Delays in the Court System Institute - Research Paper Example

Case Timings (Name) (University) Chapter One Introduction to the Study Delays in the court system institute among the major judicial management difficulties faced in the globe (Miller, 2013). Looking at various countries, it is relatively straightforward to deduce that most of these delays are similar in many nations. The causes of these delays are such as guilty pleas that are submitted late, adjournments, over listing and the failure to appear in court as mandated. Studies on case management have been researched to cope with case timings. This however affects a lot of change that the system fails to correspond with. The swiftness of the litigation process has per custom been controlled by legal practitioners, leaving the court to act in response to their timing. All citizens in any country have the right to have their cases processed suitably, with competence and without unnecessary delay. The fact that delays in the justice system have been ongoing for a long time implies that the problem is no understood well and that the mitigations provided have not been at par with the development of the problems (Ratner, 2016). Long court waiting periods greatly undermine the functioning of court systems in UAE. The court system in United Arab Emirates is fairly intricate given its basis on Islamic Law and the ever present reservations that it faces. One major characteristic of jurisdiction practiced in United Arab Emirates is the fairness and the amicable way in which the cases are processed and handled. There are barely any evident adversarial battles witnessed in the United Arab Emirates Law system. The precision over the court is usually done by one single judge with only the parties involved required to attend the proceedings. Inasmuch as this aspect has guaranteed privacy in the proceedings of United Arab Emirates cases, it is equally argued that the system lacks transparency. The aspect of privacy is further compounded by the fact that proceedings are not published or exposed to the public for viewing. The timeframe of litigation in the United Arab Emirates court system takes an average of between one to three years depending on the dispute and the amount of controversy. (Husssein & Burns, 2015) Inasmuch as there has been extensive concern over the long waiting periods in Dubai courts, the need to balance between the times allocated for cases and the quality of the case remains a dilemma to the justice system. Practically, the two factors conflict among themselves in that should one factor get acted upon with competence then the other fails in merit. Judges are usually advised to take their time in making and giving judgment but the advice unfortunately causes the clash between time and quality. Background of the Problem The court system constitutes of processes and tasks that follow a specific sequence. The activities therein are linked and require cooperation among departments to flow smoothly. Cases are required to be managed and coordinated through different stakeholders. The linkage of tasks and their management poses some difficulty in the system and times the process fails to pull through due to delays from one department or miscommunication (Miller, 2013). Given the sensitivity of justice, the repercussions can be substantially dire. The efficiency of the judicial management system has been long thought to rely on the availability of resources. It is however important to note that the management of information and the appreciation of time as a resource goes a long way to ensure that judicial activities are handled appropriately. In as much as the various levels of court systems have attempted to improve their timelines, the challenge of the period it takes for cases to be heard still remains a challenges in the court systems of the United Arab Emirates. The delay in court procedures stems from many factors and circumstances given that the process is reliant on protocol, waiting periods and corresponding departments and sectors to work effectively. The local legal culture and the characters of lawyers who are unfortunately used to the slow system compounds to the delays caused in courts. The law practiced in United Arab Emirates is founded on Islamic Law, otherwise referred to as Shari ‘a (Baamir, 2016). The law practiced is somewhat complex and different from that of other countries. However, the difficulties faced are relatively similar to that of other nations. Despite the recognition that delays are an issue in court systems, there has not been an understanding as to where to pinpoint the problem hence making the solutions given ineffective. Among the explanations given for the failure to improve on delays in court include the absence of enough resources, little funding, and the complex nature of cases in the system. Additionally, the practices in the court and the unchanging working conditions have been explained as being in the midst of the problems of delay (Ratner, 2016). The primary factors that contribute to the research concerning improvement in the justice system include programs advocated by the government that aim to increase productivity in the public sector by providing improved performance. The reality in Dubai is similar to that of other countries. The pressure to amplify effectiveness in the court system has increased due to advanced spread of knowledge. More individuals are aware of their rights and how systems should work. The spread of technology is another factor that has increased awareness among citizens. As such the