The main impediment to equitable access to justice in the civil justice system of Bangladesh, especially in land litigation, is inordinate delay. Delay in the judiciary of Bangladesh has reached such a level that it has become a factor of injustice ([15]). It is the right of every citizen that his or her suit should be disposed of within a specified time. Every citizen of the country has the right to know when his litigation will be disposed of, but in Bangladesh, if a land litigation starts, it is very uncertain when it will be disposed of. In Bangladesh, by the time judgment is pronounced in most cases, the necessity for judgment has ceased to exist. In many cases, the litigant cannot get the result of land litigation in his or her lifetime. To ensure the uninterrupted functioning of all organs of a country, to attract foreign investment, and to continue the progress of a country, disposal of civil suits within a specified time is essential ([25]). Disposal of a suit within the specified time is one of the constitutional obligations of the country ([14]). Delay in the delivery of justice causes dissatisfaction among the litigants; people lose their confidence in the judiciary and take extrajudicial means to settle their disputes.

Delay in the disposition of land litigation is common in any country, but in Bangladesh it is the main challenge of the civil justice system, which decreases public credence in the judiciary. There is a general perception among the people of Bangladesh that once a case goes to civil court, it will take years and generations before the court pronounces a final judgment ([24]). The land litigation system in Bangladesh is so lengthy that the affected people are not interested in going to court for fear of further suffering due to inordinate delay.

Delay in land litigation in Bangladesh is both intentional and unintentional. Unintentional delay is due to the existing age-old system, which is not properly updated from time to time to make it time-framed, and intentional delay is mainly due to malpractice by persons involved in the trial process, including court officials and bad tactics of parties, lawyers, and court officials. Disposal of suits within a specified time is a precondition of justice, rule of law, democracy, and human rights, but delay in the land litigation process in Bangladesh has reached such a point as to pose a formidable threat to the protection and promotion of human rights. Delay in the judiciary of Bangladesh is a factor of injustice and violation of human rights ([8]). Delay in the trial process of land litigation in Bangladesh is the main problem of the civil justice system of Bangladesh, and it is so hazardous and lamentable for the marginalized people of the country that it cannot be explained, and in many cases, poor people who went to court to address their grievances sold off their lands and property to meet the expenses of the court but did not get justice in their lifetime ([4]). “Delay devalues judgment, creates anxiety in the minds of litigants and uncertainty for parties and lawyers, results in loss or deterioration of evidence, waste of court resources, needlessly increases the cost of litigation and creates confusion and conflict in the allocation of court resources” ([14]). An aggrieved party expects unpolluted, speedy, and low-cost justice. Access to justice connotes more than simple entry into formal courts of law but includes the ability to reach lawmakers, lawyers, law-enforcing agencies, and the capacity to bear the expenses of these services ([18]). Delay in the trial process of land litigation in Bangladesh is a curse which causes financial losses to the litigants and the government, wastes valuable time of the court and countless working hours of the litigants, and creates various social problems ([10]). Delay in the trial process of land litigation in Bangladesh is such a problem which is not only a mere impediment in the way of delivery of justice but also a problem which puts the entire civil justice system of the country into question and destroys all achievements of the country.

The high cost of litigation is one of the major impediments in the way of delivery of justice in land litigation in Bangladesh. Around one-third of the total population of the country lives below the poverty line ([3]), and a considerable portion of them are “extremely poor” who cannot live from hand to mouth; they are unable to maintain a civil suit for a long time. The average cost of a suit related to land in Bangladesh is worth forty-five percent (45%) of the concerned household’s annual income ([29]). About seventy to eighty percent (70% to 80%) of the people involved in conflict are not interested in going to the court system to settle their land dispute, fearing further loss ([16]). Court fee, process fee, pleader’s fee, and other relevant expenses, along with some hidden costs (which are many times more than prescribed in law), especially to collect certified copies of various documents from courts and land offices in Bangladesh, are so high that litigation cost is one of the main obstacles to access to justice for the people of the country, especially for the poor, disadvantaged, and backward sections of the country ([3]). Besides these expenses, physical and mental sufferings and waste of working hours cannot be explained in words. The judiciary of Bangladesh is not friendly for the poor and disadvantaged people of the country, and to win the case, parties must have huge amounts of money; otherwise, they will become victimized. Legal support to the poor from the government and NGOs is very insufficient, with less than five percent (5%) receiving support from government and NGOs.

Corruption in the judiciary of a country is not only an obstacle to the delivery of justice but also like cancer in the human body, which completely destroys the entire judiciary of the country and annihilates all the achievements of the government. The judiciary of Bangladesh is now at the centre of public debate mainly due to excessive delay, high expenses, and corruption among the persons involved in the trial process of litigation ([22]). Though the appointment process of the judicial officers of Bangladesh is very transparent and impartial, the appointment process of the court’s supporting staff is not transparent, and in most cases, they are appointed for political considerations. As a result, unqualified persons are appointed, and by these unqualified and unskilled manpower, court functions have to continue, but their output level is very poor, and most of them are involved in corruption. Sometimes pleaders of both parties and some corrupt court officials develop an unholy alliance to milk both contesting sides as long as possible ([29]). “Nezarat section, bench clerk, M. L. S. S (member of lower subordinate staff) and process server—they are a syndicate, and they intentionally make mistakes in serving summons, such as incorrect name of the father of the defendant, incorrect holding number, incorrect road number, etc., mentioned in the address of the defendant, and they jointly involve themselves in these unfair practices ([8]).” Sometimes concerned pleaders apply for adjournment of the suit on fragile grounds just to prolong the trial, and the court, having no other way, grants the application repeatedly ([12]).

