IS THE Judiciary Working Hard Or Hardly Working?

“The Judiciary must realise that substantial justice is not achieved by the volumes of cases they dismiss for want of prosecution but those of interested litigants that are resolved quickly and justiciably.” -Mr. Thuita

Earlier this year, the High Court undertook a radical move to dismiss old cases towards clearing the backlog, which has been giving the Judiciary a bad name. The exercise was said to be based on the Case Audit and Institutional Survey 2014.

According to the first statement in the Foreword Section of the Survey Report authored by Chief Justice g, it was stated that “…One of the barometers of effectiveness in the Judiciary is the size of the back log in the court system”. Internally within the Judiciary therefore, this clog in the courts was understood to be caused by the inactive files that had continued filling up registry cabinets.

Over 15,000 Files

The Judiciary then commenced an exercise whereby the first phase involved the listing for dismissals, over 15,000 files in the Nairobi High Court Civil Division. The exercise has been replicated in other parts of the country and divisions of the court.

The question to ask is whether this is the best pill for the clog and delayed justice for litigators. To the Judiciary officials, this is the best thing that has ever happened and during the state of the Judiciary and Administration of Justice Annual Report, the Chief Justice will gladly brag about how his institution has “resolved” more that 100,000 old cases in 2015 alone. Never mind that the resolution was by mere dismissals without hearing parties. To others however, particularly the legal practitioners, this is yet another serious goof by the Judiciary.

In two weeks of February when numerous Judges congregated in Nairobi to dismiss old cases, their stations were largely left unattended and litigants in active files lost out of rare hearing dates while the dispensers of justice were away handling “ dead” files whose owners had long abandoned them to die a natural death.

The Judiciary must realise that substantial justice is not achieved by the volumes of cases they dismiss for want of prosecution but those of interested litigants that are resolved quickly and justiciably.

Judicial Brag

While the Judiciary will brag about the number of cases they have dismissed, there is no reflection of joy in the populace. There is no jubilation that pending cases have been resolved. No matter how many cases are dismissed for want of prosecution, the court users shall continue crying for hearing dates for their case.

In Nairobi courts, litigants are now accustomed to the fate of having court diaries declared permanently full. Instead of wasting time on abandoned cases, it would serve the Judiciary better if they can expedite the hearings of cases that litigants are interested in. Accordingly, as long as it keeps directing its energies in unnecessary exercises, the Judiciary will remain hardly working.

On the flipside though, the Civil Service Week between the 15^th to the 19th June 2015 has shown that the exercise of dismissing old cases can serve another purpose. This process has become a training ground for newly admitted Judges.

After their induction and “internship” under the old Judges, the first cases the newly admitted Judges will have to contend with are old inactive files. This is a positive step instead of having seasoned Judges leaving their busy stations to handle matters whose parties lost interest eons ago.

-Mr Thuita is an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya. He can be reached at gourdarrow@gmail.com