demand for better services has evidently increased. To improve their performance, the court system is burdened with the pressure to change from its usual routine. This present research aims to study the courts in Dubai and determine the causes of long waiting case periods and suggest improvements. The research seeks to gain a new perspective to the problem identified. The next section discusses the history of case timings in Dubai courts. History of case timings in Dubai court The cases in Dubai were previously settled in a relatively short time under the Shari ‘a which follows the rules of the Koran and Sunna (Gemmel, 2015). Sharia is founded on concepts that advocate for justice and equity and its purpose is to provide to the intent of the parties in a competent and swift manner (Baamir, 2016). In the current decade, the timing accorded to disputes and cases has unfortunately been less than amicable. As a result of globalization, Dubai has become the proverbial economic village wherein the world engages in financial and profitable activities. This has brought about the increase in commercial disputes. In addition, the fact that most disputes go past arbitration and into the court room means that the number of cases being handled has increased to a considerable level. The case of Dubai has become dire such that the citizens are losing faith in the ability of the judicial system to assist them effectively. The preceding section discusses related studies on the delays in courts and views three regions in contrast with Dubai and relatively the whole of the United Arab Emirates. Case timings related Research Below is a brief relation of research done on the timing of cases in other countries in comparison to Dubai. Singapore has been rated as first among 142 countries due to its competent legal framework in the litigation of cases (Hsieh, 2013). The performance of the justice system has been compounded by the relevant parties who work effectively to ensure the high performance of the legal system. In the recent past Singapore suffered from delays in the procession of cases and congestion of cases. A major cause for the delays in the cases in Singapore was due to the increased number of commercial of cases and the intricacy of the same cases. Due to the slow changing pace of the justice system, the country struggled with coping with the changes occurring in the system. The cases piled up and their due dates for hearing went up to five years. With these problems in their judicial system, the country made choices to improve on the court system by decongesting and reducing the delay of cases. This was mostly done through the management of cases, the managements of change and reforms in the court system. The measures taken up by Singapore to address delays in the judicial system included diversionary tools which were meant to prevent disputes from getting to the litigation stage. The country additionally facilitates enough resources for the disputes that reach the court in order to competently streamline the processes of the court. Singapore has also invested in procedures and methods to monitor and control the quality and the efficiency of the court system. In this regard therefore, Singapore as a country can justly be said to have addressed the problem of delayed periods of cases in the judicial system through effective implementation of solutions that are practical. In the United Kingdom, the custom way of solving disputes and cases involved two divisions. One system was held in Westminster while the other was executed by following the King wherever he went and presenting claims. When the fixed court in Westminster was gotten rid of, many legal practitioners had to travel to where the King was making the process burdensome. The process additionally was a cause of delay on the cases. It is hence this issue that brought forth the idea of having a fixed place for the execution of judicial procedures (Jackson, 2015). The delays caused in the judicial system in the UK have been an imperative barrier to the effective operation of the judicial system (Jackson, 2015). The delays have also created huge and unnecessary costs and intricacy with the procedures. The complexity of cases and procedures brings about unwanted costs and delay the cases. The sophistication, expense and long waiting periods weaken the legal practitioners’ interest in the competent access to justice form the system. Furthermore, the result has been to decrease the faith of the public in the United Kingdom in the justice system. In its attempt to correct the cases of lengthy timelines on the cases of the United Kingdom, there have been inquiries and research on ways to find a modicum in the issue of delays in court. The litigants in the system have accurately pointed out that undue delay reduces the quality of the evidence and the proper handling of the case. This observation has been equally related to having speed litigation which might undermine evidence as well and overlook the imperative aspects of the case. There has been a call to execute reforms only if they are consistent with the promotion of public interest and the provision of quality judicial service. In the regard of delays, the judicial system in the UK faces a similar problem with Dubai and its environs on the long waiting periods that plight the court rooms of the judicial systems. The length of trials in the United States of America has been named as among the most chronic judicial problems in the justice system (Neubauer & Fradella, 2015). It has been continuously implied in the