CJI bats for structured national registry of former judges willing to serve in ADR
Context
Chief Justice of India has proposed creating a structured national framework, including a National Registry, to systematically utilize the expertise of retired judges in (ADR) and legal awareness. He emphasized that the post-retirement engagement of judges should be recognized as formal institutional service rather than ad hoc volunteerism, aiming to improve access to justice and reduce the burden on the formal judicial system.
Exam perspectives
The Indian Constitution contemplates the continued utility of judicial experience after retirement, explicitly through Article 128, which allows the CJI, with the President's prior consent, to request a retired Supreme Court or High Court judge to sit and act as a Judge of the Supreme Court. CJI Surya Kant's proposal for a National Registry extends this constitutional philosophy to the realm of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). Currently, the engagement of retired judges in arbitration and mediation is often unstructured and ad hoc. By institutionalizing their role through a formal registry and Memoranda of Understanding with bodies like the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs), the judiciary can harness their expertise systematically. UPSC can ask candidates to analyze the mechanisms available for tackling judicial pendency, focusing on the role of retired judges both within the formal court system (Article 128) and in ADR mechanisms.
A robust governance framework requires accessible, efficient, and affordable dispute resolution mechanisms. CJI Surya Kant highlighted that Lok Adalats, mediation, arbitration, and conciliation are not "back doors" but often the only accessible doors to justice for millions of citizens. The proposal to embed retired judges as "pre-litigation counsellors" within District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) represents a shift towards preventive jurisprudence—intercepting disputes before they "calcify into cases." This approach directly addresses the chronic governance issue of judicial pendency (with the Supreme Court currently having around 90,000 pending cases). From a UPSC perspective, this highlights the transition from a purely adversarial legal system to an inquisitive and collaborative one, making justice delivery more citizen-centric. Questions in GS-2 may focus on evaluating the effectiveness of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and the role of institutionalized ADR in governance.
The social dimension of this reform lies in enhancing 'Access to Justice', a fundamental right implicitly guaranteed under Article 21 and a Directive Principle under Article 39A (Equal justice and free legal aid). Relying on retired judges to serve as legal educators in schools, colleges, and rural communities can demystify the law and empower marginalized sections to assert their rights. The CJI noted that ADR forums deliver justice "in a language the people understand, at a pace the people can live with, and at a place the people can reach." This decentralized and simplified approach bridges the gap between the complex, often intimidating formal justice system and the common citizen. In the Mains exam, aspirants could use this as a case study for judicial innovation aimed at social empowerment and making justice equitable rather than merely procedural.
Key references
AI-generated study notes, sourced from The Hindu. Verify facts and figures with standard sources.