In a landmark event that underscored the shared commitment to judicial accountability, the Honourable Chief Justice of India, Dr. Dhanajaya Y Chandrachud, addressed the “Distinguished Speaker’s Forum 2024” at the Royal University of Bhutan Convention Hall this week. The forum, organized by the JSW Law Research Centre, convened over 300 attendees, including Supreme Court and High Court Justices, Judges, legal practitioners, Members of Parliament, and representatives from various sectors, creating a microcosm of Bhutan’s legal spheres.
Justice Chandrachud’s address, centring on the critical nexus between judicial legitimacy and public trust, resonated profoundly with Bhutan’s judicial introspection as outlined in the “Judiciary Strategy Plan 2022-2032”. This convergence of perspectives – from India’s top jurist and Bhutan’s strategic planning – presents a unique opportunity to examine the challenges and potential pathways for enhancing public confidence in the judiciary, particularly within Bhutan’s distinct cultural and legal context.
As we delve into the implications of this discourse, it becomes evident that the pursuit of public trust in the judiciary is not merely an aspirational goal, but a fundamental necessity for the effective functioning of a democratic society, offering Bhutan a moment to reflect on its judicial practices and consider innovative approaches that harmonize its unique ethos with globally recognized principles of judicial integrity and transparency.
Transparency in judicial proceedings is not merely about opening courtroom doors; it’s about making the entire legal process comprehensible and accessible to the average citizen. As Justice Chandrachud aptly noted, “Sunlight is not only the best disinfectant; it also begets public trust.” Bhutan’s judiciary could consider adopting measures like India’s live streaming of important constitutional cases or making judgments freely available to public. Such initiatives would not only allow Bhutanese citizens to witness and understand judicial proceedings but also act as an internal check on the functioning of courts.
The strategy plan recognized that there is lack of judicial accountability and potential corruption. The nation’s Gross National Happiness framework offers a unique approach to this challenge. By aligning judicial conduct with core national values and ensuring transparency, Bhutan can cultivate integrity that reflects its culture while meeting modern accountability standards.
Effective communication bridges the judiciary and the public. Bhutan’s strategy plan identifies a lack of public relations and communication forums, mirroring global judicial challenges. India’s technological initiatives offer valuable lessons. Implementing e-filing, hybrid hearings, and AI-enabled technologies could revolutionize Bhutanese citizens’ interaction with the legal system, making justice a tangible, accessible reality. Adapting these innovations to Bhutan’s context could significantly enhance judicial accessibility.
However, as Bhutan moves forward with these reforms, it must honour its unique constitutional journey. As Justice Chandrachud reminded us, Bhutan’s constitution bears the imprints of its culture while adopting modern principles of democratic governance. This dual foundation should shape the nation’s judicial reforms.
As Bhutan progresses, building public trust in the judiciary is essential. This trust requires ongoing effort, innovation, citizen engagement and transparency. The judiciary “must uphold principles of equity, fairness, and justice”, which are integral to Bhutanese culture and enshrined in its constitution, to foster confidence among its citizens.
In the words of Justice Chandrachud, “Not only the constitutional outcomes but the constitutional journeys matter.” The journey towards a more accountable and trusted judiciary is intimately tied to our national goals. A strong and trusted judiciary is not just about legal proceedings; it’s about upholding the values that define Bhutan as a nation.
Sonam Tshering
Lawyer, Thimphu
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are author’s own