EFFICIENCY drives have been on for the past decade. Queues have been transferred from harassed bank tellers inside to machines outside. Tourist offices in Canberra can book you on a coach in Los Angeles. Leanness, customer service, delivery and efficiency are everywhere. Even Telecom smiles and connects phones in hours not months.
Super-markets have changed less noticeably, because visits are more frequent. Consider the cash register. No more keying in each amount and working out the change. Bar codes do the lot _ more efficiently and more accurately.
But down at the Magistrates’ Court, nothing much has changed. I had the displeasure to observed the court’s civil jurisdiction at “”work” one day last week.
In the era of mobile phones, computer booking, bar codes, electronic messages and fax machines, the ACT Magistrates Court is straight out of Dickens, only the bench is veneer not solid wood and the seats are cloth not leather.
The guiding principle seems to be that the magistrate’s time is precious. He (and from last week, or she) must not be kept waiting at any cost. So cases are listed at 10am. Lawyers, witnesses and parties all front up outside the court from about 9.30am on. A clerk attempts to get files together and seeing which parties have arrived. No-one seems to have much idea which cases are ready to be heard, which will adjourned by consent, how long argument will go on about adjournments or interlocutory applications, or how long argument about the substance of a case will last.
It is the same in the criminal list. Accused people front up ready and expecting to defend cases only to be given an adjournment date.
The case I was interested in last week was slotted for 10am. It got on an hour later. Others were still waiting when this case finished at 11.40.
This has a profound effect on justice. If Coles still had ancient cash registers and people had to queue, people would flock to Wollies, and Coles would go broke. Competition ensures the best practice. Alas, there is only one magistrates court _ an inefficient one. The choice is that one or none.
To defend a traffic matter in Canberra you have to hang around the court for a couple of hours to get an adjournment date. You have to hand around another couple of hours at least on the hearing day, and then you might face another adjournment. It is now no longer economic to defend traffic cases, and I’m not talking about radar and red-light-camera cases which are undefendable, but cases such as negligent driving, going through a Stop sign, crossing yellow lines and so on where the police evidence is occasionally wrong. These cases cost more to defend than the fine.
The inefficiency of the magistrates’ court has delivered into the hands of the police the job of prosecutor (is the driver to get a ticket), jury (is the driver guilty) and judge (what fine shall be imposed, should the excuse be acknowledged).
In civil cases, the inefficiency results in people abandoning their rights to recover damages because it is not worth the time and effort.
In encourages cynicism and disenchantment with the legal system. Further, it encourages people to attempt to get away with it in the knowledge that is costs too much to pursue.
Active legal costs are high enough. Adding passive legal costs _ paying for lawyers and witnesses to hang round outside courtrooms _ is unnecessary with modern telecommunications.
I don’t blame the magistrates. The Chief Magistrate, Ron Cahill, has cried in despair often enough about getting funds to computerise. The planning impasse over the construction of a new court will only make things worse.
But improvements can be made without the grand vision. Businesses incrementally improve the efficiency of delivering services to their customers all the time. It should not take much to get an appointment schedule and some computer-based time management in the courts with some hefty disincentives for lawyers who misestimate hearing times.
Our courts, however, seem oblivious to the informatics and communications revolution. If you don’t believe me go down to the courts at 9.50am any weekday and see for yourself, unless you are unlucky enough to be a party, witness or juror, in which can you will be an inactive participant in the chronic inefficiency.