Should Supreme Court proceedings be live-streamed?

Should Supreme Court proceedings be live-streamed?

Context:

The question is whether Supreme Court proceedings should be live-streamed

Arguments in favour:

• It will enable the legal system to deliver on its promise of empowering the masses
• It is important to make those matters that are of great public importance available for all to see. Example: public interest issues such as entry of women to the Sabarimala temple, or the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme, and similar other cases should be available for all to watch.

Strong reasons in favour of allowing live-streaming of court proceedings include:

• The right to information,
• Access to justice,
• The need to build the right perception,
• The need to educate common people on how the judiciary functions
• To avoid multiple versions or wrong projections of facts

Arguments against:

• Judges are accountable neither to the general public nor to the sovereign. They are accountable only to the rule of law and to the Constitution, as established by law.
• The individuality of judges is more likely to become a subject of public debate through live-streaming, creating problems of its own
• Live-streaming may also create practical problems. With live-streaming, there is a strong possibility that lawyers will tend to address not only the judges but also the public watching them.
• The normalcy of the proceedings may also get hampered

Way Out:

• Uniqueness of the Indian Supreme Court, its structure and processes, and the underlying problems that impede its effectiveness must be kept in kind

More fundamental reforms need to be implemented. These include:

• Greater reliance on written briefs and the significance accorded to them,
• Page limits for briefs,
• Time limits for oral arguments
• Greater emphasis on preparation in advance
• The judiciary must also employ a press officer to liaise with the media, and issue simultaneously one or two page summaries of its judgments to facilitate greater public understanding.
• Instead of live-streaming, audio and video recordings of court proceedings would reform the administration of justice