INTRODUCTION
Transparency in the Judicial system has become equally important and need of the hour as well. In a recent matter filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court; the Court stated that the right to transparency must end an inch before the right to speculate is created. The proponents of live streaming often advance various examples but the most important of them all.
There are various other countries where the practice of live streaming of Court proceedings takes place. It somehow helps in comparing the working of two organs of the government, The legislative body- Parliament, and the Judicial Bodies- Courts. It is needed the need for educating people at large on how courts decide cases, and how a matter proceeds.
The proponents of live telecast of proceedings base their support mainly on two arguments, the need for legal literacy of the masses and the hallowed virtue of institutional transparency.
PARLIAMENT & OTHER LEGAL SYSTEMS
A comparison of the Supreme Court with the Parliament is the most, illusory. The Parliament works very different from courts. Parliamentary debates are based on policies and policy because it’s nature is experimental.
Whereas, the Courts function on logic and application of the law. A policy debate warrants the direct participation of public wherever required, even criticism. However, the Courts does not any person to intervene in the matter who is not having any kind of interest in the ongoing matter.
For the purpose of live telecast, ‘will of the people’ must be exposed to such an influence. The Supreme Court does not, as it should not, represent the ‘will of the people’ and the consequences of the judiciary being subjected to such an influence are far too dangerous.
SUPREME COURT AND CASES OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
There are many countries in the world that permit live streaming of court proceedings and there are others that do not. But now, India is also one of those countries, where this question is decided by a constitutional court, on its judicial side, through a writ petition.
This new change will help a layman or any person who is not trained in law know that the court is not adopting a new rule of procedure for itself. If one files a matter before the Hon’ble Court relating to the welfare of the public; and is a matter of Constitution, billions of people will be having access to watch the same.
In simpler terms, transparency begs more than mere observability. The Court has equally kept in mind the right of privacy of a person. The matters which involve the issue of privacy of an individual; the court shall not telecast such matters.
THE PREVAILING SCENARIO
The time is changing and so is the working of the organs of the Government. It should be the foremost and major duty of the Government; as well as the Judicial system to provide the subjects with a sense of security and transparency; when it comes to the interest of people at large.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent Judgment has allowed the live streaming of the matters involving the interest of the people and the Constitutional matters.