The concept of access to justice received particular attention in the 1970s and 1980s in the work of Mauro Cappelletti and Bryant Garth. According to Cappelletti and Garth, the expression access to justice serves to focus on two basic purposes of the legal system. Access to justice means, first of all, that the legal system must be equally accessible to all. Plaintiffs must be empowered to bring a claim before a court.
Therefore, the procedural rules and practicalities shaping the legal system, such as standards on standing, litigation costs, availability of legal aid, or access to legal representation, may allow or restrict the ability of plaintiffs, especially the poor and disadvantaged, to bring a claim.
This cannot be achieved when plaintiffs face many obstacles that prevent them from filing a lawsuit. This also means that the legal system must lead to results that are individually and socially just.
Access to justice is having access to a just and adequate legal procedure that is fair, respectful, and efficient, whether through judicial, administrative, or other public processes. It entails legal defense, legal education, legal assistance, and counsel adjudication and enforcement.
The term “access to justice” refers to obtaining effective answers from court systems that are affordable and available to ordinary persons in need of aid, and that administer justice equitably, quickly, and without fear or hesitation.
In the restricted sense, access to justice refers to access to a law court. This is thought to be a prerequisite for gaining entry into the legal system. The concept of access to justice encompasses the kind, mechanism, and even quality of justice available in society, as well as the individual’s position within the judicial matrix.
It’s also a useful tool for measuring not only the rule of law but also the quality of governance in a given society. People’s ability to seek and secure a remedy for grievances under human rights norms through formal or informal institutions of justice is known as access to justice.
Law and order, as well as the general security of our social and corporate environments, are dependent on access to justice. When the right to access to justice is infringed, we are certainly in danger, and the public’s loss of faith in the state’s ability to provide displaced people with access to justice will lead to self-help and anarchy.
There is no access to justice when members of a society (especially marginalized groups) feel scared of the system, perceive it as foreign, and refuse to use it; when the justice system is financially inaccessible; when individuals lack access to lawyers; when they lack information or knowledge about their rights; and when the justice system is weak.
It is important to note that no country will be able to achieve UN Sustainable Development Goal 16.3 on equitable access to justice for all by 2030 unless it focuses on closing the global justice gap, improving access to justice, and providing legal aid to the most disadvantaged groups. Access to justice for displaced people requires a new approach to justice: a people-centered approach to justice that prioritizes individual consideration in justice responses through offering information, initiatives, and regulations.
In conflict-torn areas, justice might be difficult to arrive by. This could be because courthouses have been destroyed as a result of the fighting, or because judges and staff are too dangerous to stay in a given town or region permanently. UN peacekeeping deployments assist mobile courts, which travel to areas where conventional courts do not exist, to guarantee that communities may settle disputes and offenders are appropriately punished.
Displaced people will be unable to assert their rights or challenge crimes or abuses perpetrated against them if they do not have equitable access to justice, trapping them in a cycle of impunity, deprivation, and marginalization.
The incapacity of these vulnerable people to seek justice through current institutions enhances their vulnerability and rights abuses, while their heightened vulnerability and exclusion hinder their ability to use justice systems even more. At the end, only when the law works for everyone can the lack of access to justice for displaced people be overcome.
Improving access to justice is a critical instrument for ensuring the enjoyment of rights and preventing crime. Accessible justice systems can help people overcome deprivation by guaranteeing equal opportunity to fundamental public services and strengthening social and economic rights jurisprudence, for example. The availability of fair and effective avenues for peaceful dispute resolution can help to prevent violence and conflict.
Read also: Casualty Insurance
Access to justice improves accountability by ensuring that public and private institutions and service providers are held accountable to the people they serve. The displaced’s opportunity to justice is a critical step toward allowing them to exercise their rights and participate in society on equal ground with the rest of society.
The International Bar Association (IBA) adopted access to justice as a comprehensive concept, which covers different stages of the process of obtaining a solution to civil or criminal justice problems. It starts with the existence of rights enshrined in the laws and with awareness and understanding of such rights. It embraces access to dispute resolution mechanisms as part of justice institutions that are both formal (i.e, institutions established by the state) and informal (i.e, indigenous courts, councils of elders, and similar traditional or religious authorities). The IBA concluded that effective access includes the availability of, and access to, counsel and representation and it encompasses the ability of such mechanisms to provide fair, impartial, and enforceable solutions.
Additionally, the Open Society Initiative for West Africa conceptualizes access to justice as having three major features:
(i) Knowledge: people must have information and knowledge about their rights and how to access them, and this extends to service providers as they are required to have appropriate knowledge and expertise for the provision of effective services
(ii) The environment: the state’s systems and infrastructure for service provision must be effective and easily accessible; and
(iii) The quality of services: It is not only necessary that services should be provided; the services provided must be the optimal and ultimate service obtainable.