Backlogged legal cases

It was baffling to read the report in The Jakarta Post on March 4 about the backlog of cases in the Supreme Court. If it is true that the number of unsettled cases has reached 16,000, this must be deplored as a disgraceful occurrence.

To be sure, this should bring discredit on the one hand to the Supreme Court, as the highest judicial body in the land, and on the other hand to the professional awareness of justices with respect to the sublime function of the court to develop the nation's jurisprudence by virtue of the accumulation of a string of verdicts.

In retrospect, one may imagine the futility or ineffectiveness of the backlogged cases, featuring as just stacks of thick dossiers that fill shelves, or perhaps are just piled up on the floor.

The implications of this matter can hardly be denied. First, the potential of enriching or replenishing the body of judge-made law, comprising the invaluable variety of ramifications of jurisprudence mirroring the current legal phenomena occurring in society, is put in jeopardy.

Second, the delay in settling cases in the Supreme Court bears heavily on the burden of cost incurred by litigants.

It must be remembered that Article 4 of Law No. 14/1970 on the basic provisions of judicial power sets forth that judicial proceedings shall be carried out simplistically, swiftly and at a low cost.

Third, the oath taken by the justices refers to the duty of the justices to adjudicate in an honest and efficient manner in enforcing the law and upholding justice.

Certainly, to alleviate the hardships of poor litigants, in face of the high cost of litigation throughout three levels of courts, such a huge lot of backlog cases should soon be discarded.

S. SUHAEDI
Jakarta