While the announcement of fast-track courts is a high-profile response to public anger, critics argue that it may be a superficial fix for a much deeper, systemic problem. Skeptics point out that creating new courts does not address the root causes of paper leaks, such as the lack of security protocols, administrative negligence, or the influence of organized cheating syndicates within testing agencies. Without comprehensive reform of the institutions responsible for conducting these exams, the legal process may simply be treating the symptoms rather than the disease.
There is also concern that the focus on fast-tracking trials could inadvertently compromise the quality of investigations. Legal experts often warn that rushing through complex criminal cases can lead to procedural errors, potentially weakening the prosecution's position and allowing the actual masterminds behind these leaks to escape conviction on technical grounds. Accountability requires thorough, evidence-based investigations, which cannot always be compressed into a short timeframe without risking the integrity of the judicial process itself.
Furthermore, the opposition and various student organizations maintain that the government must first accept responsibility for the administrative failures that led to the current crisis. They argue that the focus should be on transparency, the resignation of officials responsible for the lapses, and a complete overhaul of the testing infrastructure. Until the government addresses these fundamental issues, critics fear that the fast-track court initiative will be viewed as a political maneuver designed to quiet public dissent rather than a genuine effort to ensure long-term justice.