Sealed justice: On sealed cover jurisprudence

News: Recently, the Supreme Court has decided that it will examine the issue of ‘sealed cover jurisprudence’ in the Media One channel case.

What is ‘sealed cover jurisprudence’?

This practice gained much traction in recent years, in this contents or evidences are provided to judges in sealed envelopes, withheld from lawyers appearing against the government, which is seen by judges alone. In this manner, the courts can rule in favour of the government without providing an opportunity to the affected parties to know what is being held against them.

In Media One case, Kerala High Court upheld the validity of an order revoking broadcasting rights of Malayalam news channel Media One, on the basis of a sealed envelope evoking national security. For now, the Supreme Court has allowed the channel to resume broadcasting.

What is the validity of ‘sealed cover jurisprudence’ under law?

Law permits the submission of confidential material in some cases. Courts can also order some contents to be kept confidential. The Evidence Act allows the privilege of non-disclosure of some documents and communications. The government usually justifies the submission of secret material on the basis of national security or ongoing investigation.

What are the undesirable consequences of such practice?

1. Compromising defence of accused– especially in cases of national security, money laundering, or corruption.
2. Denying bail on the basis of undisclosed material. (P. Chidambaram case)
3. Gives scope to state to avoid scrutiny of the need and proportionalityof its restrictions on freedom.

The Supreme Court should determine and prescribe circumstances in which confidential government reports can be used by courts for adjudication.

Source: This post is created based on “Sealed justice: On sealed cover jurisprudence” published in The Hindu on 25^th March 2022.