The burden on judges in Bangladesh has reached unprecedented levels, with recent statistics revealing a staggering average of over 2,300 pending cases per judge.
Until last December, Mymensingh Land Survey Tribunal court alone accounted for more than 37,000 pending cases, echoing a similar scenario in Sherpur and Jessore Land Survey Tribunals, where two judges are tasked with handling 18,000 and 12,000 cases respectively. This overload extends nationwide, with judges in all courts facing four to five times more cases than their capacity allows.
The judiciary's backlog has soared to 43 lakh cases by December, with subordinate courts bearing the brunt at 37 lakh 30 thousand cases, while the Supreme Court grapples with approximately 6 lakh pending cases. This marks a doubling of the backlog since 2012, raising concerns about the effectiveness of the legal system.
Legal experts attribute the litigation crisis to a shortage of judges and court resources, compounded by challenges such as legal defects and difficulties in producing witnesses. Lawyers emphasize the urgent need to address these issues to alleviate the burden on litigants and expedite the trial process.
Lawyers advocate for an increase in the number of judges, citing Civil Rules and Orders guidelines that recommend a maximum of 500 cases per judge to ensure fair and timely justice delivery. The prolonged trial process not only escalates costs but also leads to the unfortunate demise of witnesses and plaintiffs, underscoring the urgency of resolving the litigation crisis.
In response to queries regarding the backlog, Law Minister Anisul Haque told Bangladesh that the government is actively addressing the challenge, with ongoing efforts to appoint new judges and construct court buildings across all districts. Haque expressed optimism about the forthcoming benefits of these measures in reducing the backlog and expediting trial proceedings.
According to the information, the caseload is increasing everywhere from the high court to the lower court. Increasing the number of judges did not help. Because the number of cases filed has increased along with the judge.
In 2008, there were seven judges in the Appellate Division. There were 6 thousand 892 pending cases. After that, the number of judges in the Appellate Division never fell below seven. At present there are eight judges in the Appellate Division. And till last December there were 26 thousand 517 pending cases.
Similarly, there were 2 lakh 93 thousand 901 pending cases in the High Court Division of the Supreme Court in 2008. At that time there were 67 judges in the High Court. After 2010, the number of judges in this department never fell below 90. But the caseload is on the rise. At present, 84 judges are serving in the High Court Division. And the number of pending cases in this department is 5 lakh 43 thousand 847.
At the time of the separation of the judiciary in November 2007, there were 301 judges in the subordinate courts. On the contrary, the pending cases were about 13 lakh. At present, out of more than 2,000 judges, about 1,800 are working at the field level, and 37 lakh 29 thousand 235 pending cases in subordinate courts.
Analyzing these data, it can be seen that there are approximately 2,300 cases against one judge in the country. But in reality the situation in many courts is worse. Some courts have more than 5 to 10 thousand cases under one judge. Again, a judge has to perform the duties of more than one court.
As a result, judges are also struggling to handle the pressure of cases. And due to this, the hearing date of many cases is fixed after six to eight months. Again, many times the date is postponed without holding the hearing on the scheduled date. And this is how the longevity is increasing.
Information obtained from various sources indicates that, the number of judges in Bangladesh is less compared to many countries in the world. 1 thousand 800 judges are working at the field level in the country with a population of 173.8 million.
In other words, a judge performs duties against an average of 96,000 people. Whereas in India there is one judge against approximately 47 thousand 619 people, in Pakistan 50 thousand, in Australia 24 thousand 300, in United States 10 thousand and in United Kingdom one judge against every 3 thousand 186 citizens.
In an event on March 1, Chief Justice Obaidul Hasan said, “There are not enough judges in Bangladesh that need to be there. A judge for 90 to 95 thousand people in the country. It is not possible to reduce the backlog of cases with so few judges. This number should be increased. Logistics support and other facilities should be increased.”
How to reduce the entanglement: When asked about the way to resolve the entanglement of cases, the Additional District and Sessions Judge of Kushtia, Muhammad Tajul Islam, told Bangladesh Pratidin, highlighting his judicial experience, “Mainly, the entanglement of cases increases due to two reasons. One is the infrastructural problem and the other is the legal complexity. Ajalas and judge crisis is one of the infrastructural problems.”
“At present, about 100 judges are being appointed annually. However, this number should be increased. Considering the number of pending cases, it is necessary to appoint at least 5,000 judges within two to three years. The Law Commission has also given such a recommendation.”
“To reduce the confusion, minor problems should be solved outside the court. Criminal law also calls for increasing the use of alternative dispute resolution or ADR procedures. At the same time, investigation time should be reduced, judges and those concerned should be properly trained. Apart from this, if a new thana or upazila is created, the post of a judge should be created for the thana or upazila associated with UNO, AC land, this judge also opined,” Judge Tajul Islam said.
In relation to the removal of legal complications in solving the case, he said, “There is an opportunity in our law to waste some time in the judicial process. These must be removed first. For example, issuing notices or summons takes a lot of time. Notice or summons can be issued by electronic or digital method instead of conventional method. It will save a lot of time. Apart from this, in addition to fixing the deadline for filing the reply, the plaintiff or the defendant should discourage repeated time applications.”
Tajul Islam also praised the amendments to the Evidence Act to include provisions for the use of digital devices and taking evidence through video conferencing. The judge said, "The new evidence law will help to reduce the trial time. But it has to be followed properly.”
Law Commission recommendations: The Law Commission submitted a report in August last year recommending speedy disposal of cases and reducing congestion. The report identifies five main causes of confusion in criminal and civil cases. They are: insufficient judges, insufficient appointment of judges in specialized courts, false and harassing cases, lack of manpower and poor infrastructure.
Other reasons are: non-equitable distribution of cases, administrative laxity, insufficient allocation of funds, lack of accountability of officials, lack of sincerity of lawyers, poor case management, lack of preservation of land-related documents, practical complications in settling cases in conventional judicial system, absence of witnesses, Lack of continuous hearing, lack of proper training, irregularity in supply of duplicates, summoning of documents by High Court, revision in High Court against orders in concerned cases, protracted process in disposal of litigation, stay of High Court etc.
The Law Commission also made several recommendations to reduce false and harassing cases. These include: False, fruitless and harassing cases should be discouraged while filing cases. In case of accepting a complaint case, the maintainability of the case must be confirmed by verifying the complaint of the applicant (plaintiff). In case of false case in a criminal case, the plaintiff must be prosecuted under Section 211 of the Criminal Code and speedy punishment must be ensured. This will reduce the tendency of filing false cases and reduce the number of cases.
According to the report of the commission, if at least 5000 judges are appointed by creating posts at various levels on an urgent basis, it will be possible to reduce the number of cases to a bearable level. However, considering the limited capacity of the state, it is not possible to appoint so many judges in a short period of time. Again, if so many judges are appointed together, their quality may also deteriorate. However, the report suggested that at least 500 judges should be appointed consistently every year.
If effective and necessary measures are not taken to resolve the backlog of cases to uphold the rule of law in digital Bangladesh, the trust of the common people in the judicial system will be lost. The Law Commission is of the opinion that it is essential to take holistic constructive steps in resolving the litigation rather than looking at one or more problems in isolation and their remedies, it said.
(The report was published on print and online versions of The Bangladesh Pratidin on April May 5 and rewritten in English by Tanvir Raihan)
