Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

Abstract

Historical acknowledgements of delays in the justice system often recognise the perspective of the accused or the disputant, and suggest that for a person seeking justice, the time taken for resolution of their issue is critical to the justice experience. In essence, these acknowledgements are consistent with more recent research which has shown that the time taken to deal with a dispute is a, and in many cases the, critical factor in determining whether or not people consider that the justice system is just and fair. This article considers issues in the justice system that are related to timeliness and the interconnectedness of the definition of delay and contends that the nature of delay in the current justice environment is contingent on many aspects and mechanisms utilised by the modern justice system. These elements include information technology (‘IT’) and electronic support, proactive intervention and management including case management systems as well as alternative dispute resolution (‘ADR’) for the resolution of civil, family and other disputes. 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.