Mr. Tanmaya Mehta, Advocate, Supreme Court of India while addressing a webinar organized by Indian Dispute Resolution Centre (IDRC) on Online Dispute Resolution: Opportunities and Challenges shared some interesting insights into the opportunities and challenges which are posed by increasing use of technology in Indian Legal System, due to COVID- 19 Pandemic.
Calling video conferencing for the purpose of conducting hearings as “temporary measure,” Mr. Mehta stated that technology though has come to our aid in this period of transition yet it cannot serve substantial justice in longer run. He mentioned that the response which Indian Legal System has shown and the technical plunge it has taken, by making judicious use of technology, could not have been foreseen few months ago.
The fact that the “wheels of Indian Justice System are rolling” shows the sincere endeavor made by all the stakeholders involved in making this alive. Mr. Mehta pointed out how technology has come to our rescue by providing us alternative means of keeping our Judicial Edifice intact and how social distancing, staying indoors, could have been possible only because of arrangements which are in place to substitute physical hearings. He stated that these hearings by video conferencing have certainly saved time for advocate who used to have cases listed before different forum because travel time has reduced and one just has to switch the screen to join hearing of a different forum. But, having said so, he showed his very rooted concerns with those propositions which made case for permanent virtual courts.
He mentioned that notwithstanding the advantages these Virtual hearings have, they cannot substitute physical system of Justice Dispensation. These Video Conferencing arrangement are temporary in nature, which are brought to ensuring fundamental freedom and rights of people are not compromised.
Mr Mehta stated that it cannot diffuse with and replace the Justice delivery system supported by human to human interaction. He highlighted very practical and significant aspects of technical impediments which are capable to having wide spread ramifications on Justice Dissemination. Mr. Mehta discussed how, Virtual hearing; (a) is plagued by tech- divide; (b) technical/ network glitches which takes precious time of Court, which are to deal with around 700 plus cases every day, delays the cause of Justice; (c) is creating unnecessary impediments on mental and physical wellbeing of an individual due to increase exposure to radiation of phone or laptop, leading to uncalled for fatigue.
"But normally, the Supreme Court hears an average of 700 cases on Mondays and Fridays and the Delhi High Court hears 700-1,000 cases. It is impossible to hear that many cases through ODR. Also, in India, there are technical impediments like bandwidth problems, which waste time. It can at best be a stop-gap measure," he added.
Mr Mehta mentioned that if we are willing to consider virtual hearing as a tool (as efficient as physical hearing) of justice dispensation, then we need to be ready to double the efforts which are being put presently, because in order to make sure that “contribution to substantial justice” is done, each stakeholder will have to be way more quick, vigilant and effective. For instance, advocates will have to be extremely thorough with their cases to be able to present them briefly, thus saving time for his/ her other counterparts to present their cases. Such an arrangement, according to Mr. Mehta will create a “utilitarian” system which indeed is the need of the hour.
