TRANSPARENCY IN COURT PROCEEDINGS BOOSTS DEMOCRACY

Openness transformed judiciaries across the globe. Though some prefer more guardrails on judicial reportage in India, common people have a right to know about the proceedings

- KALEESWARAM RAJ

CERTAIN comments made by Justice Vedavyasachar Srishananda of the Karnataka High Court led to a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court taking cognisance of the issue.

The visuals of the judge's remarks were widely circulated in social media. The high court judge termed a certain part of Bengaluru as 'Pakistan' and allegedly made inappropriate comments against a woman lawyer. Subsequently, the judge apologised for his behaviour; the SC accepted it and closed the case. The matter ended there.

But, after the episode, many have demanded that live streaming of court proceedings should be stopped to avoid such embarrassing situations. They also suggested that YouTube and other social media/media outlets should be prevented from circulating video clips of court proceedings. This opinion, shared by many in the legal fraternity and outside, on the face of it, is undemocratic.

English jurist Jeremy Bentham famously said "publicity is the very soul of justice". In the era of online courts and globalised media environment, transparency of court proceedings is technologically guaranteed. A transnational conversation on the affairs of the court happens. The SC in Chief Election Commissioner vs M R Vijayabhaskar (2021) said "public discussion and criticism may work as a restraint on the conduct of a judge". It went on to say "courts must also take the aid of technology to enhance the principle of open courts by moving beyond physical accessibility to virtual accessibility" Pertinently, in this case the SC refused to interfere with the oral comments made by the Madras high court against the Election Commission during a hearing, which the EC wanted to expunge. The court also rejected the prayer of the EC for restraining the media from reporting court proceedings.