Upon reviewing the Judiciary System and Practices in the country from 2012 to 2016, the Royal Audit Authority (RAA) found that inadequacies continue in the legal and institutional framework, human resources, operational areas and case management besides other areas.
The RAA carried out the review to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of the Judiciary in delivering fair, just and equitable justices. The review report was made available to the public today.
Amongst many shortcomings, RAA highlighted that the registry sections of 15 Dzongkhag Courts and 13 Dungkhag Courts are functioning without dedicated lawyers, undermining the internal administration of the courts and accessibility of services. To this, RAA recommends considering appointing Drangpon Rabjams from persons having served as an Advocate.
The review report also found that there is no system of declaring a conflict of interest by Drangpons and Bench Clerks while settling the cases despite the Code of Conduct and other laws’ requirements. The RAA suggests making declaring a conflict of interest mandatory.
In addition, there is no standard to assess the performance of the courts, the timeframe to dispose of the cases, a fixed number of summons orders to issue and a fixed number of rebuttals in trials thus leading to inconsistent practices across courts. The review recommends the Judiciary to establish a National Standard.
Furthermore, the RAA found the case hearing schedules in lower courts constantly changes based on preferences and convenience of the Bench Clerks, prosecuting agencies and litigants hampering the fairness and timely delivery of justice. Thus, the review proposes to formalise scheduling the case hearings in courts through a collaborative approach with all relevant parties involved.
The review also found that all the judgements of civil cases are not effectively enforced. There is no responsible institution to enforce the judgements of civil cases. Thus, the report recommends instituting a system to enforce the judgements of civil cases.
And currently, the judgments passed by the Courts are restricted from public access. But the Civil and Criminal Procedure Code requires courts to make judgements available on public domains including libraries. Therefore, the review recommends to enhance the accessibility of judgements to the public for transparency and to facilitate legal researches.
Sonam Pem
