Trust deficit in judiciary might push people to resort to mob justice: Justice BR Gavai

Public confidence in the judiciary has to be seen in the broader context of the democratic institutions of India and the rule of law in society the Supreme Court's Justice BR Gavai said on Saturday.

"Democracy is not just about the rule of the people by the majority. In the view of Dr BR Ambedkar, institutional safeguards are necessary for the working of a democracy. The judiciary is a crucial institution that maintains the rule of law, acts against the excesses of the State, and protects the citizens from violation of their rights."

A trust deficit in the judiciary threatens the very foundation of the institution, Justice Gavai told the gathering.

"Another theoretical reason why public trust in the judiciary must be kept intact is that a trust deficit might push people to seek justice outside the formal judicial system. This might be through informal ways of vigilantism, corruption, and mob justice. All of this can lead to the erosion of law and order in society. Similarly, it can lead to public hesitation in filing cases and appealing decisions."

The judge was speaking at a two-day annual conference organised by the Gujarat High Court for judicial officers in the State.

In his inaugural address, Justice Gavai spoke on the topic - Trust Deficit - Eroding the Credibility of Judicial Institutions? Ways and Means to Combat the Truth Decay.

Speaking on prolonged delay in justice delivery, Justice Gavai stated that victims also suffer because delays prolong their trauma and hinder closure, ultimately undermining their confidence in the judicial system.

"Additionally, the longer a case drags on, the more difficult it becomes to ensure fair trials, as evidence may deteriorate, memories fade, and witnesses may become unavailable or unreliable. Overall, delays erode trust in the judicial system, creating perceptions of injustice and inefficiency," he emphasised.

Delays impose financial and mental strain on litigants and tarnish the judiciary's image as an active institution. Therefore, this issue must be addressed to restore public trust in the courts, he added.

If an innocent person remains an undertrial for an extended period and is later acquitted, it can still create a social stigma against them, thus violating their fundamental right to dignity, remarked Supreme Court judge, .

"For defendants, prolonged trials can result in extended pre-trial detention and an infringement of their right to speedy trial. This not only harms accused who are later found innocent but also exacerbates overcrowding in prisons, adding strains on both accused persons and the state. If an innocent person is undertrial for a long time and later acquitted, it also creates a social stigma against that person, violating his fundamental right to dignity," he added.

Justice Gavai also reflected on the factors that can contribute to a trust deficit in the courts, stating that the first factor or challenge - common to all institutions - is corruption.

"A trace of corruption, whether through bribery, partiality, or undue influence, can undermine the foundation of the legal system. A corrupt act by any judge can not only erode public trust, but also perpetuate injustice. The High Courts have taken strict action on instances of corruption in the district judiciary. But these instances dilute the credibility of the judiciary."

Justice Gavai pointed out that another critical factor contributing to the erosion of public trust is the dilution of the separation of powers, which serves as a cornerstone of democratic governance.

"The judiciary must stand independent from both the executive and the legislative. Any encroachment upon the judiciary’s autonomy, whether through political interference, legislative overreach, or executive interference, undermines the very concept of impartial justice."

Addressing the perceived lack of transparency, Justice Gavai emphasised that when judicial decisions lack clear reasoning, it breeds skepticism. He asserted that the public has the right to understand not just the outcomes but also the reasoning behind them, stating, "the appearance of justice must be as visible as justice itself."

Further speaking on reasons behind the trust deficit, the Supreme Court judge raised the lack of accessibility and the complexity of our legal system.

Justice Gavai emphasised that when a judge expresses opinions about women or other historically marginalised groups, whether on the bench or in public forums, it raises concerns about their impartiality in cases involving those communities.

A judge’s conduct both on and off the bench must be in consonance with the highest standards of judicial ethics, Justice Gavai remarked.

In his speech, he also addressed the issue of fake news, noting that while social media has increased connectivity and access to information, it has also contributed to the spread of misinformation.

He pointed out that clickbait journalism often sensationalises routine judicial actions, presenting them out of context as "big breaking news." In some cases, facts are not reported accurately, he pointed out.

[Watch Here]