Poverty

Poor households generally find it difficult to access the formal justice system because of the prohibitive costs associated with litigation. Poor people residing in villages often do not approach the formal legal system, i.e police courts, and the district bureaucracy. They view the police and courts and their delaying tactics as means to generate bribes and as a luxury for the rich. These institutions are perceived as partial in favoring the influential. Hence, they prefer to have their disputes resolved locally through the panchayat. Even if some people do approach the formal legal system, they are often forced to abandon it due to the high cost involved.

The poor are discriminated against in property cases. Poor litigants also face a longer wait when suspected of having been involved in some petty crime. This phenomenon was observed in Punjab, NWFP, and Sindh. In a Toba Tek Sindh case concerning the theft of Rs.100, it took the court 4 years and 3 months to decide not to pursue the case. One of the accused had absconded while the other kept appearing in the court for over 4 years before finally deciding to discontinue appearing. The court decided to declare both absconders and stopped the proceedings until their arrest. Thus, one of the accused was made to suffer repeated but futile appearance. The plight of poor litigants involved in petty crimes is particularly bad in rural Sindh. This raises questions of judicial competence and accountability.

Sometimes the courts take a sympathetic view where the poor are involved. Two cases in rural Punjab demonstrate this point. In both cases, the court awarded a lesser sentence than prescribed by law. It was not clear, however, whether this was deliberate or on account of ignorance. Also, this was not until after the patience of those involved was tested to its limits.

As mentioned already, the concept of poverty is not limited to the poverty of income but includes poverty of opportunity. In the context of dispensation of justice, the empowerment of the poor lies in the formal justice institutions addressing their risks and vulnerabilities. Similarly, a broader conceptualization of poverty is needed to understand the litigant’s ability to garner contacts and support through non-monetary and social networks. It is not surprising that across the board, the poor shunned the police and the courts. So denigrated is the formal system that a tribal chief of Balochistan claimed with some pride that their one person qazi (judge) system was far superior to the formal police and court system.

The rich are more likely to engage the formal system partly as a mark of their status, and partly because they can purchase justice.

While women are discriminated against as a gender group, their plight is made even worse when coupled with a poor socio-economic status. Women with relatively better socio-economic status and contacts in urban settings do not fare badly I their pursuit of justice. In one urban case, both parties fought their cases without going to the court since both parties were relatively well-off and represented by their lawyers. The defendant, a woman, seemed better connected to the judicial system through an uncle and was able to sway the case in her favor before it ended in a compromise. Therefore, gender cannot be seen in isolation from the litigant’s class.