assignment on justice delayed is justice denied

William E. Gladstone: 'Justice delayed is justice denied.'

Justice delayed is justice denied.

In the realm of law, the quote "Justice delayed is justice denied," popularized by William E. Gladstone, carries a profound meaning and holds tremendous importance. At its most straightforward interpretation, the quote suggests that any delay in delivering justice can have the same detrimental effect as a denial of justice itself. In essence, it emphasizes the significance of timely and efficient justice systems to ensuring fair outcomes and upholding the rule of law.However, let us delve deeper into this concept by introducing an unexpected philosophical notion – the existence of multiple dimensions of time. Just as science fiction has explored the idea of parallel universes or alternate timelines, we can view justice through the prism of multiple temporal dimensions. This departure from traditional thinking allows for an intriguing exploration of how justice delayed or disrupted on one dimension may still find its resolution in another.Imagine a scenario where a crime occurs in one temporal dimension but evades immediate detection or justice. Time then branches off into countless dimensions, each with its own story and distinct outcomes. In some dimensions, justice indeed gets delayed, as cases languish in bureaucratic red tape or face other unforeseen obstacles. However, in other dimensions of time, justice may be swift and delivered without delay. Thus, within the context of multiple temporal dimensions, the quote takes on a new dimension itself, leaving room for the possibility that justice may ultimately prevail.This philosophical concept allows us to reflect not only on the importance of timeliness but also on the complexity of justice. It prompts us to question whether justice delayed truly equates to justice denied in the grander scheme of existence. While the immediate consequences of delayed justice can be detrimental for individuals or societies, this perspective suggests that justice may find its rightful place regardless of any perceived delays.Nevertheless, it is crucial to stress that this philosophical exploration should not be seen as rendering urgency and efficiency in delivering justice as irrelevant. A fair and effective justice system remains essential in safeguarding the rights of individuals and maintaining social order. Timely resolutions uphold public trust, prevent the erosion of confidence, and ensure that individuals can move forward with their lives.Moreover, the quote also serves as a reminder of the need for continuous improvement in legal systems worldwide. By acknowledging the potential for delays and their potential consequences, policymakers can work towards refining legal processes, streamlining bureaucracy, and minimizing unnecessary delays. Enhancing the accessibility, efficiency, and quality of justice systems can undoubtedly contribute to a fairer society.In conclusion, the quote "Justice delayed is justice denied" encapsulates the fundamental principle that any delay in delivering justice can undermine its very essence. However, by introducing the concept of multiple temporal dimensions, we are prompted to reflect more deeply on the nature of justice and its eventual realization. This exploration underscores the importance of effective legal systems and the need for continual improvements to ensure timely justice for all. As we navigate the intricacies of legal processes, we must remember that our pursuit of justice should remain unwavering, regardless of the twists and turns of time.

Margaret Thatcher: 'Europe was created by history. America was created by philosophy.'

Kim jong-un: 'our party maintains the improvement of the people's living conditions as the most important of the numerous state affairs.'.

The Aspen Institute

0 Comments Add Your Comment

Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied

August 28, 2020 • Aspen Global Leadership Network

“Justice delayed is justice denied” is an ancient legal concept, but it’s been cast in stark relief in the last few months. The new pressures of the current pandemic have heightened the reality of inequality and injustice. Systems that most of the world contently ignored have reached a breaking point—or, perhaps, a boiling point. Now is the time that leaders must act to rectify generations of discriminatory systems.

This year, the 2020 Resnick Aspen Action Forum took Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s call to action: “the fierce urgency of now,” as its theme. Four Aspen Global Leadership Network Fellows from across different Fellowships joined in conversation for its third plenary session . In this series of Spark Talk influenced conversations, Tina Fernandez , a Pahara-Aspen Education Fellow and the founding CEO of Achieve Atlanta , and James Abraham , a Kamalnayan Bajaj Fellow and the founder and director of Solar Arise , moderated the Fellows as they discussed their experiences confronting injustice in the world and their perspectives on what we owe to each other through four lenses: income inequality, gender parity, action against climate change, and racial equity.

Income Inequality

Many people are familiar with the reality of income inequality, but they may not understand how it operates on a global scale. Henry Crown Fellow Kenneth Ofori-Atta , Ghana’s Minister for Finance and Economic Planning, tells the story from an African point of view, where richer nations are “sucking money out of the continent.”

There is, he said, an unofficial “Africa premium,” in which lenders impose a higher cost of capital on African ventures—a surcharge that is completely out of line with historic repayment rates. This has led to undercapitalization and underinvestment, and COVID-19 has only made things worse. While the aggregate economy has been moving briskly for the previous two decades, the costs of the pandemic have erased those gains; GDPs are estimated to be down by 15 percent. The world’s largest economies, putting their reserve currencies to use, have “broken all the rules of classical economics” to save themselves, but this is a luxury that African countries do not have.

The inequalities run deeper than fiat and finance, however. Ofori-Atta argues that there is a troubling devaluing of tangible goods and resources in global trade.

“The fundamental equity is the raw material, but somehow we have upended this to make intellectual capital to be more profitable than that,” he said. He cites the example of cocoa farmers in Ghana; they feed the world’s craving for chocolate and “get snake bites and cutlass wounds” in the process, but reap only a small percentage from the $100 billion international chocolate industry. All that value-add doesn’t leave much for the actual producers. To rebuild Africa’s economy, we need to center and value the producers first.

Gender Parity

“We have enough data and compelling business cases and human rights cases that show gender parity has a fundamental bearing on whether or not economies and societies thrive,” said Alexandra Kissling , a Fellow from the Central America Leadership Initiative and the president of the Vital Network in Costa Rica. “Women have a huge impact on growth and competitiveness and readiness.” Unfortunately, she said, “we live in a world in which people have unconscious biases based on male and female stereotypes.”

Societies have harnessed the differences between men and women to build systems of injustice, rather than using those differences to transform society. The math is simple: “When we invest in women, we improve the world. We are half of the world’s available talent.”

Kissling’s experiences working with women who face limited access to opportunities have led her to rethink how we should approach the problem—and her answer is in proximity. “If you want to help a community to transform itself… go and be with them, understand how they live and become empathic, proximate, and then design by putting human needs at the center of the equation.”

Jianyu Zhang is a Fellow in the China Fellowship Program and the managing director of the China Program for the Environmental Defense Fund . He thinks about climate change in two dimensions. The first is spatial, in which the rich countries of the north produce the carbon that disproportionately affects the countries of the south. The second is temporal. Humanity, in aggregate, is drawing all the benefits of fossil fuels right now, “but the consequence is more to be seen for the generations to come, so we’re leaving this issue to our children, our grandchildren, and even for future generations.”

There is a metaphor in the pandemic. “Right now, every country is fighting the pandemic by themselves,” Zhang said. “I think we already seen the shortfall of having a global alliance of fighting back together, quarantine-wise and vaccine-wise. And I think that’s just really a preview of the fight that we’re having with climate change.” He believes we cannot succeed if we’re not united.

Racial Equity

“One of the things that’s so pernicious about race is that it operates sort of at an automatic level,” said Stephen DeBerry , a Henry Crown Fellow and the managing partner of Silicon Valley’s Bronze Venture Fund . “It’s something that we’ve been socialized to think or act around, and it’s not something that we’re necessarily being conscious of or intentional about all the time.” This has led to inequitable systems designed around things like the fiction of race—something DeBerry, as a scholar of anthropology, is acutely aware.

But there are other aspects of our current system that create inequity because they are also based on wrong or outdated ideas.

The systems of our everyday lives, he says, were built largely in the context of the industrial era, which had a lot of zero-sum thinking. “It also happened to be, particularly in the United States, the era of legal segregation,” he noted. “And so the fundamental logic that we use to think about systems and the way that things flow starts from a place of assuming that there will be an us-versus-them.”

DeBerry believes we will see a better future, one in which technology eases our workloads, and societal strife. “I think if we do take on this challenge of thinking more inclusively, that’s where we’re headed,” he said. “We’re not headed to a place of conflict and constraint and a lack of resources—we’re headed to a place of ease.”

View the entire discussion, recorded live but distanced, and scroll through the page for other plenaries from this year’s 2020 Resnick Aspen Action Forum .

assignment on justice delayed is justice denied

Cover of JGP Lessons form the Field Report, 2023

November 6, 2023 Equal Measure

August 10, 2023 Kilhah St Fort

The best of the Institute, right in your inbox.

Breaking News

Justice delayed or justice denied?

Williams v. Louisiana ended with both a bang and a whimper. Flagged as a “ petition of the day ” back in April, Williams’ petition sought to have the U.S. Supreme Court review the Louisiana courts’ decision to leave in place his conviction for first-degree murder.

