THE IMPACT OF IMPLICIT BIAS ON JURY SELECTION AND VERDICTS
Paarisha, Student, Gautam Buddha University
Introduction
Implicit biasness is a term which refers to the subconscious behaviour or stereotypical approach that affect one’s understanding, actions, and decisions. In the fields of law these biases hinder in the way of justice and undermine the fundamental principle of equality before the law, provided in Article 14 of Constitution of India. Globally the discourse focuses on the impact of implicit bias on the jury selection and verdicts. India’s unique judicial system ensures a tailored exploration of this problem.
The jury system in India: Historical Background
India adopted the jury system from the British colonial administration. But the jury system was effectively abolished after the landmark case of K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra [AIR 1962 SC 605]. In this case, the jury’s verdict was perceived as influenced by the public opinion and media, which expressed concerns over the reliability and impartiality of jury decisions.
After the Nanavati case, India evolved into a judge-centric trial system. In today’s new era Judges preside over both civil and criminal cases, which are expected to deliver unbiased, fair and just verdicts based on the substantial and procedural law. India’s Constitutions safeguards every citizen of India from biasness and unequal treatment.
Implicit Bias in judicial proceedings
Implicit bias will always remain a pertinent concern in India’s judicial concern despite of the absence of juries. Judges, lawyers, police and other legal powerholders are not immune to subconscious prejudices that may inherit from societal stereotypical approach towards caste, religion, gender, or socioeconomic status.
For instance, researches have conveyed that people from marginalized communities face harsher sentencing or maybe more likely to be presumed at fault. This challenges the idea of impartial justice and can waver the public trust in the legal judicial system.
Structural inequalities like discrimination by gender, race, religion, caste and ethnicity can be seen among all the groups or societies in India. A challenge that our Indian legal system encounters is unequal representation which creates a void in legal system to confront those situations, The Constitutions of India provides provisions which ensures and safeguards the fairness in judicial system. Article 14 of Indian constitution guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. Under Constitution of India, it is fundamental right that signifies that all the people should be treated equally and without discrimination, it provides doctrine of arbitrariness which safeguards against arbitrariness, it is also based on the principle of natural justice. “A landmark judgement, one with regard to defining the strata of natural justice, as earlier natural justice being a universal rule was extended to all policies, rules and statutes which sometimes dissolved the very purpose of its being and existence i.e. to provide justice. The scope of natural justice was further increased after the Maneka Gandhi case, which extended the scope of article 14 to arbitrariness, indirectly bringing natural justice under the umbrella of Article 14“.
Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. And Article 21 provides protection to the right to life and personal liberty, which encompasses the right to a fair trial. The right to life is a fundamental to our very existence, without which we can not live as human beings and includes all those aspects of life, which makes a life of man meaningful, complete and worth living. It is based on the procedure established by law.
Judicial recognition of implicit bias
Indian courts are very well aware and acknowledges the dangers of bias in judicial proceedings. In State of Punjab vs. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar, the Supreme Court put stress on the need for judges to stay impartial and free from biases, emphasized that justice should not only be done but also be seen to be done. Furtthermore, in Zahira Habibullah Sheikh vs. State of Gujarat, the court conveyed the importance of free and just trials and the role of judiciary in upholding the rights of the accused, especially in sensitive cases.
Impact on Marginalized Communities
Implicit biases can gravely affect marginalized groups:
Caste-Based Bias: People from lower caste such as SC’s, ST’s and the non-creamy layer of the society adversely encounter prejudice, affecting bail decisions, sentencing, or even the likelihood of being charged.
Religious Bias: In a country like India communities might face implicit bias that impact the judicial outcomes due to the diversity throughout the country Gender Bias: The questioning of truthfulness in the testimony of women, especially in instances of sexual offenses, may betray their familiarity with the stereotypes.
Mitigating Implicit Bias
Restoring balance to the judicial space requires strategies to reduce or, if possible, eradicate unconscious biases. These strategies might include:
Training and Sensitization: It is of utmost importance to keep the judiciary conscious of its own biases. Regulating and enhancing the leniency programs for judges which shed light on the ignorance as well as the reactionary responses that result from unconscious biases. This systematic adjustment will also extend to include face-to-face dialogue to cope with deeper emotional confrontations triggered during conversation.
Diverse Forms of Representation: Having more perspectives from which to judge could also assist in decreasing these. It is an urgent task to task the very judiciary to recognize and reconcile with its biases in conformity with the judicial canons.
The role of the Judiciary
The judiciary has the crucial torched self-inquisition so that justice can be administered. Integrity of the legal system means giving up impartiality as the foundation value.
Conclusion
Implicit bias could pose a subtle but sure threat to the fairness of justice in India. Recognizing and dealing with these biases is crucial for the judicial system to safeguard the rights of the national citizens. Upholding the democracy held dear by the Constitution requires a concerted effort to ensure that justice becomes but not presented by any bias. Conclusively, against the backdrop of the constitutional rights to justice to which India aspires inscribed in the Constitution, fighting implicit bias is fundamental indeed. As the principal architect of the Indian Constitution, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar emphasized that the Constitution is useless if its rights do not go hand in hand with the societal commitment to justice and equality. Implicit bias frustrates this ideal by perpetuating subtle forms of inequality. Recognizing and working on implicit bias would shake up the system by raising its credibility and thus increasing public confidence on it. However, winners of the fights against judges’ biases will multiply like mushrooms and hence, save the whole of the people. It is high time that justice truly learnt to close its eyes, deaf to all prejudice or stereotype, while headlong India in democracy building.