The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud, on Friday (February 9), sought the centre’s reply on a petition seeking live streaming of court proceedings in matters of national importance while also seeking assistance of Attorney General KK Venugopal on the matter.
The court’s order came on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by senior advocate Indira Jaising.
During submissions before the Bench on Friday, while Jaising qualified her request by urging the court to allow “live streaming of proceedings in cases that are of constitutional and national importance having an impact on the public at large or a large number of people”, advocate Mathews Nedumpara requested for “recording of cases in all courts”.
Senior advocate Jaising asked the court to consider laying down guidelines governing which cases can be recorded and live streamed and which may not. Her petition, for which she has also sought public support through an online campaign, says live streaming of cases of constitutional and national importance would empower and provide access to ordinary citizens who cannot personally go to the court due to social and economic constraints, even though the decision would impact them.
In January, when the PIL had been filed with the apex court, Jaising had said that “live telecast” in cases of national importance would increase access to courts, thereby negating “second-hand information”.
“The right to seek, receive information including live streaming of Supreme Court proceedings is a fundamental to and part of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution,” she had submitted. Jaising’s petition had specifically mentioned that rather than relying on an interpretation of what is happening in court by third parties, citizens would be able to get the first hand information on such issues.
On Friday, Jaising reiterated before the Bench headed by the Chief Justice that live streaming and videography of the proceedings of the apex court in matters of national importance will be in keeping with the principle of “open access to justice” and will ensure “justice is not only done but is seen to be done”.
Arguing that live streaming of court proceedings would “inspire confidence in the functioning of the judiciary as an institution and help in maintaining the respect that it deserves as a co-equal organ of the state”, Jaising underscored how other jurisdictions including, those of Canada, Australia, the UK, New Zealand, South Africa, the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court, permit varying degrees of recording of court proceedings.
The bench then directed the petitioners to serve a copy of the petitions to the relevant Central Agency so that Attorney General KK Venugopal can assist the Court in the matter.
Commenting on the court’s directives on her petition, Jaising tweeted: “Happy to note that the SC has an open mind on open Justice, order passed in my petition for live streaming seeking assistance from Attorney General. The doors of the court may finally be opened someday to everyone everywhere to watch, listen and understand”.