The Supreme Court has highlighted the critical role of artificial intelligence (AI) in reducing delays in the judicial system, warning that prolonged cases often amount to the denial of justice.

The court emphasized that timely justice is a constitutional right and essential to maintaining public trust in the judiciary.

Landmark judgement on decade-old auction case

Justices Mansoor Ali Shah and Ayesha Malik issued a written judgement on a 2011 auction case, which had remained unresolved for over a decade. The case was pending in the Peshawar High Court for 10 years and has been in the Supreme Court since 2022 but had not been heard.

The judgement observed:

Delay in justice weakens the justice system, undermines the rule of law and judicial credibility among the public.
Prolonged proceedings disproportionately affect weaker and marginalised sections of society that cannot afford the expenses of lengthy court proceedings.
Delays can deter investment and harm institutional reputation.

Over two million cases pending nationwide

The Supreme Court noted that more than 2.2 million cases are currently pending across Pakistan, with approximately 55,941 cases in the Supreme Court alone. Highlighting the scale of the challenge, the court stressed the urgent adoption of a modern, accountable, and smart case management system, including AI-based solutions, to streamline proceedings and ensure accountability.

AI and smart systems as the solution

The judgement urged courts to leverage smart, technology-driven case management to minimize delays and improve judicial efficiency. The court emphasized that timely justice is not just administrative but a constitutional imperative, and failure to provide it erodes public confidence in the legal system.

Petition dismissed for lack of follow-up

Regarding the 14-year-old auction case, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition due to a lack of follow-ups. Neither the petitioner nor any representative appeared in court, highlighting the practical challenges of pursuing decades-old disputes.

"Delay in justice is not merely a denial of justice; in many cases, it amounts to the end of justice," the court ruled.