Transforming Dispute Resolution: Who Holds the Key?
We can no longer imagine standing in a queue for 30 minutes to withdraw money from a bank, but we accept waiting for years to seek justice. Why this should not be the case anymore.
In July 2023, a friend of mine learnt her 3-year-old son was molested by the teacher’s husband at the playschool. She immediately pulled him out of school and warned every other parent. But she didn't file an FIR because she understood the process would go on for a few years and require her son to testify multiple times. She was terrified that filing a case would make her son relive the process. In January 2024, we heard another case was reported against the same person in the school. The parents, again, left the school and focused on helping their child heal. The school continues to run, and the husband actively plays a role in the school. He also runs a business that picks and takes children from their homes to school.
Millions of us face injustices daily within our homes, workplaces, businesses and communities. Some of these disputes are more grave than others. Either way, the process of resolving them is expensive, uncertain and harrowing. So, most of us decide not to approach the police or courts to seek justice (for ourselves and, in doing so, for others). Some of us file cases to use the process itself as a punishment against another. A small minority of us take recourse to the courts. We endure the long and unpredictable process, hoping to see the light at the end of the tunnel. We all lack choices to access justice outside of courts to help us heal and restore.
It is odd that we, as a society, have accepted this reality.
We can no longer imagine standing in a queue for 30 minutes to withdraw money from a bank, but we accept waiting for years to seek justice. We have come to expect updates on our AADHAR or passport applications on our mobile phones, but we are okay with having to go to the court website and go through captchas to search for and track updates on our cases. We expect to have the choice to access private or public healthcare but don't question the lack of exit options to access justice, especially for civil and contractual disputes.
Why is this our reality?
My experience tells me it is not because we cannot reimagine how disputes can be resolved.
The real barrier that perpetuates this reality is our mindsets. The harsh truth is we have been deeply conditioned into believing we cannot shape our experience of resolving disputes. Within courts and outside. Its opaque and insular design alienates us in every possible way. Unlike the executive, we citizens have no role in determining who administers court processes and holding them accountable. We don't have a mechanism to give feedback or complain about the process. Shrouded with an aura of expertise and complexity, we feel unqualified even to enter the playground because we don't know the rules, precedents and practices of the game. We believe a better leader or ‘expert’ exists out there who knows exactly what and how it must be done.
But this perception is so far from the reality.
There is no such expert or a better leader. If the problem persists in our world, it is a fair indicator that this mythical leader has not yet manifested.
“We are the people we have been waiting for.”-Unknown
Most transformations we have witnessed in other fields have been shaped by a small group of citizens who felt responsible for the problem. Take, for example, the field of banking. Its greatest transformations in the past few decades, in micro-finance and fin-tech, were not led by bankers but by leaders like Mohammad Yunus, Chandrashekar Ghosh, Vijay Shekar Sharma, and so many others who just invested in learning the user's needs. Likewise, Indian Kanoon, which radically democratised access to law by making available judgments from nearly all courts and tribunals for free, was founded by software engineer Sushant Sinha. There are countless such examples.
These non-experts worked quietly and tirelessly, deepening their understanding of the problem. Bringing in a fresh perspective to see why the current approach is failing and what can be done better. Their frustration with what exists takes them to the edge of knowing, allowing them to innovate. They challenge basic assumptions that experts rarely do and ask new questions: Is collateral necessary for a loan? What are other ways we can secure repayment? What if we can use social capital as a security? They enjoy experimenting and problem-solving for hurdles faced. Along their journey, they find and grow their tribe. They co-opt champions and peers with whom they can make mistakes and grow.
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Margaret Mead
It is not going to be different in the field of dispute resolution. When we started Agami a few years ago, I remember a retired Supreme Court judge asking: “I tried doing so much of this and could not do it. What makes you think you can?”
I don’t know if I can. But I do believe ‘we’ are a good bet.
‘We’, active citizens or ‘outsiders’, can bring fresh perspectives to transform the dispute resolution experience. We can learn, discover pain points, challenge assumptions about the process, and reframe goals. We can draw in actors from diverse disciplines and jurisdictions to learn from the best. We can convene, consult, design, build, test, and experiment with possibilities.
The opportunity to make this count is bigger than ever before. The e-courts Phase III vision document, which was approved in September 2023, commits to the court's opening to participation. Rather than focusing on developing all the solutions itself, it sets a vision towards ‘ecosystem participation’ in which the judiciary will enable solutions to emerge rapidly from the ecosystem of innovators. This policy has a budget of INR 7000 crores approved for it!
As active citizens, we must roll up our sleeves, innovate, and create all we believe is possible because we are the makers of our dispute-resolution experience. We must not be bound by our identities but defined by the possibilities we can create.