Williams claimed, among other things, that in obtaining his conviction, prosecutors had violated their obligations under Brady v. Maryland to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense. Although the prosecutors had provided the defense with summaries of the evidence (some of which were accurate, others not), they had not provided the evidence itself. The state courts, in rejecting Williams’ Brady claim, maintained that the undisclosed evidence would not have affected the outcome of Williams’ trial. The evidence included statements that Williams could not have committed the murder and that the state’s eyewitness probably did. In determining that the evidence would not have affected the outcome of Williams’ trial, the state courts refused to factor into consideration evidence that Williams was severely intellectually disabled. As his petition detailed, Williams, at the time of the crime, was an intellectually disabled 16-year-old child who “still sucked his thumb, urinated himself on an ordinary basis, and regularly ate dirt and paper” and “was hospitalized for extreme lead poisoning, institutionalized multiple times, and placed in special education.” Williams’ intellectual disability was potentially relevant, he maintained, because it undermined the force of his confession, which he gave after being arrested and questioned by police officers. After the confession, Williams told officers he was “ready to go home and lay down,” arguably underscoring a concern the Supreme Court itself had flagged almost a decade ago “that a person who is intellectually disabled carries a heightened risk of unwittingly confess[ing] to a crime that he did not commit.”

Williams’ case, including the cert petition, received a fair amount of coverage. Ian Samuel and I discussed it on this episode of First Mondays , in which we openly mused about how Louisiana could possibly think that the prosecutors’ behavior in the case complied with Brady . We were not alone in wondering that; a remarkable brief by the Georgetown Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection on behalf of 44 former career prosecutors and Department of Justice officials argued that the prosecutors’ conduct in the case had not complied with Brady . The authors of the brief also underscored their argument in a recent op-ed .

After two decades, Louisiana finally saw the light, or at least some of it. On Tuesday, Corey Williams walked out of Angola prison after finalizing a settlement with the state prosecutors in which, in exchange for pleading guilty to manslaughter and obstruction of justice, his first-degree murder conviction and sentence were vacated, and the state agreed to his release. (The obstruction-of-justice charge stems from Williams’ false confession.)

The Williams case raises important questions about the Supreme Court’s docket and litigants’ control over it (particularly some categories of litigants). It’s also reasonable to wonder how the parties arrived at this settlement after contesting it for 20 years. On Louisiana’s side, it’s notable that Caddo Parish, the jurisdiction in which Williams was convicted, recently got a new District Attorney , James E. Stewart Sr., whose 2015 election made him Caddo’s first black district attorney. It’s possible that other DAs wouldn’t have made a deal with Williams, and instead would have stuck with what had been Louisiana’s position for the last two decades. Or Louisiana may have just finally seen the writing on the wall; the agreement goes so far as to say that the DA recognizes that Williams had a “colorable” constitutional claim. The color may have deepened in light of Williams’ first-rate petition for certiorari by the MacArthur Justice Center and Promise of Justice Initiative, particularly when layered on top of the amicus brief and the extensive press coverage of the case. Louisiana may also have thought twice about going to the Supreme Court with another Brady case that might cause a justice to ask pointedly, as Justice Kagan did in 2011 , why the state had not just conceded error. (Lyle Denniston described the argument in that other Brady case out of Louisiana, Smith v. Cain , as a “disaster at the lectern.”) Or Louisiana may not have wanted to risk an opinion that expanded states’ Brady obligations in light of the alarming facts of Williams’ case. We will probably never know.

Easier to understand is why Williams agreed to a deal in which he admitted to a crime he has, for decades, maintained he did not commit. Pro Publica did a study on cases in which defendants are offered those kinds of deals; many take them, since certainly and immediately getting out of prison is worth an awful lot. For Williams, the prospect of getting out of prison at 36 was probably too great an opportunity to pass up. The aftermath of one of the Supreme Court’s cases, Schlup v. Delo , provides an anecdote that might help to explain why: In Schlup , the court found that the defendant was “probably … innocent” of the crime he was convicted of, a finding that allowed a court to reach the merits of the defendant’s constitutional claim. After a court later decided that claim and vacated his conviction in light of it, the state elected to retry him. The defendant ultimately pled guilty in order to avoid the death penalty, even though the Supreme Court had found it more likely than not that he did not commit the crime. Williams, at least, got to go free, even though his guilty plea relinquished any hope of obtaining compensation from the state for his wrongful incarceration. Reflecting that reality, Williams’ attorneys have set up a support fund for him, in order to get him off the ground.

Settling cases and eliminating the prospect of certiorari (or the prospect of an unfavorable decision after certiorari) is nothing new. It happened in a pair of Fair Housing Act cases the court attempted to decide before ultimately holding, contrary to many people’s expectations, that disparate-impact claims are cognizable under the act. It has also happened in several bankruptcy cases, including one this past term . Given prosecutors’ leverage and ability to extract concessions from people who are incarcerated (sometimes wrongfully), it’s no surprise that it happens in criminal cases, too.

Posted in Cases in the Pipeline , What's Happening Now

Cases: Williams v. Louisiana

Recommended Citation: Leah Litman, Justice delayed or justice denied? , SCOTUSblog (May. 23, 2018, 6:55 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/justice-delayed-or-justice-denied/

Privacy Overview

About SAFLII
Terms of Use

South Africa: North West High Court, Mafikeng

Lelaka v s (caf10/2014) [2014] zanwhc 34 (10 october 2014).

Subscriber Services
For Authors
Publications
Archaeology
Art & Architecture
Bilingual dictionaries
Classical studies
Encyclopedias
English Dictionaries and Thesauri
Language reference
Linguistics
Media studies
Medicine and health
Names studies
Performing arts
Science and technology
Social sciences
Society and culture
Overview Pages
Subject Reference
English Dictionaries
Bilingual Dictionaries

Edited by: John Simpson and Jennifer Speake

Find at OUP.com
Google Preview
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Justice delayed is justice denied

The idea of a link between delay and denial of justice is an old one (cf. 1215 Magna Carta To ...

Access to the complete content on Oxford Reference requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.

Please subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.

For questions on access or troubleshooting, please check our FAQs , and if you can''t find the answer there, please contact us .

Oxford University Press

PRINTED FROM OXFORD REFERENCE (www.oxfordreference.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2023. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single entry from a reference work in OR for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice ).

date: 15 May 2024

Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy
Legal Notice
Accessibility
[66.249.64.20|81.177.182.136]
81.177.182.136

Character limit 500 /500

Sustainability
Client Login

Built Environment
Energy & Natural Resources
Financial Services
Government & Public Sector
Technology, Media & Communications

Legal Services

Commercial, Regulatory & Data
Dispute Resolution
Employment and Pensions
Finance and Restructuring
Real Estate
Tax & Private Capital
India Group

Legal Operations

Contracts Management
Cyber Incident Services
Legal Analytics
Legal Operations & Consulting
Litigation and Investigations

Business Services

Claims Management & Adjusting
Corporate Governance & Compliance
DWF Chambers
Regulatory Consulting
Class Actions
Economic Crime & Fraud Hub
Sustainable Business & ESG
Data Protection and Cyber Security
News and Insights
Reports and Publications
News and Press
DWF onDemand
Brave New Law
DWF Link: Business leaders of the future
Consumer Duty Hub
Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

'Justice Delayed is Justice Denied'

We know from the Supreme Court decision in Primor plc v. Stokes Kennedy Crowley [1996] 2 I.R. 459 and later decisions that a court has inherent jurisdiction to strike out a claim for want of prosecution where the delay is both inordinate and inexcusable and where it is in the interests of justice that that the case should be dismissed.

A delay that causes significant prejudice to a defendant and creates a real risk of an unfair trial is another important factor that will be considered by a court.

While traditionally the courts were slow to grant orders to strike out proceedings for delay recent decisions illustrate an increased willingness to strike out in appropriate circumstances.

The decision of the High Court in McGarry –v- McGuinness and Ors [2018] IEHC 350 provides another example of the consequences for plaintiffs for failing to progress proceedings in a timely fashion.

The plaintiff was employed as a school teacher in Co. Donegal. In October 1998 he was suspended by the Board of Management (the "Board") for refusing to teach a class. His employment was terminated in 2002. He issued Judicial Review proceedings seeking declaratory relief from the Board, the Minister for Education and Science, Ireland and the Attorney General. The High Court refused to grant leave. In September 2003 he issued High Court proceedings seeking damages and declaratory relief against the same entities. A statement of claim was delivered in December 2003. The Board delivered a defence in February 2005 and a defence was delivered on behalf of the other defendants in July 2007. After several years of inaction the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Intention to Proceed in March 2017. In July and October 2017 two motions to strike out the proceedings for delay were issued on behalf of the defendants.

The court focused on 3 significant periods of delay in the proceedings as follows: the period between the accrual of the cause of action in 1998 and the issue of proceedings in 2003, the period between the delivery of the defences and the Notice of Intention to Proceed in November 2012 and the delay that occurred thereafter.

The court noted that the plaintiff did not adequately explain the "… significant pre-commencement delay" other than seeking to largely attribute this to his efforts to avoid litigation and difficulties progressing matters with his then solicitor. Mr Justice O'Connor refused to accept these arguments and stated the plaintiff "… has offered no justifiable explanation as to why he did not retain new solicitors ". In addition, he noted that Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights places "…an onus on litigants to recognise the necessity for the administration of justice within a reasonable time…"

As regards the second period of delay, it was submitted by the plaintiff that he understood that he could not set the matter down for trial until a defence was received on behalf of all defendants. The court rejected this as an explanation for the delay.

