Principle of natural justice

Principle of natural justice

Subject :Polity

Section : Constitution

Context:   Jahangirpuri incident violates principle of natural justice

Concept:

Natural justice is the essence of fair adjudication, deeply rooted in tradition and conscience, to be ranked as fundamental. The purpose of following the principles of natural justice is the prevention of miscarriage of justice. Natural Justice recognizes three principles:

• Nemo debetessc judex in propria causa.
• Audi alterem partem
• Speaking orders or reasoned decisions.

 The first two have come to us from the Roman Law and the third one is a recent Innovation due to the rapid development of the constitutional as well as administrative law.

Nemo debet essc judex in propria causa.

The first principle of impartiality roughly translated into English means nobody shall be a judge in his own cause or in a cause in which he is interested. This principle is more popularly known as the Doctrine of Bias. That is the authority sitting in judgment should be impartial and act without bias. To instill confidence in the system, justice should not merely be done but seen to be done.

Audi alterem partem

The second principle of natural justice literally means ―to hear the other side‖. This is necessary for providing a fair hearing and no doubt the rule against bias would also be a part of the procedure. A corollary has been deduced from the above two rules and particularly the audi alteram partem rule, namely qui aliquidstatueritparteinaudita alteram actquam licet dixerit, haud acquum facerit‘ that is, he who shall decide anything without the other side having been heard, although he may have said what is right, will not have been what is right‘ or in other words, as it is now expressed, justice should not only be done but should manifestly be seen to be done‘.

Speaking orders or reasoned decisions.

The third aspect of natural justice requires speaking orders or reasoned decisions. It is now universally recognized that giving reasons for a certain decision is one of the fundamentals of good administration and a safeguard against arbitrariness. The refusal to give reasons may excite the suspicion that there are probably no good reasons to support the decision. Hence reasons are useful as they may reveal an error of law, the grounds for an appeal or simply remove what might otherwise be a lingering sense of injustice on the part of the unsuccessful party. When the order to be passed is an appealable order, the requirement of giving reasons would be a real requirement. Thus, reasons are also required to be given when the appellate or revisionary authority affirms the order of the lower authority.