Disruption in Legal System!

 

The other day, I was leafing through online & came across to one of the presidential debates wherein one contender Ms. Fiorina contended for a Three page taxation code instead of 73,000 pages in US, which was rebutted by everyone else. There’s another debate going on, including in India, of abolishing taxes for good, as it creates load on only few honest tax payers. I’m sailing on the similar ship as a common man wherein to see the entire legal system being minimalistic but unparalleled. AI is an option, & of course is in use at many places, BUT, until General AI is built & planted everywhere with full Autonomy, it’s unworkable. Till then, it has to be done through human intervention.

 

The example “Never hide anything from your doctor or legal representative” is fundamentally wrong as I elucidated in my earlier blog, as, there’s no intermediary representative present between you & doctor (considering doctor being honest) & everything is executed on the basis of knowledge of Doctor, Whereas, between a judge & a plaintiff/petitioner/defendant/respondent/witness, everything depends on the guidance & arguments made by the legal representative mostly at that moment of time. My motto is to reduce the procedural & council part of the entire legal structure. Impossible! But what’s the harm defining another theoretical concept amidst already existing millions.

 

So why not if in every Tribunal or Court, & for every subject specific case, big or small, there should be a bench of 3-5 hon’ble judges. The preliminary procedural part of filing, directing & advising, alike chamber practice, to any plaintiff/appellant/respondent/witness, would depend on the legal representative, as done presently. BUT, then onwards, would be taken forward by that bench only (included everything), sans jury (if exists anywhere), via going through filed documents, or, through direct interaction with plaintiff/defendant/petitioner/respondent/witness and further, without presence of any intermediary, and furthermore decree would be passed in terms of majority, applicable only for reviewing, until question of law is the issue. 

 

What it would achieve is, the decree would depend on the direct interaction between Judges - Victims/Accused/Witnesses themselves & NOT on the arguments alone by the intermediary, at that moment of time. So, just alike Doctor-Patient relationship. Of course, as we expect the knowledge of any Doctor to be in perfection, similar shalt be in case of Bench too.

 

Simple! 😇  

© Pranav Chaturvedi