The plaintiff sought to justify the third period of delay (between November 2012 and March 2017) by referring to difficulties he was experiencing with his former solicitor. Again, the court refused to accept this as a justification for the delay.

The court considered the issue of prejudice and accepted that the memories of witnesses relating to events from 1998 to 2002 have faded and there was a risk of an unfair trial. The court referred to material sought by the plaintiff which relate to a period dating back 26 years as an example of the challenges now faced by the defendants.

Mr Justice O'Connor was particularly concerned with the examples of actual prejudice suffered by the defendants which included the retirement of a majority of members of the then Board, the death of essential witnesses and the inability of the remaining members of the Board to defend the proceedings. In concluding his judgement, he held, "… it is clear that he is responsible whether directly or vicariously for significant delays in the prosecution of these proceedings…I am satisfied that the presumed and specific prejudice arising for the defendants in allowing these proceedings to proceed to trial is overwhelmingly in favour of the defendants as opposed to allowing the plaintiff air and substantiate his various allegations and grievances at this late stage. In those circumstances, I direct and order that the proceedings be struck out".

The decision of Mr Justice O'Connor is particularly critical of the plaintiff for his failure to provide reasonable justification for the delays that had occurred in the proceedings. A Plaintiff must be in a position to provide reasonable justification for delays when they are opposing an application to strike out otherwise their claim may be dismissed.

Related Sectors

Related services.

Professional Indemnity

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied | Essay | Expansion & Meaning

March 10, 2020 by Study Mentor 5 Comments

Table of Contents

Meaning of “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied”

The saying ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ is quite famous and used often. It has a deep and significant meaning which reflects true situations. It is a legal maxim which has historic origins.

Justice delayed is justice denied is a maxim which means that even if remedy against an illegal injury caused is available but not executed in due time, such a situation is comparable to having no remedy at all.

When justice is not provided to the injured party in timely manner, and is prolonged to an insufferable amount of time, it is a form of injustice to the injured party. Apart from the opportunity to get justice, it is also necessary for justice and remedy to be provided in a speedy manner.

There are many theories as to the origin of the phrase. One account suggests that the phrase ‘justice delayed is justice denied finds its roots in the Pirkei Avot, which is the teachings passed down by the Rabbis.

The phrase was also used in the famous charter Magna Carta. As long ago as 1215 CE, the phrase was reflected in clause 40 of the Magna Carta which reads as “To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.” Therefore, the meaningful idea of the phrase is centuries old.

This popular and relevant saying has been used by various famous personalities to highlight various situations. It was first used by William E. Gladstone. William E. Gladstone was one of the most prominent politicians of Britain. Later, he became the Prime Minister of the country.

He said this quote to highlight the problem of delay in justice. Later, the phrase was also used by Martin Luther King Jr . , the pioneer of black rights and equality in America. In his famous ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail’, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote that “justice too long delayed is justice denied”.

He used this phrase to highlight the injustice and racism faced by the black community in America by the government and the ruling white community. Such a situation of injustice had been going on for far too long, leading to denial of justice to the one who had suffered.

Thus, he wrote this to highlight the bleak situation if gross violation of human rights of the black people which had been going on for a long time, which in a way, also amounted to denial of justice.

Indian Context

On the 15th of August, 1947 , India finally got its freedom. It had been denied justice for far too long. India fought back, peacefully, and gained independence from the British colonialists who had no choice but to give in to the will of millions of Indians who provided a united front. But, the British had left India poor and struggling.

The justice system that India has today is a product of the British rule in India. The judiciary system of India is based on the British model. But the important fact is, this model is quite old and outdated. It is because of this outdated system of courts organisation in India, that there is a delay in providing of justice.

And when that delay is prolonged for far too long, it amounts to the denial of justice itself. Is such a system healthy for the largest and perhaps the most vibrant democracy in the world?

Let’s take the example of case of a motor car accident. In this accident, the victim has suffered huge loss because of the negligence of the defendant. Due to the accident, the victim is no longer able to provide to her family. As she was the sole bread earner of the family, the family is left destitute and devastated.

The case is pending before the court. Due to delays, backlogs, fees, etc., the case is tried for 10 years. Only after period of ten years is compensation provided to the victim. Is the compensation of any use now? The victim and his family suffered for 10 years.

The children could not get proper education and the family became destitute. Such a situation is not reversible. Justice, in this case, is denied due to the delay in providing it.

In fact, the Indian Judiciary is so infamous for delays that people prefer not to seek court remedy if they can avoid it. Is such a mindset good? This would ultimately result in people having no faith in their own Judiciary. Such a situation would be quite dangerous.

Then, why are there so many delays in the delivery of judgments? In India, there are about 10,000 courts. We have one Supreme Court which is the highest branch of Judiciary in India, twenty- one High Courts in various states, 3150 District Courts, one in each District of India and about 3825 Magisterial courts divided into First class and Second Class.

Apart from this, we also have various tribunals, Lok Adalat’s, etc. According to a recent survey, there are more than 34 Lakh cases which are pending in High Courts and more than 4 crore cases that are pending in District Courts. This is the situation of the Indian Judiciary. Many of these cases will take years to finally resolve.

Apart from the number of courts, the number of judges is also inadequate. With a population of over a billion, India needs a lot of judges for speedy disposal of cases.

But, this has not been done in India. For example, in Mumbai which is the economic capital of India, there are 50 magisterial courts, serving more than 12 million people. Therefore, a court serves a population of over 2 lakhs! Such is the situation in just one city.

The scenario in all of India is just as bleak. According to a survey, a population of about 10 lakh is server by a mere number of 12 judges in India.

Not only this, many judges that are appointed are incompetent and ineffective. If lawyers give proper advice and judges give proper judgement, the problem of delay will be solved.

Lawyers are also a cause of delay in providing justice. Some keep on extending the case to extort money from their client while others keep delaying the dates of hearing to harass the other party of the case.

In some cases, the accused is kept in prison till her trial is on- going. If after a lot of delay, it is finally proved that the accused is in fact not guilty, will it not be injustice? She spent years rotting away in prison when she was not even guilty.

Because of delay in providing justice, her life is over. Other delays are also caused by corrupt officials and judges. Judges are appointed not by the Judiciary but by the Executive. The party in power appoints judges who favour them, which leads to corruption and mal- practices.

Then, what can be done? To make sure there is no delay, the number of courts and judges should be increased. The mechanism to file a case should be simplified and made less costly. The judges should be appointed according to stringent requirements and guidelines. This would only be a starting step. There are many other measures that need to be taken.

Dr. Cyrus Das rightly said that, “Justice is a consumer product and must therefore meet the test of confidence, reliability and dependability like any other product if it is to survive market scrutiny. It exists for the citizenry, at whose service only the system of justice must work” Thus, delay in justice cannot be tolerated.

Reader Interactions

March 8, 2020 at 9:27 pm

Thanks for this!! You helped me a lot for my assignment

March 8, 2020 at 9:32 pm

Thanks for this!! You helped me a lot for my assignment. Thank you very much

March 10, 2020 at 9:45 pm

Happy to hear

March 28, 2020 at 7:19 am

Justice delayed is justice denied means far more than the sentence written and the objective act of getting justice through accountability and consequence. Justice is more importantly a measurement of the value among any human being which is inter-dependent of she/he deserving to have justice. Justice is also the fundamental right to safety, which branches into a human rights issue which can implicate the outcome from associated new interpretations, responses, and outlooks integrated into one’s actions/experiences. The core principles of self dignity, equality, and safety is evolved and intertwined into the meaning of justice. Justice denied is similar and correlated with justice delayed because a delay in time strengthens such development of the devaluation and the insecurity in a person’s, population, or aggregate’s experience in life. Prompt justice is imperative which resembles our social justice principles that we are expected to adhere to in principles and society.

February 10, 2021 at 8:53 pm

Top Trending Essays in March 2021

Essay on Pollution
Essay on my School
Summer Season
My favourite teacher
World heritage day quotes
my family speech
importance of trees essay
autobiography of a pen
honesty is the best policy essay
essay on building a great india
my favourite book essay
essay on caa
my favourite player
autobiography of a river
farewell speech for class 10 by class 9
essay my favourite teacher 200 words
internet influence on kids essay
my favourite cartoon character

Brilliantly

Content & links.

