Stories
Compassion in judging means never letting legal abstraction erase human reality: Justice Vikram Nath
- •Supreme Court judge Vikram Nath stated that compassion in judging is not favour or leniency, but the duty to never let legal abstraction erase human reality.
- •Delivering the second Prof. Dr N R Madhava Menon Memorial Lecture, he emphasized that compassion cannot belong only to the party backed by public sentiment.
- •Justice Nath noted that the opposite of compassion is not strictness, but indifference, and urged judges to be impartial yet never indifferent.
- •He highlighted that courts must pay attention to how individuals experience the justice system, particularly survivors of trauma and marginalized litigants.
- •Stressing the importance of a trauma-informed courtroom, he stated that a compassionate court understands every side without becoming captive to any.
Key Questions Answered
Supreme Court judge Vikram Nath stated that compassion in judging is neither favour nor leniency, but rather the duty to ensure legal abstraction never erases human reality. He emphasized that a judge must remain impartial and understanding without abandoning the law or becoming captive to public sentiment.
Justice Vikram Nath stated that while artificial intelligence can serve as a tool to augment the judicial system, it cannot replace human judges in delivering judgments or making core decisions. He noted that AI cannot resolve complex legal disputes, constitutional issues, or criminal cases requiring nuanced human judgment.
Justice Vikram Nath stated that institutions must be open to questioning and willing to account for the power entrusted to them by citizens. He noted that as people become more aware of their rights, expectations rise, and institutions must ensure that fairness and transparency are felt in the lived experiences of citizens.