region that individuals are reluctant to go court due to the delays and expenses involved. The growth of the judicial system has been slow with an increase in the number of regulations to the system. There has been the need to increase the number of judges, though non life tenured, so as to manage the increased number of cases and their complexity. The aspect of diversionary measures has been insisted upon such as Singapore to assist in dealing with the congestion of cases. One of these includes the settlement of the dispute away from the courts and just between the parties involved. The federal Justice system in the US adopted several measures such as following several principles in case management to help manage delay (Feeley, 2013). There has been the encouraged use of technology to increase productivity in court as well. Despite the challenges witnessed from the use of technology such as expensive equipment and their running, the measure still proves to be remarkable. Compared to Dubai, the problem of delays in the United States is not as dire as in the former. The US has additionally implemented some measures used in Singapore to improve its justice system especially with regards to the case timings. Problem Statement According to Ratner (2016), the cause of delays in the court system are practically harmful and are sometimes based on a calculated strategy be parties involved. The assessment given on the Court delays deprive citizens of their basic judicial rights. The lapse in time is prone to cause deterioration and loss of and thus affecting the outcome of the case when there is an eventual trial. The ultimate blow caused by court delays is the loss of belief of the judicial system by the citizens of a country. The congestion and slow pace of court cases are a real threat to the United Arab Emirates justice system. Delays make provision of bail harder for those who have to wait. It additionally lets the guilty walk free thus placing the society in dire danger. Due to these reasons, the pressure among the courts is piled up making the litigants try to solve cases quickly without being keen thus heaping up on the wrongs taking place. It is evident that the Emirati are rapidly losing confidence in the justice system. The fact that delays in the justice system have been ongoing for a long time implies that the problem is no understood well and that the mitigations provided have not been at par with the development of the problems. Purpose Statement The purpose of this study is to examine the long waiting periods experienced in the UAE, using Dubai courts as the case for the study. The original motivation behind the topic is the necessity to understand the real reason for court delays, why improvements are not working and other solutions that can be implemented. The continuous problem of the delays in the courts in Dubai is a great implication of the increasing pressure in the system and the need to implement processes that improve their functioning. Changes concerning improvement in the court systems are certainly exigent given the paradoxical beliefs and cultures of the court room and the judicial system at large. The acceptance of the changes may yet be the major problem thus the need to develop a method that ensures all parties are comfortable with change and that they incorporate it. Research Question and Hypotheses   1. What are the causes of delays in cases in the United Arab Emirates court system? 2. What recent improvements have been made to reduce the waiting period of cases in the United Arab Emirates? 3. Which factors hamper the execution of improvements on the waiting period of cases in the United Arab Emirates? 4. What enhancements can be made to solve case delays in the United Arab Emirates? Theoretical Framework This study relates its implication to the theory of change. The theory of change purports that ideas can be introduced to a program or a setting to suggest interventions that can bring about required change (Lerner, 2013). In its ultimate goal, the theory of change insists that an idea should be followed through until the implementation of the set decisions. In the process of change all the procedures to effect the change should be followed to ensure that the work done is not a simple experiment, but rather a logical sequence that builds to the best practices in the judicial system. The change should additionally be aligned to the purpose of the court system. The other motive engineered by the theory of change is that it serves as an avenue for the follow up and monitoring of the processes of the court and the effectiveness of change. The degree to which the intended activities result to the desired outcome is measured together with the present impacts. In the theory of change however, ne major setback is the acceptance of change. Many individuals get enthusiastic over the idea of change but when the real change is presented then they are not ready to embrace it. Naturally, human beings are creatures of habit. These habitual characteristics have traversed from individual behavior to the running of organizations and government. The reluctance to interfere with the present state of affairs is a common pattern seen among individuals. Being an organization, the court system is no different in the challenges of change as any other organization. The system is nevertheless more sensitive to change due to the nature of the justice system. Advocacy for change in a court system is usually as a result of circumstances viewed as unfair and unjust (Warner, et al, 2014). As such the court system