Verified by Sur.ly

Essay for Students

Essay for Class 1 to 5 Students

Scholarships for Students

Class 1 Students Scholarship
Class 2 Students Scholarship
Class 3 Students Scholarship
Class 4 Students Scholarship
Class 5 students Scholarship
Class 6 Students Scholarship
Class 7 students Scholarship
Class 8 Students Scholarship
Class 9 Students Scholarship
Class 10 Students Scholarship
Class 11 Students Scholarship
Class 12 Students Scholarship

STAY CONNECTED

About Study Today
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions

Scholarships

Apj Abdul Kalam Scholarship
Ashirwad Scholarship
Bihar Scholarship
Canara Bank Scholarship
Colgate Scholarship
Dr Ambedkar Scholarship
E District Scholarship
Epass Karnataka Scholarship
Fair And Lovely Scholarship
Floridas John Mckay Scholarship
Inspire Scholarship
Jio Scholarship
Karnataka Minority Scholarship
Lic Scholarship
Maulana Azad Scholarship
Medhavi Scholarship
Minority Scholarship
Moma Scholarship
Mp Scholarship
Muslim Minority Scholarship
Nsp Scholarship
Oasis Scholarship
Obc Scholarship
Odisha Scholarship
Pfms Scholarship
Post Matric Scholarship
Pre Matric Scholarship
Prerana Scholarship
Prime Minister Scholarship
Rajasthan Scholarship
Santoor Scholarship
Sitaram Jindal Scholarship
Ssp Scholarship
Swami Vivekananda Scholarship
Ts Epass Scholarship
Up Scholarship
Vidhyasaarathi Scholarship
Wbmdfc Scholarship
West Bengal Minority Scholarship
Click Here Now!!

Mobile Number

Have you Burn Crackers this Diwali ? Yes No

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied Essay for Students and Children in 1000+ Words

Here you will read Essay on Justice Delayed is Justice Denied Essay for Students and Children in 1000+ Words. This includes meany of this phrase and demerits of delayed justice.

Table of Contents

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied Essay (1000+ words)

For modern civilization, justice is one of the functional parts. According to the state of affairs in the Indian judiciary and alarming, there are more than 3 crores cases pending in our country. The necessary step should be taken to maintain justice unless people lose faith in the justice delivery system.

To solve all those cases, it will take around 300 years. There are multiple backlogs of cases in many states of India . From a report in January 2015, the Supreme Court has a total of 62,794 pending cases.

At the end of 2013 A.D, about 44.5 lakhs cases are pending in 24 high courts and 2.6 crores cases in other lower courts. All these cases include civil and criminal cases.

People are relying on the courts to get justice. But at this rate, it is very hard to achieve. As per the survey, Allahabad (Prayagraj) has the highest pendency of cases with 10, 43,395. Out of this case, criminal cases are 3, 81,615.

The Meaning of This Phrase

This idiom is put forward by William E Gladstone, in the late 1800s. He was a former British Statesman and Prime Minister. At the passage of time, the meaning of this phrase has been spoken in many different ways.

The phrase ‘Justice delayed is Justice Denied’ means within a certain time the justice is not carried out, then after some time even if the justice is served but it is not justice as in the exact period of time justice was not served.

This phrase is actually a very charming saying. Sometimes it is difficult to understand its meaning. Justice is everyone’s right. Justice should be served within a specific time. The system of justice has the genuine worth of the judicial rights of these civilians. We can name justice as the guardian of civil rights and the shield of innocence.

Martin Luther King had quoted a statement that ‘Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.’ Justice should be impartial, cheap, and speedy when it serves a genuine judiciary system.

The idiom ‘Justice delayed is Justice Denied’ has huge importance. If someone is intentionally delaying something as important as justice, then justice is denied, and due to such ignorance, the culprit can escape easily.

The True Judgment

Knowing the truth and not doing anything is the biggest crime. In India, there are many cases hanging in the courts, and the law is not strong enough to solve them all within the limited time.

People, who are seeking for justice, have to face lots of ups and downs in this path. The case may be a civil one or a criminal one, it doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is justice. Without justice, it is impossible to gain the trust of people on the jurisdiction system.

Those who have filed their cases and are waiting eagerly for the outcome but can’t receive in time, is not justice. In history, we all know about the method of the judgment of kings. There were no delays in their judgments.

The kings had enough power to punish the culprits and give justice to the people. We must have noticed in our society about these unpleasant situations. The people of society always find them guilty and punish them at once.

When justice gets delayed, the criminal can escape. He/she can prove in the court that he or she is innocent by removing all the pieces of evidence or anything that can happen.

The lawyer that the criminal has hired can prove that his or her client is not guilty. This will be the worst scenario that a criminal can escape easily due to the weak and delayed judgment.

In this democratic country, people are looking for clean and genuine justice. It can help people keep their faith in the jurisdiction system.

Demerits of Delayed Justice

Do you ever know why justice is deferred? The investigation which is running by the police to put the criminal behind bars delays the process of justice. As the investigation is going on, it is impossible to keep them as a criminal.

When the whole procedure of investigation is accomplished with proofs, the police will drag the criminal to the court. After that, many law-and-order duties are there to maintain the formalities.

Negligence of investigation from the police also causes a delay in justice. The phrase ‘Justice delayed is Justice Denied’ is completely applicable here. Sometimes, the police are making the delay in filling the charge sheets.

Even if the charge sheet is deposited at the court after some time, it is still a long process to take the case on the file. After that, the court will communicate with the clients and culprits with lawyers from both sides on a sanctioned date.

There are no special courts to take immediate action against the most insane crimes such as murder, rape, burglary. These courts are exclusively for such kinds of crimes. They must be set up with the supremacies to take cognizance of felonies directly. After finding the culprit, they must conduct a trial on a day-to-day basis.

But sadly, our jurisdiction does not have this kind of facility to punish the culprit. The time is short for the victim’s family to get justice in such kind of slowest jurisdiction procedure. Also, in our country, the courts have to face too much litigation from the Government side as many of the cases are against the department of the government.

10 Lines about Justice delayed is Justice Denied

The time taken by the jurisdiction to give justice is completely dissatisfactory.
Sometimes, the delayed decision from the courts helps the culprit to escape from justice.
The family of the victims suffers a lot due to delayed justice.
The investigation procedure makes the judgment more delayed sometimes.
In the time of the kings, there were no delays in getting justice.
Justice has to be served to the victims so that the people can rely on the jurisdiction system.
Police and their investigation play a huge role in the time of justice.
The laws and orders should be stricter to get justice in time.
Special courts should be set up for immediate action against serious crimes.
The procedure to put the culprits behind bars should be conducted in an enhanced way.

The idiom ’Justice Delayed is Justice Denied’ states that an irrational adjournment in justice management. The statement explains the unacceptable denial of justice. The main reason for delayed justice in our country is the lack of a satisfactory number of judges.

This has a huge impact on the delay of justice and the jurisdiction of India. We hope that the system may change to something different on a day that can bring peace and justice to everyone.

1 thought on “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied Essay for Students and Children in 1000+ Words”

This essay is good. In the essey some places the word jurisdiction is used. But in those places the word judicial system should be replaced.

Is Justice Delayed Really Justice?

By Leigh Ann Davis, Program Manager, Justice Initiatives

If you had been in prison since 1987 for a crime you didn’t do – missing nearly three decades of your life – and then were released and had charges dismissed, would you believe you had received justice? I would not.

While attending The Arc’s national convention in Indianapolis this month, I received news that so many of us had been waiting for: charges against Richard Lapointe, a man with intellectual disability who had been in prison since 1987 until April of this year for a rape and murder he did not commit, were dismissed and he was finally a free man! After a lengthy, coercive interview with police, Lapointe falsely confessed to the crime, which was committed against his then-wife’s grandmother. Since then, his legal team and advocates (including advocates within The Arc at the local, state and national levels) have been fighting for his case to be reconsidered because of his intellectual disability.

In the spring, the Connecticut state Supreme Court raised concerns about the circumstances of the interrogation and the truthfulness of the alleged confessions, and ordered that he be released or given a new trial. Then prosecutors agreed not to pursue the means to keep him in prison while they decided whether to challenge the state Supreme Court decision. Richard lived in an unbearable stage of limbo – until last Friday, when charges were formally dropped.

“Freedom is when I can walk down the street and wave to somebody and not worry that, that they’re gonna think I’m trying to be trouble,” Lapointe said in the Hartford Courant, June 15, 2015

The decades of advocacy it took to right this monumental wrong was thanks to dedicated advocates who never gave up hope that Richard would one day be a free man. Robert Perske founded The Friends of Richard Lapointe more than 20 years ago when, during Lapointe’s first week in court, he noticed that not one person was sitting on Richard’s side of the courtroom – except Perske. By the next Monday morning, some 30 people sat behind Richard in court thanks to Perske’s quick and persuasive advocacy work. Since that time, many have joined the cause and The Friends of Richard Lapointe was born. Perske is a legendary giant in the field of false confessions of people with intellectual disabilities. He is also a respected author, advocate and long-time supporter of The Arc. He compiled a list of people with intellectual disabilities who gave false confessions in order to document just how often false confessions are coerced out of people with intellectual disabilities, and to show how devastating the outcome can be. Those accused of crimes they did not commit often face the greatest injustice of all, some losing their lives when coerced into giving false confessions. Since 1983, over 60 people with intellectual disabilities have been executed based on false confessions. Lapointe, who became one of Perske’s closest friends throughout this ordeal, was on Perske’s list – until last Friday.

Too many people with intellectual disability are trapped in situations similar to Richard’s, or become involved in the criminal justice system because their disability was never noticed, seriously considered or accommodated. To address this injustice, The Arc received funding from the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Bureau of Justice Assistance to create the National Center on Criminal Justice and Disability (NCCJD) two years ago, the first national effort of its kind to bring together both victim and suspect/offender issues involving people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) under one roof. NCCJD is a national clearinghouse for research, information, evaluation, training and technical assistance for criminal justice and disability professionals and other advocates that will build their capacity to better identify and meet the needs of people with IDD, whose disability often goes unrecognized, and who are overrepresented in the nation’s criminal justice system.

