What should have been done long back is being done now by the Supreme Court of India. Anyway, it is better late than never. Filibustering by the lawyers at the time of the arguments, mostly in high profile and media’s attention-catching cases has become almost a norm. I have been watching many top-notch lawyers arguing their cases for days together, sometimes making the judges sleepy and drowsy. Some of the advocates start reading page after page from books and the decided judgments to buttress their points. Judges also give them the indulgence to hear for hours. They make millions for the presentation of their cases even if it is witless and without any sparks.
Many centuries ago, Shakespeare had said ‘Brevity is the soul of wit’ but in our courts, that is hardly followed either by advocates or by the judges. The judgments are padded by hundreds of pages to make them unnecessarily bulky. However, a ray of hope was seen yesterday when the Supreme Court directed the lawyers to adopt the practice of confining their oral arguments to 30 minutes and submissions on the law to three pages. The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and R Subhash Reddy asked the lawyers to change their habits. This will go a long way in the speedy disposal of the knotty cases. This observation by the Supreme Court came on a petition filed by Yatin Narendra Oza, a veteran lawyer from Gujarat, who was stripped of the ‘senior advocate’ designation following contempt proceedings initiated against him by the Gujarat High Court.
The decisions and observations of the Supreme Court of India are mostly ‘in rem’ and not ‘in personem’. The difference between the two is that while the former is applicable to one and all, the latter remains confined to the litigating persons or parties. The Supreme Court will do a great service to the people if the proceedings of all constitutional courts are ‘live streamed’ for the sake of transparency.
It will be helpful not only for the lawyers and litigants but to the vast numbers of teachers and law students. There are many colleges, who have been charging hefty fees from students just to show them the proceedings of some courts for a few hours in a year.