Timely justice a right, not a privilege

The Malaysian legal system, rooted in the British adversarial model, diverges significantly from the inquisitorial approach embraced by major religions. This distinction stems from philosophy. Inquisitorial traditions focus on seeking truth and community responsibility, while adversarial systems emphasize procedure and advocacy.

One major reason behind Malaysia's extensive court case backlogs is this philosophical divergence. The Commonwealth, including Malaysia, has yet to acknowledge the benefits of transitioning from adversarial to inquisitorial procedures inherited from colonial rule. These outdated practices remain the primary cause of prolonged delays.

In contrast, India's Panchayat system—where village elders employ inquisitorial methods—delivers swift and equitable justice. My personal experience in Thopputhurai, Tamil Nadu, formed the basis for my University‑cum‑Court Annexed Arbitration (UCCA) model, aimed at addressing case backlogs. Litigants and the public yearn for immediate resolutions to their disputes and anticipate swift judgments.

However, they are met with lengthy and convoluted processes culminating in extensive written judgments from trial and appellate courts. My observations as both a lawyer and judge indicate that the adversarial system prioritizes convincing narratives over genuine justice, often rewarding those who manipulate the truth. Litigants frequently resort to "economical" truth-telling, securing victories through persuasive storytelling rather than factual accuracy.

Judges, lacking subject‑matter expertise, act as arbiters of competing narratives. This scenario often prioritizes courtroom rhetoric driven by financial motives, perpetuating Commonwealth court backlogs. The UCCA model presents a solution. By appointing subject‑matter experts of integrity—selected by disputing parties—rhetorical excess can be curtailed and backlogs resolved.

This approach would restore credibility to the legal process, returning justice to timely, fair, and accessible. With divine intervention, the UCCA path may revive the legal profession’s purpose, reminding practitioners that their duty is to uphold justice as a sacred trust, not to perpetuate delay or profit from complexity. In doing so, the profession can rediscover its moral compass, aligning with the values of major religions that emphasize truth, compassion, and accountability.

Through my three published articles, "Is the British litigation system a failure?", "Justice not a privilege, costs not a weapon", and "Academia can rescue democracy’s spoilt child", I aim to provide a comprehensive solution to challenges across the Commonwealth, restoring public faith in the judiciary while saving governments billions of dollars.

Timely justice is not merely a procedural expectation; it is an unwritten constitutional right. Legal professionals and the judiciary are constitutionally obligated to deliver justice promptly. Failure to do so risks public perception of them as mere scam artists, not guardians of justice. Having studied this crisis for over two decades, I firmly conclude that the legal industry and judiciary have fallen short of their constitutional duty, eroding public trust and undermining the legitimacy of courts.

Chief Justices across the Commonwealth should unite to address the backlog crisis and pursue resolution. Such gatherings must move beyond rhetoric and commit to structural reform. The UCCA model provides an opportunity for them to overhaul their court systems, dismantle the culture of delay, restore faith in the judiciary, and reaffirm the profession’s higher calling. The views expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.