Thanks to a recent continuation grant from DOJ, NCCJD will be able to continue building bridges between the worlds of disability and criminal justice. The work is incredibly important, and every day I know I am making a difference. I see how far chapters will go to support the cause of justice in their states and local communities. But it’s going to take an entire systemic shift to make sure that there are no more Richards behind bars for a day, let alone decades.

You can be a part of the solution, starting today. Join NCCJD’s mission to begin finding solutions to the problems that plague our criminal justice system. Together, we can:

Refuse to accept that this is how it as to be.
Refuse to believe that because a person has no advocate in his or her life, that person has to fight alone in their struggle to find justice.
Refuse to ignore the countless number of cases like Richard’s or the cracks in the system that lead to blatant violation of human rights.

There are many ways to get involved, whether it’s something as simple as following NCCJD on Facebook to stay updated on current issues, listening to archived webinars, adding resources to the state-by-state map, or creating a Disability Response Team and offering training to criminal justice professionals right where you live. Every action, big or small, has a ripple effect that can change the tide toward freedom and justice. Let NCCJD support you in changing the tide in your community, one case and one Richard at a time.

Sign Up for Email Updates

Newsletters, free resources, events, advocacy, and more

First Name *
Last Name *
Zip Code * ZIP Code

Join The Arc >

Donate >

Take Action >

Our Mission & Values
Our History
Position Statements
Board and Staff
Access, Equity, & Inclusion at The Arc
Press Center
Financials & Reporting
Working at The Arc
Policy & Advocacy
Civil Rights
Direct Support Professionals
Employment, Training, & Wages
Grassroots Advocacy
Health Care
Legal Advocacy
Long Term Supports & Services
Public Policy Goals
Paid Family & Medical Leave
Social Security & Income Maintenance

Our Initiatives

OUR INITIATIVES
Criminal Justice
Future Planning
Volunteering
Get Involved
Get Resources
Take Action
National Conference of Executives
Chapter Portal
Find a Chapter

Your Vote has Power

Will you pledge to vote this November?

Justice too long delayed is justice denied. — Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

I have a deep understanding of my history because I know who I come from. My mother is African American, and my father is Haitian. The Haitian people fought against their enslavers, the French, and won their independence. African Americans fought, too, although the history of slave revolts in the United States is often muted. Most Africans who came to the Americas during the transatlantic slave route died, their bodies were thrown overboard, and their histories were erased. The small percentage of Black people who made it to the Americas were sold to plantations without regard to family or tribe and children were often ripped away from their mother’s love and protection and sold to the highest bidder.

Somehow, we survived.

Maybe it is because of the injustice I see so often displayed in the media or maybe it’s because it is Black History Month, but every day I go out into the world with the weight of my ancestors’ struggle for freedom sitting on my shoulders . I pick up my morning iced latte, go to work, and give my best in every aspect of my life because I know I have a greater purpose. My ancestors went through inhumane abuses so that I can have freedom and the right to justice.

I work at the city of Fort Lauderdale and my mission is to prevent and remedy unlawful employment discrimination and advance equal opportunity for all in the workplace. I believe I have found my calling. I oversee the Office of Professional Standards, investigate employee discrimination claims, and aim to instill a framework for DEI in our organization. There is a lot of work to be done but I am hopeful and excited for the future.

Lately, I have been thinking about Dr. Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail. In his letter, he voiced his concern over the plight of historically marginalized people and those denied their basic civil rights. He mentioned that they were tired of hearing the word “wait.” The line from King’s Letter from Birmingham Jail that stuck with me the most was “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

I work carefully but I believe in solving claims of discrimination or harm expeditiously. Others may not like the pace at which I move, but again we are tired of waiting for justice.

I used to teach tenth grade world history and my students would tell me stories of how they would go home to a dark street because they had no streetlights in their neighborhood. Their stories stirred an intense desire in me to change the world in which we live.

I thought I could make the world a better place, one community at a time, so I went back to my alma mater, earned a master’s in public administration, and aimed to find a job in local government because local government directly affects people and their day-to-day lives. The work that I do could not have been done without the lives of the women and men who have fought to pave the way for me. We mustn’t forget our history and how it directly affects our lives today.

On August 28, 1963, civil rights leaders marched to Washington, D.C., demanding justice and human rights. The protest saw more than 200,000 brave men and women take to the streets for freedom and the right to exist. During the march, King delivered his "I Have a Dream Speech" to an eager crowd. This was a momentous turn in our history; however, we must not forget that women were told not to speak at this event and were only allowed to sing.

The march pressured the John F. Kennedy Administration to enact a federal civil rights bill in Congress. With mounting pressure from the demonstrators, the press, and liberal supporters, Kennedy was slated to pursue the civil rights bill. Unfortunately, on November 22, 1963, President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, and because of his assassination, many lost hope that the federal bill would ever become law.

However, in 1964, President Johnson signed into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964. One section of the Act, referred to as Title VII, prohibits employment discrimination based on race, sex, color, religion, and national origin. The Act also created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to enforce Title VII and eliminate unlawful employment discrimination.

Furthermore, in 1966, three EEOC field offices opened including one in Dallas, Texas, the city where President Kennedy was assassinated. The EEOC works closely with state and local government agencies that offer protection against job discrimination. State and local governments can participate as independent EEOC’s through proper filing. In 2002, The Fort Lauderdale City Commission created the Office of Professional Standards as the city’s EEOC through city ordinance with the help of Judge Henry Latimer, who was the first African-American circuit court judge in Broward County.

As the professional standards program manager, I am faced with a history of progress, and I have a deep desire to serve justice for those who have been discriminated against. What do I do with all of that? I keep pushing forward to serve those in need, fulfill my dreams, and ensure a better world for future generations because “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

On March 8, 2023, the third annual SheLeadsGov Virtual Forum, Balancing the Blur: Be a Leader in Your Personal and Professional Life , will provide a unique professional development opportunity to renew your vitality and steady your capacity. Developed by ICMA and the League of Women in Government , and sponsored by ICMA Strategic Partner Cigna , this event will inspire all local government professionals to gain control over the whirlwinds in their work and home life. Registration is complimentary , courtesy of Cigna.

New, Reduced Membership Dues

A new, reduced dues rate is available for CAOs/ACAOs, along with additional discounts for those in smaller communities, has been implemented. Learn more and be sure to join or renew today!

School guide
Social Science Notes
History Notes
Geography Notes
Political Science Notes
Economics Notes
Science and Technology Notes
Social Science Solutions
English Grammar
Science Solution
Biology Solutions
Mathematics Solutions
R.D.Sharma Solutions
Write a story around the theme "Justice delayed is justice denied"
What is the use of delay() method in jQuery ?
How to delay document.ready() method until a variable is set in jQuery ?
How to Display a Text in a Specific Time in Android using Handler?
Write a note on the policy of Apartheid
Role of Public Prosecutor and Judge in Criminal Justice System
How To Write An Apology Letter with Sample Letter
Design a Wedding Theme based Page using HTML and CSS
Do you think the victims of the Bhopal gas tragedy got justice?
NCERT Solutions for Class 9 English Moments Chapter 3 Iswaran The Storyteller
Top 30 Two Truths and a Lie Ideas
What to Write in Sympathy Messages: Check Examples and Templates
Difference between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism
How to Save Instagram Story with Music
How to Add Music to Instagram Story in 2024
How to Write a Poem- A Step-by-Step Guide
Economic Reforms in India in the Light of Social Justice and Welfare
How to execute setInterval function without delay for the first time in JavaScript ?
Create an Instagram/Twitter Heart Like Animation in Android
A Guide to Writing an Essay for Job Interviews

Write a story around the theme “Justice delayed is justice denied”

India has a significant backlog of cases, and little is being done to clear it and provide justice to the parties involved in a quick manner. Many cases in court are still unresolved. There are 4.7 billion big integers unfinished cases for lesser courts, with a total of 25,628 judges with significant authority. 51.5 lakh cases are currently pending in the criminal justice system.

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

A person thinks in court to obtain legal justice However, due to the length of our legal process, it takes longer than intended due to a scarcity of judges Another cause could be the pending cases within the court system. The court is taking fake cases. Some people arrive after they have completed their sentences. Their lawsuit, though, is still active. The code includes provisions for resolving disputes and expediting trials, such as charge joining and plea bargaining, negotiating, plan hearings, and so forth. But the issue is that the law isn’t completely clearly enforced. Ordinary people lose the majority of their cases because some judges favor one side or the other. Rape cases are rampant in India, where women are revered as gods. Day after day, the ratio continues to rise. There ought to be a way out of pursuing justice as quickly as feasible.

Views of Courts on the Delay in Justice

“A system of criminal procedure that failed to bring down a swift trial couldn’t be considered to be either truthful or cheap,” the Supreme Court declared in Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (AIR 1979 SC 1364). In the case of R.C. Sharma v. Union of Bharat (1976 (3) SCC 474), the Supreme Court stated that justice should not be done, but rather appear to be done and that plaintiffs should consider the judgments of the courts that have already passed.

