Bhutanese. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Thursday supported technology-based reforms in Bhutan’s judicial system. He said that access to justice depends on greater use of technological advancements. He delivered a speech on ‘Access to Justice in the 21st Century: Technology, Legal Aid and People-Centric Courts’ at the Royal University of Bhutan in Thimphu. During this, he told Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay that he would be happy if the Supreme Court of India, along with the High Courts, would give opportunities to Bhutanese students to do internship.
Technology is only a modern medium in this era – Justice Surya Kant
He said that we should remember that technology is only a modern medium in this era. Our duty is to ensure that where things get complicated in the 21st century. At the same time, some things should remain simple and accessible like the language of common people. We must firmly understand, the Chief Justice said, that justice is not a solitary virtue, locked behind the heavy wooden doors of the court, but, rather, it is a living presence that must be allowed to reach out into the world, into the high valleys and bustling markets, and into people’s homes.” He said, “Getting first-hand experience of the functioning of the court is an essential part of quality legal education.” Chief Justice Kant stressed, “If we are to be true to our heritage, If we want to remain true, our technological reforms must not only digitize the status quo, but also democratize the very essence of the judicial process.”
He said that the Indian judicial system originally consisted of traditional files containing handwritten pleadings, oral witness statements, oral submissions, rarely documentary evidence and only a written judgment. “These files were bulky, leading to lack of space to keep records, often in inadequate court rooms where judicial officers, including the presiding judge, were often found hidden behind the files.”
A special change in the legal field in the 21st century
“The changes began with improvements in the judicial infrastructure, such as the establishment of more courts, additional staff and record rooms,” the Chief Justice said. He further said that significant change came only in the 21st century, when there was a significant transformation in the legal field globally. He said technology is changing the way legal work is done, legal professionals and
It is redefining the way judges engage with information and most importantly, the way citizens access justice.
Technology has been adopted thoughtfully
“We have adopted technology thoughtfully, leveraging its benefits while protecting our core values of fairness, due process, transparency, human dignity and accountability,” he said. Chief Justice Kant said, “What initially started with modest digitization of paperwork, this effort has transformed into a reimagining of the way legal work is prepared, executed and presented. He further said that for the Indian judiciary and court administration, technology has become a force multiplier as the Courts have introduced virtual hearings, e-filing and online dispute resolution, which have expanded the reach of justice far beyond the traditional boundaries, ensuring that access to the Courts is now Not limited to geography or circumstances.
He emphasized that “judicial officers can now see case histories, precedents, and hearing transcripts at a glance, allowing them to make faster and more informed decisions.” “By bringing the courts to the community, we ensure that geographical distance is no longer a barrier for those seeking justice,” he said. He further said that the second step should be ‘procedural simplicity’, whereby a simple land dispute or small claims case can be initiated through a mobile interface that is as user-friendly as a banking app. The third and most important step is to strengthen legal aid through teleservices, whereby dedicated paralegals can be connected to indigent litigants through simple digital means, and early stage legal advice can be provided before a complaint turns into a long-drawn dispute.
