Top StoriesStart Physical Functioning Of Courts & Open Hearings From June 1 : BCI Chairman Writes To CJI Nilashish Chaudhary26 May 2020 7:39 PMShare This – xBar Council of India’s (BCI) Chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, has urged Chief Justice of India (CJI) SA Bobde to issue appropriate directions to all Courts to resume physical open court hearings from June 1, 2020.Claiming to have consulted with State Bar Councils and a majority of Bar Associations across the country, Mishra conveyed the reservation and grievances of advocates regarding the…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginBar Council of India’s (BCI) Chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, has urged Chief Justice of India (CJI) SA Bobde to issue appropriate directions to all Courts to resume physical open court hearings from June 1, 2020.Claiming to have consulted with State Bar Councils and a majority of Bar Associations across the country, Mishra conveyed the reservation and grievances of advocates regarding the prevalent practice of virtual hearings, through a letter dated May 26.This letter is in furtherance of a communication made by him on April 28 on the same issue. In that communication he had requested the CJI that though virtual hearings were the need of the hour, the practice should be done away with as soon as the COVID-19 lockdown is lifted. It was his claim that virtual courts are only accessible to a few lawyers, which leaves 95% of the fraternity brief-less, or without work.Reiterating his apprehensions, Mishra has pointed out that the Supreme Court, High Courts and most lower courts across the country have been functioning in a restricted manner, wherein only urgent matters are being listed before virtual courts. He has further apprised the CJI that with respect to even those matters which ought to be listed, several complaints suggest that not all requests for listing have been entertained adequately. As a result, he adds, only certain privileged Advocates are beneficiaries of virtual hearings whereas a huge majority of lawyers are left without work and therefore struggling to make ends meet. The current plan for the functioning of courts, through virtual hearings, offers no respite to these disgruntled advocates, contends the BCI Chairman.Apprising CJI Bobde of the ‘harsh reality’ of virtual hearings, Mishra thus throws light on the anguish of Advocates:-“The cases of only a few fortunate persons are being fixed, the kith and kin of only a few have earned huge money during this lockdown in almost all the High Courts. Such messages are pouring regularly in BCI.This has caused great loss to Common Advocates and there is a resentment developing among 95% of Advocates in almost all Courts.Therefore, we are bringing all these harsh facts to the knowledge of our Apex Authority. Almost same is the case with Supreme Court Advocates.”Expressing strong reservations against the Courts functioning through virtual hearings, the letter states,”Our view is that virtual court cannot displace and replace traditional courts even partly due to lack of knowledge and training in technology, lack of technological infrastructure and also due to law and procedures of dispensation of justice in trial matters, which, as we said, occupies a space of 80% in the litigation spectrum in India.”‘Litigants Unable To Get Justice Through Virtual Courts’ : Bar Council Of India To Hold Consultations On Resumption Of Physical Functioning Of Courts Invoking various features and procedures of a traditional hearing, Mishra vehemently advocates against the continued reliance on virtual Courts.”We cannot even imagine of trial court work being done in/through virtual courts proceedings. Can we think of recording of evidence in virtual courts? Exhibiting documents, confronting witnesses with documents, watching the demeanor of witnesses and, above all, ensuring that the witness is deposing without any pressure, coercion or undue influence, are some salient features of traditional court which would be impossible to achieve in virtual courts.We deeply ponder and wonder and find no plausible answer, as to why are we encouraging virtual hearings in the Supreme Court and High Courts when the system of Actual/Physical/face to face open court Hearing is fool-proof and fully successful. It is fully transparent and gives full satisfaction to all and when more than 80% of Supreme Court and High Court Lawyers are comfortable with Actual Hearings in court rooms, then why should we encourage Virtual Hearings and to think further about continuing with this system even after Lockdown.”Admitting that the COVID-19 situation will not go away anytime soon, the need to work safely around the pandemic is pressed by Mishra. Accordingly, the CJI has been asked to consider coming up with a suitable scheme, containing guidelines which would facilitate Advocates to safely appear physically