When the courts take an excessive amount of time to deliver judgments, this faith is shaken. In the case of Narain Singh Yadav v. The Chief Controller of Vending, Kanpur and Ors. (1990 (1) BomCR 39), the city court held that the current judicial procedure consumes a significant amount of time and that a few cases can last up to twenty-five years, which is clearly in violation of Article twenty-one of the Indian Constitution. It had been noted that our legal system is based on the rule of law, which cannot be maintained indefinitely.

Lack of Transparency: In the functioning of the Indian courts, there is a severe lack of transparency and accountability. The public may be concerned about the mystery surrounding the legal system.
Appointment of judges: Judges in the Republic of India area unit are appointed as a command in three Judges’ Cases by a collegium.
Benches distribution: The Supreme Court benches, also known as Master of Roaster, are awarded by the Chief Justice of the Republic of India. On January 12, 2018, four of the Supreme Court’s most senior judges convened a group meeting to address the issue of assignment cases inside the apex court, as well as other challenges plaguing the country’s highest court.

Improve Court Efficiency

The ways to improve court efficiency are as follows-

By streamlining the procedure in order to expedite the trial.
By elucidating the judicial procedure.
Increasing the system’s data technology performance.
Improving the legal education of students.
Lawyers’ advice: Be transitory, be bright, and be off.
Increasing the number of judges from the lowest level to the highest.
The courts are being screened live.
Reducing corruption in the judiciary, especially at the highest levels.
Judges’ post-retirement jobs are coming to an end.

eCourts Project

The eCourts Project was conceived in response to the Supreme Court of India’s committee’s submission of “National Policy and Action Plan for Implementation of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the Indian Judiciary – 2005.”With the goal of transforming the Indian judiciary through ICT-enabled courts. The committee might also be an organization set up by Asian governments. In response to a proposal from Hon’ble the Asian nation’s jurist to serve on a group that will assist him in creating a national policy on Asian Judiciary automation and technological communication advice. Changes in management are connected. The eCourts Mission Mode Project might also be a pan-India project that is overseen and monitored.

Examples

A few important examples of “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied” are as follows-

The Upphar Cinema Case

On June 13, 1997, a swirling mass of dense smog invaded the balcony portion of a metropolis cinema theatre. The families standing on the roof terrace were trapped, with most exits unreachable and no help available, and 59 died, with 100 and five of us getting burned. Neelam and Shekhar Krishnamoorthy of the World Health Organization brought a case against the cinema theatre after their children were killed in the tragedy. It took many years for the final word to be delivered, finding the management of the movie hall and the city government to be negligent.

Nirbhaya Case

We have a strong desire to understand all or any aspects of the heinous act done by the four men in the Nirbhaya case in 2012. The courts took seven years to ultimately punish the defendants.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q 1. are you aware of any changes to new and ongoing cases related to gender-based violence or rights in the family .

Section 354 discuss about an offence where an accused uses assault against girls for outraging her modesty. The punishment for this offence is imprisonment of five years.

Q 2. What is Article 21?

It states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

Q 3. How many virtual courts are there in India?

After the successful launch of the e-courts project, the e-courts filling computer code is on the market to be used in 21 High courts and 18,000 District Courts of Asian country.

Please Login to comment...

Improve your Coding Skills with Practice

What kind of Experience do you want to share?

#donaldtrump
#election2024
#michaelcohen
#openthread
#republicans
#stormydaniels
#trumptrial
#dailykoselections

Will Justice Delayed Be Justice Denied? Update on the TX Bar Disciplinary Complaints

The current focus on the Trump criminal trial in New York (along with the other pending criminal trials and potentially dangerous U.S. Supreme Court ruling on immunity)—like so many Trump atrocities that produce the almighty “engagement” sought by the corporate media—can make us forget that Trump had the assistance of dozens of cronies and co-conspirators in his bid to overturn the 2020 election.

Many of these Trump co-conspirators are attorneys. Some of these attorneys have been subject to judicial sanctions (i.e., having to pay attorney fees for the opposition), state bar grievance complaints, and even criminal indictments for their role in attempting to overturn the 2020 election results. A flurry of litigation attempted to challenge the election results based on claims of “fraud” and manufactured evidence. When this didn’t work, the strategy turned to creative legal theories around the arcane electoral college, along with the manufacturing of “fake” alternate electors.

The primary players in these events--Rudy Giuliani ( NY, June 24, 2021 and DC, July 7, 2021 , John Eastman ( CA, March 27,2024 ), Kenneth Chesebro ( MA, March 14, 2024 ), Jeffrey Clark ( DC, April 29, 2024 ) and L. Lin Wood ( GA, July 2023 and CO, December 2023 )—have been subjected to various adverse actions involving their license to practice law—from having it suspended (Giuliani and Chesebro) to judicial or committee recommendations for disbarment. Note that none of them have been officially disbarred as of this date. Which gives you some idea of the aggravatingly slow pace of justice.

Just as attorneys were the bad guys in the Big Lie and its associated criminal schemes, they are also the good guys—Judges upholding the rule of law, bar disciplinary boards (which are often comprised of both paid staff and volunteer attorneys), as well as groups like Lawyers Defending American Democracy and the Brennan Center for Justice who advocate for the rule of law, democracy, and voting rights—the institutions that give the rest of us a voice in the system and set the guardrails to keep it honest.

In the remainder of this article, I will give a brief overview of the status of Big Lie-related bar complaints in Texas, followed by a brief discussion about why attorneys might be willing to jeopardize their law licenses.

Ken Paxton/Brent Webster

As some here may recall, I filed complaints against TX Attorney General Ken Paxton and his First Assistant Brent Webster for their part in filing suit against four other states (PA, GA, MI, and WI), arguing irregularities in these states’ appointment of electors (which had already been litigated and decided by the states own courts). I will not go into the intricacies of the legal arguments here, but rather provide a brief history of the procedural hoops that had to be jumped through in order to get the case where it is now—which some three years later is nowhere near resolution on the merits.

The complaints were initially dismissed, so I appealed them to the Texas Board of Disciplinary Appeals (BODA), which reversed the dismissal. [According to Bar sources, BODA reverses complaint dismissals in only 7% of cases.] Webster filed a response on July 15, 2021, and (for some reason unknown to me), Paxton was permitted to file a response sometime later. On July 21, 2021, Lawyers Defending American Democracy filed its own complaint against Paxton (but not Webster) for the same conduct . The LDAD complaint was signed by a number of past State Bar Presidents and Grievance Committee Chairs. During this process, I learned that over 80 complaints had been filed on the same issue, but only four of us survived in the Paxton matter and only my complaint survived in the Webster matter.

A hearing was initially scheduled on the Webster matter for November 3, 2021, which was then consolidated with the Paxton hearing and postponed until January 5, 2022.

When we didn’t hear from the State Bar past a deadline in March, I presumed that something was afoot. In Texas, if the Bar has determined that discipline is warranted, the Respondent (attorney charged with misconduct) can choose whether to have a hearing before a Bar Disciplinary Panel (where it would remain confidential) or before a state court in their home county (where it would now become public).

Both Paxton and Webster elected to have their cases tried in their respective local courts. [Paxton strategically kept his professional “home” in Collin County rather than in Austin-based Travis County.] The first thing that they did was to challenge jurisdiction by arguing that the Bar could not discipline Paxton (or anyone in the AGs office) due to sovereign immunity and the separation of powers (in short, Paxton argued that he was above the law).

Webster’s case was heard in Williamson County. The Williamson County judge dismissed the Bar’s complaint, but the Bar appealed the case and the Eighth Judicial District Court of Appeals (based in El Paso) reversed the dismissal on July 13, 2023. The court held that (what should be intuitive to those of us who are grounded in reality) the Bar had authority (granted by the Supreme Court) over the conduct of all attorneys in the state, and its action in no way abrogated the powers of the AGs office. Webster has filed something with the Texas Supreme Court (which has made no decision yet).

In Paxton’s case, the same “plea to the jurisdiction” was tossed by the Collin County trial judge and Paxton appealed. The Fifth District Court of Appeals (based in Dallas) upheld this ruling on April 18, 2024 (agreeing that the Bar has jurisdiction to discipline Paxton . So now, both cases are headed to the Texas Supreme Court. AND we are still arguing about jurisdiction and other procedural questions, not once having addressed anything about the actual misconduct.

Ironically, Paxton had to request a postponement of oral argument before the 5 th DCA because he was in the middle of an impeachment trial. Paxton—who in addition to bar discipline—has managed to avoid charges in a securities fraud trial , evade impeachment , and continues to avoid having to testify under oath by stating he won’t contest the so-called “whistleblowers” lawsuit that is based on the allegations leading to his impeachment. Now 18 other Republican AGs have joined Paxton’s fight against Bar discipline —apparently hoping to remove all avenues of accountability (or any way of ever ascertaining the truth) before the next time they want to overturn an election.

