10.04.2013 Views

The Nepali Judiciary - Supreme Court Of Nepal

The Nepali Judiciary - Supreme Court Of Nepal

The Nepali Judiciary - Supreme Court Of Nepal

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

yearly arrears is satisfactory, the court has not been able to dispose the cases within the<br />

prescribed period. In other words the courts have failed to dispose cases within one year which is<br />

very unsatisfactory. From the <strong>Supreme</strong> <strong>Court</strong> to the District <strong>Court</strong>s, cases have not been disposed<br />

within the prescribed period. Many judiciaries of the world have the practice of disposing cases<br />

within three or six months from the date of registration, whereas we have not been able to achieve<br />

that target of one (maximum two years) year and this is a serious challenge for the <strong><strong>Nepal</strong>i</strong> judiciary.<br />

<strong>The</strong> judiciary is not solely responsible for this. Lack of sufficient reform in the laws, lack of sufficient<br />

assistance from stakeholders in relation to case management and lack of sufficient logistical<br />

support are some of the external factors that are equally responsible.<br />

In order to make the justice dispensing process efficient and speedy, the judiciary has to take<br />

some important steps immediately otherwise the justice dispensing process may not be efficient<br />

and speedy. A High-Level Committee constituted for development of case management upon<br />

identifying the core problems regarding case management has recommended and suggested for<br />

improvement and reform in case management and has also suggested for applying different<br />

procedures pursuant to the nature of the case. It is believed that expected results would be<br />

achieved provided these suggestions and recommendations are to be implemented. Till date, the<br />

judiciary has failed to arrange judge controlled case flow management. Time table for disposal of<br />

cases and its subsequent implementation has not been done. Likewise, work performance<br />

standard has not been determined. Panel system has not been implemented for hearing of cases.<br />

Effective mechanism for disposal of old cases has not been implemented and neither has the<br />

judiciary succeeded in implementing management of case hearing. Likewise, the judiciary has not<br />

been able to control postponement of hearing of cases. Other than this, the judiciary should with<br />

utmost priority undertake the following: make efforts to reform the due date (tarik) system,<br />

effectively and strictly implement the provision of preliminary hearing, effective application of<br />

information technology regarding case management, reform in record system and effective<br />

monitoring and inspection.<br />

Without looking into the actual maturity of the case, it has been a practice of accepting all the case<br />

registered during the previous fiscal year as arrears for the coming year and as such this practice<br />

does not reflect the actual status of arrears of cases and therefore this system should be reviewed<br />

and redefined. A prescribed process need to be followed while deciding a case and without<br />

fulfilling those processes a case cannot be disposed and therefore while projecting a target a<br />

minimum period required for disposing the case should also be taken into consideration.<br />

<strong>The</strong>refore, on this basis, when a case is registered, the stages of proceedings of the case and the<br />

probable period of disposal of case should be determined and parties to the case should be<br />

informed about it. For improvement in the management the following improvement is deemed<br />

necessary: improvement in management of information and data, bench management, time<br />

management, management of logistics and reform in library system.<br />

It is also an important aspect for the judiciary to maintain good relation with the stakeholders. No<br />

matter what kind of reforms the judiciary makes within its institution or no matter what kind of<br />

reform plans the judiciary brings, the success of such reforms depends upon the full assistance<br />

and cooperation from its stakeholders. Cooperation is required from the Judicial Council with<br />

regards to appointment, transfer and evaluation of competency of judges. Likewise, cooperation is<br />

required from lawyers and government attorneys in relation to case management and from the<br />

government for procurement of logistics and similarly assistance is required from the concerned<br />

50

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!