is required to be the most flexible to change and implementation of dynamic justice. It is conversely unfortunate that changes in the court system are slow and sometimes hampered by major influences such as political authority. This study will thus base on the theory of change to explain case timings and their improvement in United Arab Emirates. Nature of the Study This research will basically be exploratory with the intent of finding out the causes of delayed court cases in the United Arab Emirates and the improvements that have been implemented so far. The research will further seek to identify why some improvements in the judicial system have not been effective. A social survey will be conducted using questionnaires to collect information from the field. The study is quantitative nature given that the data will be analyzed using statistical references. Assumptions The study assumes that participants will give honest answers given the provision of anonymity. Based on the fact that the exercise will be a voluntary participation on the part of the respondents and the confidentiality assured, it is thus safe to assume that the answers will be truthful. The participants will further be encouraged to subject their opinions on the topic under study and given assurances that answers are neither right nor wrong. Scope and Delimitations This study will narrow down its research to the case delays in the Dubai court. Despite the fact the justice system is plagued with accusations of being inconsistent and its failure in transparency, this research chose to address only the delay of cases based on the fact of increased delays and the complaints from citizens. Limitations   The major limitation anticipated in this study is the nature of the court system itself where information is very private thus preventing the complete access of information to be used or the study. The second limitation expected is biased answers from the representatives of the legal system given that they might not want to paint their proceedings in a bad light. Time itself is furthermore an anticipated limitation. The time limit accorded for the research and the information to be garnered might prove to be difficult. The court system has protocols that and procedures that involve time thus requiring enough time to gather the data required. Significance of the Study The purpose of this study is to examine the long waiting periods experienced in the UAE, using Dubai courts as the case for the study. First, the study will aid in exposing the delays experienced in courts thus bringing about other destructive factors that undermine the justice system of UAE. This exposure is significant in that it will help make the courts improve on their proceedings and further implement the current expectations. The study will additionally suggest ways to improve and manage time in the UAE courts thus making the platform for the representatives of law easier to handle. This study will create a basis for other research hence an avenue to promote future studies on the same. Based on the exposure warranted from this study, fields on management of case times might come up thus creating more academic and employment platforms. Summary Delays in the court system institute among the major judicial management difficulties faced in the globe. The need to balance between the times allocated for cases and the quality of the case remains a dilemma to the justice system in Dubai. The ultimate blow caused by court delays is the loss of belief of the judicial system by the citizens of a country. The congestion and slow pace of court cases are a real threat to the United Arab Emirates justice system. This chapter discusses the introduction and background to the study on long waiting periods on cases in Dubai. It further relates case timings in other countries with in UAE, more particularly in Dubai. The problem and purpose statement are identified in this chapter and the theoretical framework is further explained. The chapter also identifies the nature, assumptions, scope and limitations to the study and gives significance to the study as well. References Baamir, A. Y. (2016). Shari’a Law in Commercial and Banking Arbitration: Law and Practice in Saudi Arabia. Routledge. Feeley, M. M. (2013). Court reform on trial: Why simple solutions fail. Quid Pro Books. Gemmell, A. J. (2015). Commercial Arbitration in the Islamic Middle East. Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 5(1). Husein, A., & Burns, J. G. (2015). Choice of Forum in Contracts with Saudi Arabian Counterparties: An Analysis of the DIFC Common Law Courts from a Saudi Arabian Perspective. The International Lawyer, 48(3). Jackson, R. M. (2015). The machinery of justice in England. Cambridge University Press. Lerner, M. J., & Lerner, S. C. (Eds.). (2013). The justice motive in social behavior: Adapting to times of scarcity and change. Springer Science & Business Media. Miller, A. R. (2013). Simplified Pleading, Meaningful Days in Court, and Trials on the Merits: Reflections on the Deformation of Federal Procedure. NYUL Rev., 88, 286. Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2015). America's courts and the criminal justice system. Cengage Learning. Ratner, M. (2016). Judicial Ethical Integrity: Challenges and Solutions. Hastings International and Comparative Law Review, 39(1). Warner, B., Hum, T., Harrison, N., & Hilton, K. (2014). Maximising value through strategic advocacy. In UCL [University College London] International Conference on Access to Justice and Legal Services, June 19 (Vol. 20). Read More