Sidney Powell

Like Paxton and Webster, Powell opted to have her case heard in Dallas County. Although I did not follow this case with the same attention as the Paxton/Webster cases, what I did see of it appeared to be that Powell was flooding the Bar with motions and exhibits, essentially creating the discovery war from hell. It was hard to follow what exactly was going on. Judge Andrea Bouressa dismissed the Bar’s case on the basis of filing and clerical errors without ever reaching the merits. Even in Texas, several editorials urged the Bar to continue its pursuit of discipline .

Which the Bar did. But on April 17, 2024, the 5th District DCA has upheld the dismissal of the disciplinary charges against Sidney Powell . Again , Texas editorials are urging the Bar to either appeal or refile. Notwithstanding the Bar’s mishandling of the case, complete dismissal with no allowance for correction of the errors amounts to a travesty of justice given the seriousness of the charges. The analysis seemed to focus entirely on the Bar's mislabeling of exhibits, with no discussion at all about the underlying alleged malfeasance.

Moreover, this was pursuant to a motion for summary judgment, where the question is whether or not there is a disputed material fact. Intuition alone would suggest that in all this sound and fury there would be one or more factual disputes. It would seem that in a discipline case, credibility—which is difficult to determine from documentary evidence alone—would be a major issue. Unfortunately, the Bar made the decision (or agreed) to forgo oral argument, which bolstered the blindered focus on documentary evidence (and even this was limited to the Georgia case). In the one case where Powell was subjected to questioning by a judge--the sanctions case before Michigan US District Judge Linda Parker--Judge Parker determined that Powell (along with the other sanctioned attorneys) filed the Michigan lawsuit "in bad faith and for an improper purpose."

In my opinion (and I do not purport to suggest to the Bar what to do next), it might be a good idea to update and refile the disciplinary charges against Powell. Judge Parker's sanctions order sets forth the (Michigan) infractions in particular detail --which might help the Bar wade through all of the crap that Powell threw at them. Ironically, in the Rule 11 sanctions hearing before Judge Parker, all of the attorneys attempted to argue that they should not be held accountable for "electronic signatures" and argued about which of them actually drafted the pleadings.

“…what very clearly reflects bad faith is that Plaintiffs’ attorneys are trying to use the judicial process to frame a public “narrative.” Absent evidentiary or legal support for their claims, this seems to be one of the primary purposes of this lawsuit. Second, there is a basis to conclude that Plaintiffs’ legal team asserted the allegations in their pleadings as opinion rather than fact, with the purpose of furthering counsel’s political positions rather than pursuing any attainable legal relief…circumstancessuggest that this lawsuit was not about vindicating rights in the wake of alleged election fraud. Instead, it was about ensuring that a preferred political candidate remained in the presidential seat despite the decision of the nation’s voters to unseat him.” Judge Linda Parker

Since the original Bar complaint against Powell was filed (which included the Michigan Governor, Secretary of State and Attorney General), Powell has pled guilty to six misdemeanors in the GA election interference criminal case . Although the plea deal allowed Powell to avoid the original felony charges, she has admitted to acts amounting to "conspiracy to commit intentional interference with the performance of election duties"--acts which highly suggest corrupt motive and dishonest behavior.

Fortunately, Michigan is also pursuing bar discipline against Powell , where she is again attempting to interminably delay the proceedings with a flurry of tangential pleadings such that the actual merits are never addressed. Powell is now attempting to argue that the Texas 5 th DCA ruling dismissal is res judicata in the Michigan disciplinary proceedings. Apparently, Powell had previously made the arguments that (1) Michigan has no jurisdiction over her because she is not licensed in Michigan, and (2) the Texas trial court dismissal (which the TX ODC appealed) precludes further disciplinary proceedings in Michigan.

A March 11 th response from the MI Attorney Grievance Commission argues that the Board does have jurisdiction both because Powell consented to it by signing and filing a pleading in the state (which is consistent with similar rules in other states), and res judicata does not apply because (1) there is no “privity” (commonality of interests) between the Texas and Michigan disciplinary authorities, and (2) there was no “trial on the merits” in Texas (an understatement). Hope that the Michigan Attorney Discipline Board continues to pursue justice against Powell. Then maybe the Texas ODC can go for reciprocal discipline.

Another interesting detail is that on March 11, Powell was represented by two attorneys from Collins, Einhorn and Farrell, a Michigan-based firm that handles ethics and grievance defense. However, in Powell’s more recent filings, she appears to be representing herself. It has always seemed that these election-denying co-conspirators were able to tap into the deep pockets of dark money—or, alternatively, start their own Go-Fund-Me style grift—but maybe there is a limit to this (and Powell has reached it).

Louis Gohmert/William Sessions

I filed initial complaints against the attorneys involved in Gohmert v Pence , a case that had a number of previous iterations, but was dismissed by a U.S. District Judge in the Eastern District of Texas for lack of standing. Complaints were filed against two Texas attorneys: William Sessions (who had signed the pleadings) and Louis Gohmert (who had appeared as a Plaintiff along with a number of “fake electors” from Arizona). Apparently, Gohmert’s role was to get the case out of Arizona and into Texas before a (hopefully) friendlier Republican Federalist Judge. Alternatively, the scheme was to create diversity jurisdiction (because Gohmert is not an AZ resident) to get into federal court.

In Texas, the complaint against Gohmert was dismissed by BODA on June 10, 2021. Although the ODC determined that the original complaint against Sessions sufficiently alleged “Professional Misconduct or a Disability or both,” the complaint was dismissed by a District 2 Grievance Panel on May 27, 2021.

The two DC attorneys were Lawrence Joseph and Julia Z. Haller. Lawrence Joseph also appears as a co-signer on the Paxton case which is the subject of that complaint. In early 2021, the District of Columbia Bar took the position that (1) it would not docket a complaint from someone with “no personal knowledge,” and (2) it would not involve itself in issues that it deemed were “motivated by political interests.” However, the letter from the DC Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) stated that it might independently decide to investigate, but such a decision would be confidential. I did not pursue complaints against the D.C. attorneys. Lawyers Defending American Democracy informed me they were in the process of challenging the DC Bar’s stated positions.

As an aside, the District of Columbia and the State of California are unique in that disciplinary hearings are open to the public and livestreamed. This is how I was able to follow the DC hearing involving Rudy Giuliani and the California hearing against John Eastman . By contrast, most Bar discipline (investigation and process phases) takes place within a black box of confidentiality. The public may not even know if a complaint has been filed against an attorney unless (and until) some kind of discipline is imposed. Texas is unusual in that Respondents (charged attorneys) are allowed to choose whether they want a public hearing in a local district court or maintain the confidentiality of a bar committee hearing.

But more has come to light since the dismissal of the Gohmert case. The DC ODC has instituted formal disciplinary proceedings (January 9, 2024) against Lawrence Joseph and Julia Z. Haller for their part in the Gohmert and other Big Lie-related litigation. Hearings in these consolidated matters will be livestreamed on September 30 through October 10, November 6-8, and November 12-18, beginning at 9:30 am Eastern time. You can watch the hearings by following the links here.

Additionally, the State of Arizona has issued criminal charges against the fake electors named as Plaintiffs in the Gohmert v Pence case , along with a number of other co-conspirators we are all now becoming familiar with . Not surprisingly, Republicans everywhere are howling and shrieking about the “weaponization of the law.” God forbid that these entitled authoritarians ever be held accountable to the rest of us.

So…today (May 14, 2024) I refiled updated complaints against Gohmert and Sessions in Texas, citing the DC ODC charges and the AZ indictments. I was going to file in late April (after the AZ indictments came down), but the CDC website has been down for at least the past two weeks, so I had to mail them in (paper, ink, postage). I will confess that conspiracy theories briefly crossed my mind, but concluded (Occam’s’ razor) it was more likely due to typical tech malfunctions that plague us everywhere else. Let the howling and whining begin…

Why Are Attorneys Willing to Risk Their Law Licenses?

A question that some have raised is why would attorneys jeopardize their law licenses by filing high-profile yet arguably meritless cases? Mark Elias (Democracy Watch) notes with alarm that the “quality” of Trump’s attorneys appears to be improving, which suggests that Trump has plenty of money coming in both from his billionaire cronies and grifting off the MAGA base:

Elias also asks why attorneys (especially reputable ones) would risk their law license in taking on Trump’s questionable “legal” causes? Studies of lawyers who have been subjected to discipline (prior to the Trump election cases) found that most of them are solos or in small firms in practice areas serving “unsophisticated clients.” Solo practitioners comprise 30% of lawyers but receive 56% of discipline. Large-firm lawyers make up 10% of the profession yet receive only 2% of discipline.

One proposed theory is that attorneys who practice alone or in small firms don’t receive adequate supervision or peer review. Of the attorneys subject to discipline in the Trump election cases, 11 out of 22 appear to be operating as solos, and four of them work in small firms (six or fewer lawyers) .

Another theory is that solo and small firm attorneys face huge financial pressures simply keeping their doors open and their practices solvent, implying that they are so hungry for paying business they aren’t motivated to do much investigating or questioning of a potential client. We also know that Trump is infamous for not paying his bills—including his legal bills—so why would any attorney risk both not getting paid and their law license?