in Court for open court hearings. To this end, the following suggestions have also been given:-“We could start with listing of limited number of cases, and allow only those Advocates whose matters are listed to enter court rooms/premises, and time slots for hearings may be fixed, leading to even lesser people inside court rooms/premises at a particular time slot. Waiting halls ensuring social distancing norms may be developed in the already available area. The Bar Associations/Chambers/Libraries may not be opened for general sitting of the Advocates, only those Lawyers may be allowed to enter the Bar Rooms/Chambers who have some work in the Courts.Those Advocates who wish to mention their matters may be allowed entry at a fixed time subject to showing their identity to the appropriate authorities at the entry gates of the Courts and particular time slots may be fixed for mentioning too, to be regulated by someone deputed for each of the courts which are sitting and working. All Advocates wishing to mention may be asked to wait in a hall, where social distancing may be ensured and their mentioning be regulated and after mentioning they would be requested to leave the court premises and regulators will have to ensure the same in a strict but polite manner.”Averring to those who are at greater risk to the Corona Virus, on account of age or medical health, Mishra states that virtual hearings may be considered only for them, subject to the consent of Advocates from both parties. This indulgence, he adds, may be allowed only till the time the Virus is looming large as e-courts cannot be allowed to function when normalcy is resumed.Click here to download letterRead LetterSubscribe to LiveLaw, enjoy Ad free version and other unlimited features, just INR 599 Click here to Subscribe. All payment options available.loading….Next Story
ORIN Boston’s 6 emerged winners of the Frederick Halley feature dominoes tournament held on Monday night last at Everest Cricket Club pavilion, Camp Road, Georgetown.In a fiercely contested encounter which went right down to the wire, Boston’s 6 tallied 79 games to edge out Beharry’s 6 on 77 and Halley’s 6 which ended in cellar position on 74.The game wasn’t decided until the final sitting after only one game separated the three teams, both Beharry Halley’s teams deadlocked on 63 and Boston’s 6 a mere one game away on 62.In the end, Boston’s 6 prevailed after marking 17 games in the final sitting which saw Beharry’s 6 scoring 14 and Halley’s 6 managing 12 games.Sonia Goodluck led the way for Boston’s with 17 games while John Freeman supported with 15. Skipper Boston, who played through, made 13 in his first three sittings and 14 in the other three.The top players in Beharry’s 6 were Roderick Harry with 15 games and Mark Welch who marked 14.For Halley’s 6, Edmund Sammy topped with 15 games while there were 14 and 13 games respectively for Ravi Shivnauth and Frederick Halley.The game was organised by Manniram “Packer” Shew while the trophies were sponsored by Halley.
Source: ahram.org FIFA announced late on Tuesday that it had appointed a normalization committee for the Egyptian Football Association (EFA) headed by Amr El Ganainy until the upcoming elections.The decision of the world football governing body follows the recent resignation of the EFA President Hany Abo Rida and all board members after the national team’s unceremonious exit from the African Cup of Nations in the round of 16 at home earlier in July.The resignation was followed by a visit of a FIFA mission to Cairo when the EFA was temporarily managed by its Chief Executive Sarwat Sewilam.According to a statement by FIFA, Zamalek’s former board member Amr El Ganainy will chair the temporary committee alongside Gamal Mohamed Ali as deputy chairman.Sahar Abdel Hak, Mohamed Fadl Zahran, and Ahmed Abdallah Rady are the other members of the committee.The mandate of the normalization committee will include running the daily affairs of EFA, reviewing statutes and other regulations where necessary, the statement declared.Reviewing the statutes of the EFA members and ensuring they go in line with the new EFA Statutes as well as with the FIFA Statutes and requirements are also among the tasks of El Ganainy and other members.The committee will also be responsible for organizing and conducting elections for all EFA members based on their new statutes.“As the last step, the committee to act as an electoral committee in order to organize and conduct elections of a new EFA board based on the newly aligned EFA Statutes,” the statement added.FIFA said that 31 July 2020 is the deadline of the work of the committee that also can finish the mission earlier once it fulfills all its tasks.“As the normalization committee will also act as an electoral committee, none of its members can be eligible for any of the open positions in the elections under any circumstances,” the FIFA statement concluded.