The United Nations defines access to justice as being the fundamental principle of rule of law. Promoting access means having “fair, transparent, effective, non-discriminatory and accountable services”. This is to be read with Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 7 states, “All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law.” This in turn is guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Article 14 guarantees that “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”
Fake advocates infringe on the constitutionally guaranteed right of access to justice. In turn infringing on the right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 and the right to equality under Article 14. What the Constitution of India guarantees fake advocates take away. And when statutory bodies and the courts refuse to intervene then what happens is colossal injustice. Read on to know how I believe fake advocates, including G.A.Srikante Gowda and M.Amaranatha, compromise my and my family’s access to justice both in the High Court of Karnataka and in the Supreme Court of India.
Understanding the Nuances of Violations in Access to Justice
When one speaks of access one is referring to the ability to approach the Courts for legal redressal. While there is a whole field of substantive law concerning the same, I refer here to procedural law. This is where I believe that violations happen unhindered. These include “clerical” tasks such as filing, process, notices, paperwork, amendment, rectifying scrutiny etc.
Access to Court Records
As a litigant I do not have access to the court office or my records even though it is guaranteed under the Rules. As a litigant-in-person unless I have an order from the court I cannot in practice access my file. This isn’t the same for advocates. At least the advocates in our case.
As an illustration, I filed Writ Petition No.9545 of 2023 in the High Court of Karnataka seeking a quashing of Original Suit No.964 of 2010 (trial court). The advocate representing the opposite party informed the Judge in the trial court all my grounds in the Writ Petition. This is BEFORE a copy of the petition was even served to him. He had access to my file.
As another illustration, an advocate for the opposite party served me with copies of Petition papers in Writ Petition No.12079 of 2023 in the High Court of Karnataka. These were photocopies of papers filed in the court. Not before they were filed BUT photocopies made after it was filed. Which means the advocate for the opposite party was able to take the file and papers out of the court premises (after it had been filed!!) and give them for photocopying.
What happens when a fake advocate enjoys such privileges?? By law, even real advocates cannot do this. A fake advocate has easy access to all documents on file. Thus, allowing for them to be easily tampered with and without any accountability. I am compelled to file for certified copies of all papers submitted into court. I do this at every hearing in order to inhibit tampering.
Violations of Process
Violations occur in places other than a hearing in front of a Judge. For the simple reason that a Judge’s orders are amenable to appellate jurisdiction. Not so on the administrative side. My experience as a Complainant has taught me that administrative complaints go into a black hole, a void. This is something fake advocates also know. Through personal examples, of cases we are fighting, I illustrate herein below how my access to justice has been and continues to be thwarted: