law of the land as well as most commercial and corporate laws are modeled on English laws.  English case law is often referred to and relied upon both by lawyers and judges.  As in England, a certain class of litigation lawyers are designated as “Senior Advocates” (equivalent to QCs).  They do not deal with clients directly and take instructions only through solicitors.  Certain lawyers however, follow a mixed practice i.e., both plead and act in relation to court matters.
There is a great tradition and emphasis on oral arguments. Counsels are seldom restrained in oral arguments and complex hearings may well take days of arguments to conclude.
Specialisation is relatively a new phenomenon.  Most lawyers have a wide-ranging practice.

Arbitration: 

In 1996, arbitration got an impetus with the enactment of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. This is based on the UNCITRAL Model Rules.  The earlier enactment of 1940 was widely considered ineffective. With the enactment of the new law, arbitration has gained in popularity and is fast becoming the preferred route for settlement of commercial disputes.
India does not have a separate Arbitration Lawyers Bar. Generally, court lawyers are engaged for arbitrations that are conducted over the weekends or after court hours. Often retired High Court or Supreme Court Judges are appointed as arbitrators.
The Indian Council of Arbitration, promoted by the Ministry of Commerce is a leading Institute for administration of arbitrations.  However, due to its low payment scales for arbitrators, it is not suitable for large international arbitrations.

AHMEDABAD: City-based Research Foundation for Governance in India (RFGI) has organised an interactive session with Padmashree DR Karthikeyan on Paradoxical Indian legal system: The root cause of unabated corruption' at Ahmedabad Management Association (AMA) on Thursday.

The session will start at 5.30pm. Founder director of RFGI Kanan Dhru said, "A lot remains to be changed in the Indian legal system. Apart from the excruciatingly long waiting period, pendency of legal cases, and stifling corruption, the system leaves a large number of loopholes making it highly vulnerable to manipulation."

"One major area of concern remains the criminal justice which will be discussed during the session," she added.

Karthikeyan is former special director of CBI and former director-general of National Human Rights Commission of India and Head of Special Investigation Team of Rajiv Gandhi Assassination.

Read more: Talk on Indian legal system today - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/-Talk-on-Indian-legal-system-today-/articleshow/6435209.cms#ixzz1Aqma7ziW