|Demand of the question
Introduction. What are quasi-judicial bodies?
Body. Various advantages and disadvantages of quasi-judicial bodies.
Conclusion. Way forward.
A quasi-judicial body is an entity such as an arbitrator or tribunal board which has powers and procedures resembling those of a court of law or judge. It is obliged to objectively determine facts and draw conclusions from them so as to provide the basis of an official action. Their powers are usually limited to a very specific area of expertise and authority, such as land use and zoning, financial markets, public standards etc. National Human Rights Commission, National Commission for Women, National Commission for Minorities, etc. are examples of quasi-judicial bodies.
Advantages of quasi judicial bodies:
- Lessen the burden of court: These bodies reduce the burden of judiciary which is having huge number of pending cases.
- Expertise: Generally members of the bodies have necessary expertise and specialisation in the particular area which help immensely in cases. Thus expertise is a major advantage.
- Accessible:These are easily accessible to common people and moreover these involve very low cost as compared to judiciary.
- Flexibility: Judiciary generally refer to its old judgements but quasi bodies have flexibility to operate.They have flexible approach in dealing with the cases hence are approached frequently by the people.
- Suo moto Power: Some of these bodies are having Suo moto power that is they can enquire on their own on proceedings. For example National Human rights commission can initiate proceedings on their cases based on reports from media or their knowing of human rights violations.
- Autonomy of Functioning: They are fully independent in their functioning outside the purview of executive. For example NHRC can ask state governments for information related to any incident in lieu of Human rights violation happened in state
Disadvantages of quasi judicial bodies:
- Lack of independence: Many organisation lack independence like judiciary thus affected from interference from executive.
- Toothless tiger(No Power to punish): Most of these bodies are recommendatory in nature, like NHRC and CIC. They can’t even award compensation or relief to the victims directly, but can only recommend. These bodies also lack enforcement mechanism & compliance to rules.
- Lack of manpower: Many Quasi Judicial bodies are under-staffed so proper and quick investigation is not being done.
- Add to cost and delays: A person can again appeal in the court against the decision of the Quasi Judicial body. This fades away the advantage of cost and time provided by the Quasi Judicial body.
- Poor efficiency: People if not satisfied with the decisions of the body always move to courts and hence low administrative efficiency and poor functioning of quasi judicial bodies further increase the burden on courts.
- Partial justice:Many members of these bodies are ex-bureaucrats without any training of law, this hampers the proper way of justice. Also, there is always a possibility of executive interference in their functioning which may result into partial decisions sometimes.
- Multiplicity: Now a days multiplicity of bodies and mushrooming of tribunals have made the judicial functioning complex.
Therefore, as a whole, quasi-judicial body is a good concept as it reduces the burden on Judiciary but there are some loopholes there in this system also. Govt should choose individual with both technical and legal knowledge and providing them with power to take decision will be a booster to this organ of Government.