The entire civil justice system of Bangladesh, including the land litigation process, is age-old, inherited from the British, and is full of complexities. Most of the people in Bangladesh involved in land litigation, especially in rural areas, are poor, illiterate, and unconscious, who do not have proper knowledge regarding the complex procedures of land litigation and also the language of the court. Due to the procedural complexities of land litigation in Bangladesh, poor and illiterate justice seekers are frequently obstructed in the way of getting justice. Outdated laws are the fertile ground of complexities for justice seekers. Most of the procedural laws governing land litigation in Bangladesh were made by the British to secure their colonial administration more, and not to make it more fruitful and friendly for the marginalized people of the Indian subcontinent ([3]), which is obstructing the way of equitable access to justice (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Land litigation process in Bangladesh. Source: [12].

Backlog of cases is another impediment to access to justice in land litigation in Bangladesh. Land litigation still dominates the entire judiciary of Bangladesh ([29]). Two-thirds of the total suits pending in the judiciary of Bangladesh are related to land ([16]). Due to the huge backlog of cases, the judiciary of Bangladesh is overburdened, and land disputes in Bangladesh have reached such a level that one in every seven households is either directly or indirectly involved in land disputes ([27]). Day by day, the population of the country is increasing, which continuously creates pressure on land. As a result, land is becoming more in demand and the number of land litigations is increasing, especially in the rural areas of Bangladesh, which is continuously creating pressure on the judiciary of the country. The backlog of cases causes wearing delays which is “eating Bangladesh judiciary” ([5]). The backlog of cases in the way of justice delivery puts tremendous pressure on the judiciary, which causes not only delays in the delivery of justice but also extra financial losses for the parties and wastes valuable time of the court as well as the parties concerned. The backlog of cases in the judiciary of Bangladesh, especially in the delivery of justice in land litigation, is not only an obstacle to equitable access to justice but also one of the major causes of judicial injustice.

Shortage of judges and efficient court officials is one of the major drawbacks of the judiciary of Bangladesh. In considering total pending civil suits, the number of judges in civil courts is very insufficient to ensure speedy justice. The judicial mechanism in Bangladesh, especially the subordinate courts, cannot function efficiently and effectively with the expected speed due to the shortage of judges and efficient court officials ([3]). The judge-population ratio in Bangladesh is ten (10) judges per million people, which is not adequate to ensure speedy justice ([26]). In contrast, this ratio is forty-two to one hundred seven (42 to 107) in developed countries of the world, and even in our neighboring country India, there are seventeen (17) judges per million people ([28]). The number of supporting staff in subordinate courts in Bangladesh is very poor in comparison with the volume of work. There is a shortage of court officials on one hand, and on the other hand, existing supporting staff of subordinate courts are not competent enough to ensure speedy justice, and they are not so interested in developing themselves as they think they are doing a government job and have sufficient job security and do not have any accountability to the people. There is a lack of proper training for lawyers and supporting staff of subordinate courts of Bangladesh, and the training for judges of subordinate courts is not sufficient. But competent and dutiful judges, as well as supporting staff and pleaders, are sinequanon to maintain speedy and equitable access to justice in any litigation ([15]).

Defects in existing laws regulating land litigation in Bangladesh are an obstruction to ensuring equitable access to justice in the trial process of land litigation in Bangladesh. Most of the laws regulating the trial process of land litigation were drafted by the British more than one hundred years ago. These laws were made considering the socio-economic condition and demands of that time, but the advantages of technology are not included in these laws. These laws have not been properly amended from time to time to make these laws timely. The land administration and management system is very old and complex, which cannot keep pace with the growing demand and changing situation of the land market ([21]). “The land management system in Bangladesh is old, slow, conventional, and characterized by inefficiencies and corruption, and computerization of land records and development of an organized land information system have become essential” ([17]). Land administration and management system, court record system, and records of land offices are not digitalized. The Evidence Act, 1872 still does not recognize audio and video recordings as evidence, whereas many developed countries of the world have recognized them as evidence and have also introduced audio, video conference, and Skype in taking evidence from witnesses who are far from the court or extremely old or sick. Collection of certified copies of documents from land offices and collection of certified copies of judgments and decrees from the court are still conventional, which causes unbearable suffering to the parties and also consumes their valuable time, money, and energy.

Under the existing judicial system of Bangladesh, judges of the subordinate court, i.e., District Judge, Additional District Judge, and Joint District Judge, exercise both civil and criminal jurisdiction ([13]). Though the judges have both civil and criminal jurisdiction, in practice, judges give more importance to criminal cases than civil suits. In civil suits, especially in land litigation, a huge number of documents are involved, and the procedure of land litigation is more lengthy than criminal cases. Normally, the hearing and argument process of land litigation is more lengthy than criminal cases, and the judges are more interested in hearing criminal cases than civil suits, especially land litigation, which is not only an impediment to access to justice but also a direct injustice to the justice seeker. The reasons for doing so by the judges are: “a. it is easier to deal with criminal matters than civil matters, as criminal matters are less time-consuming and less formal, whereas civil matters are very technical, formal, and time-consuming; b. it has become practice that if a government witness, e.g., Investigation Officer (I. O.), comes to attend criminal cases, the court should take his evidence by adjourning civil proceedings that day; c. the judge has to prepare and submit to his superior authority monthly or weekly statements of judicial functions, which must include a certain number of disposals irrespective of civil or criminal, and failure to reach that number makes him accountable. This prompts him to fulfill the number of disposals even with mere criminal cases. It is not rare to find that a District Judge has not disposed of a civil suit during his judgeship at the district level” ([13]).