One possible explanation is the perverse incentive structure and the “market signals” in campaign and election litigation. The stakes are high for both the lawyers and their politician-client. A lawyer who is viewed as aggressive—win or lose—may gain professional prominence along with other opportunities, perhaps additional clients, or lucrative political and judicial appointments if their client is elected. Moreover, thanks to Citizens United v FEC, huge amounts of dark money can now be funneled into 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) (trade association) organizations that are shielded from campaign disclosure laws. So…a big payday may be possible regardless of the personal wealth (or financial responsibility) of the client himself.

Perhaps the most alarming explanation in the case of the Trump co-conspirators is that various members of the original conspiracy have determined that— if they just hang on and delay justice long enough—they will be able to complete the coup and thus elevate themselves above the law and any accountability for their previous acts of corruption. The loyalists will be rewarded with positions of power. Until the malevolence turns—as it inevitably does—against anyone of them who doesn’t demonstrate sufficient loyalty.

The forces of oligarchy/plutocracy have been attempting to undermine democracy practically since America’s founding. The pendulum between democracy (the people participate in decisions affecting them) and plutocracy (the oligarchs impose their will downward upon the masses) has swung back and forth throughout history. Our founding institutions—along with their (not ever fully realized) ideals of equal voice and equal justice have generally survived and even improved over the long run: slavery abolished in 1865, freed slaves allowed to vote in 1870, women allowed to vote in 1920, the Civil Rights era of the 1960s. Yet these positive developments were met with—sometimes extreme and violent—resistance.

Democracy has been tested time and again, but today it seems to be in an especially precarious place.

IMAGES

Justice delayed is justice denied
Justice delayed is justice denied
William Ewart Gladstone Quote: “Justice delayed is justice denied.” (7
Martin Luther King Jr. Quote: “Justice too long delayed is justice
⇉Justice Delayed is Justice Denied Essay Example
JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED

COMMENTS

Justice delayed is justice denied
"Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim.It means that if legal redress or equitable relief to an injured party is available, but is not forthcoming in a timely fashion, it is effectively the same as having no remedy at all.. This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because of the unfairness for the ...
Is justice delayed justice denied? An empirical approach
1. Introduction. In the last two decades, the legal maxim, justice delayed is justice denied has been at the center of domestic and international policies agendas all around the world, especially for its economic consequences. If economic theory has always assumed property rights to be smoothly enforced by courts (Botero et al., 2003, North, 2005), nowadays it is quite obvious that even an ...
(PDF) Justice Delayed is Justice Denied
William E Gladstone, Former British Statesman an d Prime Minister in the late 1800 's, famously. said 'justice delayed is justice denied'. However he was not the first to ex press this ...
William E. Gladstone: 'Justice delayed is justice denied.'
Justice delayed is justice denied. In the realm of law, the quote "Justice delayed is justice denied," popularized by William E. Gladstone, carries a profound meaning and holds tremendous importance. At its most straightforward interpretation, the quote suggests that any delay in delivering justice can have the same detrimental effect as a ...
Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied
August 28, 2020 • Aspen Global Leadership Network. "Justice delayed is justice denied" is an ancient legal concept, but it's been cast in stark relief in the last few months. The new pressures of the current pandemic have heightened the reality of inequality and injustice. Systems that most of the world contently ignored have reached a ...
Justice delayed or justice denied?
Justice delayed or justice denied? Williams v. Louisiana ended with both a bang and a whimper. Flagged as a " petition of the day " back in April, Williams' petition sought to have the U.S. Supreme Court review the Louisiana courts' decision to leave in place his conviction for first-degree murder. Williams claimed, among other things ...
(PDF) Justice Delayed is Justice Denied
The dictum 'Justice Delayed is Justice Denied' postulates that an unreasonable put. off inside the management of justice constitutes an unconscionable denial of. justice. The final item of any j ...
Lelaka v S (CAF10/2014) [2014] ZANWHC 34 (10 October 2014)
CAF 10/2014. In the matter between: MATHEWS SIPHO LELAKAAPPLICANT. and. THE STATE RESPONDENT. Gura J, Matlapeng AJ and Djaje AJ. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT. MATLAPENG AJ: [1] One of the most quoted maxims lawyers love to refer our courts to is the mantra "justice delayed is justice denied".
Justice delayed is justice denied
Justice delayed is justice denied. The idea of a link between delay and denial of justice is an old one (cf. 1215 Magna Carta To ... Access to the complete content on Oxford Reference requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
Justice delayed and justice denied: New report on non-implementation of
To shed more light on these worrying trends, Democracy Reporting International and the European Implementation Network (EIN) published the joint report 'Justice Delayed and Justice Denied: Non-Implementation of European Courts Judgments and the Rule of Law' offering a unique methodology that ranks member states based on three criteria: the ...
PDF Justice Delayed or Denied: The Myth of Justice in Pakistan
Thin line between two known legal maxims i.e. 'justice delayed is justice denied' and 'justice hurried is justice buried' must always be appreciated by every single court." (2015 SCMR 1549) Court has referred to the both opposing legal principles together "Justice delayed is justice denied" and "justice hurried
Justice Delayed Justice Denied :: Juris Academy
The judicial system is believed to be fair & just. It should bring the culprits to justice & should make sure no injustice is happening in the state. The phrase "justice delayed is justice denied" has been used for centuries. It was first used by the English philosopher and jurist Sir Edward Coke in the early 1600s.
PDF JUSTICE DELAYED JUSTICE DENIED
The phrase "justice delayed is justice denied" has been used for centuries. It was first used by the English philosopher and jurist Sir Edward Coke in the early 1600s. Coke was writing about the right to a speedy trial, but his words are just as relevant today. In a society where justice is often
'Justice Delayed is Justice Denied'
Stokes Kennedy Crowley [1996] 2 I.R. 459 and later decisions that a court has inherent jurisdiction to strike out a claim for want of prosecution where the delay is both inordinate and inexcusable and where it is in the interests of justice that that the case should be dismissed. A delay that causes significant prejudice to a defendant and ...
Is justice delayed justice denied? An empirical approach
Introduction. In the last two decades, the legal maxim, justice delayed is justice denied has been at the center of domestic and international policies agendas all around the world, especially for its economic consequences. If economic theory has always assumed property rights to be smoothly enforced by courts (Botero et al., 2003, North, 2005), nowadays it is quite obvious that even an ...
Justice Delayed is Justice Denied
The saying 'justice delayed is justice denied' is quite famous and used often. It has a deep and significant meaning which reflects true situations. It is a legal maxim which has historic origins. Justice delayed is justice denied is a maxim which means that even if remedy against an illegal injury caused is available but not executed in ...
Justice Delayed is Justice Denied Essay in 1000+ Words
10 Lines about Justice delayed is Justice Denied. The time taken by the jurisdiction to give justice is completely dissatisfactory. Sometimes, the delayed decision from the courts helps the culprit to escape from justice. The family of the victims suffers a lot due to delayed justice. The investigation procedure makes the judgment more delayed ...
Is Justice Delayed Really Justice?
Is Justice Delayed Really Justice? October 14, 2015 / in Criminal Justice / by The Arc. By Leigh Ann Davis, Program Manager, Justice Initiatives. If you had been in prison since 1987 for a crime you didn't do - missing nearly three decades of your life - and then were released and had charges dismissed, would you believe you had received ...
Justice Too Long Delayed Is Justice Denied
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's work to eliminate unlawful employment discrimination. Justice too long delayed is justice denied. — Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I have a deep understanding of my history because I know who I come from. My mother is African American, and my father is Haitian. The Haitian people fought against their ...
Write a story around the theme "Justice delayed is justice denied
Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. A person thinks in court to obtain legal justice However, due to the length of our legal process, it takes longer than intended due to a scarcity of judges Another cause could be the pending cases within the court system. The court is taking fake cases. Some people arrive after they have completed their sentences.
Will Justice Delayed Be Justice Denied? Update on the TX Bar
Our founding institutions—along with their (not ever fully realized) ideals of equal voice and equal justice have generally survived and even improved over the long run: slavery abolished in ...
Boeing may be prosecuted after breaking safety agreement that ...
The Assignment with Audie Cornish ... and the March 2019 Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max crash had long denounced the delayed prosecution agreement, arguing it denied them justice for the deaths of ...
Justice delayed is justice denied
The question of whether justice delayed is justice denied appears to depend on whether delay is inappropriate, out of proportion or avoidable. Proportionality and appropriateness of time taken to provide an outcome for disputants is said to form part of the definition of timeliness, as per the definition above.
PDF IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO
1. While his motion was pending, Mr. Ames filed a petition for a writ of procedendo in this court, alleging the trial court had unjustifiably delayed entering final judgment in the underlying case. This court granted Mr. Ames' petition in State ex rel. Ames v. Pokorny, 11th Dist. Portage No. 2022-P-0007, 2022-Ohio-1102.
Nonviolent Protest Assignment Flashcards
answer. African Americans have waited long enough for change. Those who have not suffered injustice cannot criticize the impatience of those who have. Many have suffered under segregation. Protests expose existing tension. Disorder is a necessary step toward progress. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like We are now ...