I am happy to have attended a lecture on “Appearing In Virtual Mode - Technology and Indian Courts in the 21st Century” by #JusticeMuralidhar (Retired) on #ConstitutionDay 26-Nov-2023 (celebrating the day constitution was adapted) organized by #Daksh. The slide is from his presentation depicting the comprehensive view of digital reforms in India judiciary. Justice Muralidhar was instrumental in ushering in various #digitalInitiatives at the courts, in addition to being known as a liberal judge who stands by the people. The Judge informed the audience that the digital initiatives at the courts has been driven mostly by the Judges and that India was fortunate to have had a few Judges who were fairly hands-on students of the technology. It was fascinating to learn that as late as 2005, India courts worked primarily with typewriters and papers, while Covid triggered vast changes. The #phase3vision document (https://bit.ly/48arolO), contemplates that litigants can avail of the court system from anywhere by efiling/virtual hearing. I posed a humble question: “The vision document has no section on #RTI (Right to Information). The notion of RTI is very different in a digital world, compared to when the law was passed in 2001 requiring then government provide copies of paper records they maintain. My understanding of the design of constitution is it is a restraint on the powers (of authorities). So does the recording and processing of data in government computers. Why is #SupremeCourt not starting this process given that the expectation is that judiciary will lead the executive and perhaps the legislature also to record and make their data processible.” The Learned Judge acknowledged it is a good question and that there is no reference to RTI in phase 3 vision document. However, the Judge pointed to the values espoused by the vision document and the broad conviction for transparency that should lend to consideration of the same. The vision document in fact goes as far as suggesting that the court portal will report for every court counts of disposals and backlog. Though positive, this is clearly a far cry from recording the entire workflow data and/or sharing the same with public as a data set. Indeed the crucial interests of people/litigants in terms of (A) adjournment practice; and (B) listing of cases, are not contemplated to be addressed, for which there would be transparency and accountability with comprehensive workflow data. With that background, am curious if any thinks either of the below is a overstatement: P1. #Constitution is an instrument for achieving higher goals. 'Data sets' helps reach several of those goals that the constitution alone fails. Therefore, the same standard of care exercised in design of constitution should be exercised in embracing data sets for governance; and P2. There is no better start point than #judiciary putting forth its workflow data as a publicly accessible data set.
Well said, Naren Thappeta. The importance of ease of access to data is as critical as the existence of data itself. Transparent data availability will naturally lead to accountability, and therefore, bring efficiency. While reporting on disposals and backlog is useful, the true transparency requires digital availability of data sets. Every well run organization tracks their internal workflows and operational execution with such data, and that’s how they identify opportunities for better execution. This is an opportunity not yet capitalised by any arm of government, and maybe judiciary can lead by example.
VP Eng at HPE
1yAgree with Naren on his points on RTI in the context of Digitisation and the fact that it would be extremely useful and efficient if it is available for use by the common people on the digital internet both in RTI Requests and Responses. I also feel that Digitisation and easy retrieval and search of records in this area will bring out a huge transparency.