In ancient India, court cases mostly used to be held in the open. However, with the passage of time, in the modern era, cases are held and decided behind closed doors. Of late, a general question has caught the public mind that court cases, specifically, Supreme Court cases should be allowed to see by the junta. In other words, Supreme Court cases should be live streamed. There are factors favoring and against this notion. Let’s do a swot up…..
In cases, of national importance, people, specifically the think tanks are of the view that the public has full right to know the case proceedings. After all, the entire final jurisdiction concerns the public. How can one not involve the public in cases regarding them? This seems unthinkable. For instance, in cases, such as eradication of section 377 of Indian Penal code, or in cases like the entry of women in Sabarimala, live streaming; most people hold the view is, that it should be allowed. Also, why shouldn’t law and judiciary benefit from technology? Live streaming, would be a great move in this direction.
Now, let’s consider the facts against the notion. First and foremost, people argue, that in some cases like those involving heinous crimes or criminal proceedings, live streaming would be an unhealthy choice. The life of people involved in such cases may be put to danger. Also, there is a problem with graphic violence. They may prove gross, and audience, specifically if it involves children should never view them.
The aforesaid sentiments prove, that common sense says, that in this era of the internet and digitalization, live streaming is not a bad option, albeit within the certain restriction. The International Court of justice, certain high courts in Canada and Australia allow it.
The bottom line is, the idea is a novel one and worth a try. At the same time, precaution should also be taken regarding the sensitivity of the cases. Common sense and prudence is the key.