03, Jul 2018
The Supreme Court favoured to broadcast live hearing of cases in the apex court. This live telecast of court proceedings would be in line with the principle of open court.
- In accordance with the cardinal principle of law that justice should not only be done, but also seen to be done.
- It advance the rule of law and to bring accessibility and transparency in the administration of justice.
- As citizens have the right to information under Article 19(1)(a) live broadcast will immensely help disseminating vital information and it also provide access to justice as protected under Article 21.
- All citizens must be given an opportunity to understand how the law functions.
- Technology will help us bridge the gap and make it possible to access the Supreme Court and virtually enter the courtroom even when not present.
- When people understand how the judiciary functions and how the decisions are taken, it gives them more power, it gives them the tools to protect their rights, it gives them more respect and confidence in the judiciary.
- Live streaming would also help in avoiding “misinformation and disinformation” of the top court proceeding. As people know instantly about the important developments in the court.
- Would help litigants follow the proceedings in their case and also assess their lawyers’ performance.
- People from far-flung States do not have to travel all the way to the national capital for a day’s hearing.
- Enhances the transparency in its working.
- A live telecast of proceedings also has the potential to reduce unwarranted delays in the cases caused by the occasionally unconcerned attitude of lawyers.
- This it would keep a check on lawyers’ conduct inside the courtrooms.
- As the arguments gets advanced and the discussions that ensue between the bar and the bench.
- The next generation of lawyers and citizens will also gain from the immense educational and archival value of the landmark cases.
- This will provide an opportunity to young lawyers to showcase their talents to the world and has the potential to break the stranglehold of a select few over the legal profession.
- Could adversely affect the character and quality of the dialogue between the attorneys and Justices.
- It could lead to misunderstandings about how the court works and enable journalists to take snippets of arguments out of context.
- Media distortion of the proceedings for their commercial motive is possible.
- Televising court proceedings could make Judges and lawyers, targets of violence from disappointed litigants or the public at large.
- Live-streaming cases involving national security concerns, matrimonial disputes and rape cases, public viewing of marital dispute and rape case proceedings would seriously affect justice and amount to a violation of the fundamental right to privacy.
- Broadcasters should be on a non-commercial basis. No one should profit from the arrangement.
- Framing guidelines for live-streaming proceedings with inputs from all stakeholders.
- There should be guidelines on which kind of cases could be live telecast or recorded etc.
- Consent of witness or the accused has to be obtained before broadcasting, by the trial judge hearing the case.
Live telecast of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha proceedings since 2003 and 2004 respectively had generated awareness among the people about the work of their elected representatives and enhanced transparency in the parliamentary processes. This can be replicated in judiciary.
Last year, in a bid to ensure transparency, the top court allowed the installation of CCTVs to record proceedings in trial courts.so following this path supreme court and central government can implement live broadcasting after taking all the reservations in to account.