A fair trial is the right of the victim and the accused.
Yet, we all intuitively know that not all trials result in a fair judgment. One
may even be pardoned to imagine that most legal trials in India result in
errors. Occasionally, we make an outburst about a judgement gone wrong or
perceived to have gone wrong. Yet we take it on our stride and believe that
life is a chain of trials and errors.
Courts are meant to dispense justice. However, the long
chain of the justice system is often a test of smartness or skilful work by a
whole lot of intermediaries in the chain right from the local police who
registers a complaint or a First Information Report. A small twist by an
intentional or unintentional error in the FIR can change the entire course of
trial and even the outcome. Similarly the collection and presentation of
evidence and trial of witnesses at different trial courts can make or break a
case. Truth usually doesn’t stand up on its legs. It always needs some
artificial limbs provided by interested and sometimes uninterested parties.
‘Satyameva Jayate’ is a fascinating aspiration like many other ideals. Truth manifests
differently to different people and at different times. OK, that is philosophy.
Let’s return to reality.
An article in the recent Fortune magazine (August 1, 2015) adapted
from Geoff Colvin’s book titled ‘Humans Are Underrated’ cites an interesting
research study. Parole decisions are made by judges in some countries, such as
Israel, where researchers investigated how those decisions are influenced by a
routine human act like lunch. Over the course of a day, the judges approve
about 35% of prisoners’ applications for parole. But the approval rate declines steadily in
the two hours before the lunch break. Immediately after the lunch, it spikes to
65% and then again declines steadily. If you are a prisoner, the number of
years you spend behind bars could be affected significantly by whether your
parole application happens to be the last one on the judge’s stack before lunch
or the first one after!
Data-driven algorithms have proved superior to human judges
in such decisions. Rationally we prefer a computer that doesn’t take a lunch
break to a judge who takes a lunch break whose body metabolism and mental
agility or emotions depend on many external factors. Yet, we may not reassign
such jobs from judges to machines. Why? The issue is not computer abilities; it
is the social necessity that individuals be accountable for important
decisions.
Corporate situations are similar too. Will the manager who
writes the appraisal of five employees at a stretch apply varying judgements
based on when he is taking a lunch break? Quite likely! You may want to pray that
your appraisal comes up in the morning list and not closer to the lunch break.
It can potentially make or break a career, or affect your salary increase or
promotion. It is not a question of fairness. It is a matter of hunger!
Seriously, ask your boss, ‘hungry, kya?’
Well, lot of transactions have been automated in many
companies, making a day’s job easier for the average employee and the HR
Department. But not many decisions are automated or moved to self-service
mobile app. It appears, the higher the impact of a decision the greater the
chance of error. Alas, human judgement after 200,000 years of evolution, still
remains in the realm of trial and error!
‘The ability to observe without evaluating is the highest form of intelligence.’- Jiddu Krishnamurti
No comments:
Post a Comment