TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 2157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....upreme Court case proceedings of "constitutional importance having an impact on the public at large or a large number of people" should be live streamed in a manner that is easily accessible for public viewing. Further direction is sought to frame guidelines to enable the determination of exceptional cases that qualify for live streaming and to place those guidelines before the Full Court of this Court. To buttress these prayers, reliance has been placed on the dictum of a nine-Judge Bench of this Court in Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.,^1 which has had an occasion to inter alia consider the arguments of journalists that they had a fundamental right to carry on their occupation under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution; that they also had a right to attend the proceedings in court under Article 19(1)(d); and that their right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) included their right to publish a faithful report of the proceedings which they had witnessed and heard in Court as journalists. The Court whilst considering the said argument went on to emphasise about the efficacy of open trials for upholding the legiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cation of cases before this Court. The right to know and receive information, it is by now well settled, is a facet of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and for which reason the public is entitled to witness Court proceedings involving issues having an impact on the public at large or a section of the public, as the case may be. This right to receive information and be informed is buttressed by the value of dignity of the people. One of the proponents has also highlighted the fact that litigants involved in large number of cases pending before the Courts throughout the country will be benefitted if access to Court proceedings is made possible by way of live streaming of Court proceedings. That would increase the productivity of the country, since scores of persons involved in litigation in the courts in India will be able to avoid visiting the courts in person, on regular basis, to witness hearings and instead can attend to their daily work without taking leave. 4. As the debate has actuated momentous issues, we had requested the learned Attorney General for India, Shri K.K. Venugopal to collate the suggestions given by him as well as the petitioners and interventionists and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... relation to any such proceedings, except with the previous permission of the Court:] [Provided that the ban on printing or publication of trail proceedings in relation to an offence of rape may be lifted, subject to maintaining confidentiality of name and address of the parties.]" Section 153-B CPC "153-B. Place of trial to be deemed to be open Court.- The place in which any Civil Court is held for the purpose of trying any suit shall be deemed to be an open Court, to which the public generally may have access so far as the same can conveniently contain them: Provided that the presiding Judge may, if he thinks fit, order at any state of any inquiry into or trial of any particular case, that the public generally, or any particular person, shall not have access to, or be or remain in, the room or building used by the Court." 7. Notably, in Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar (supra), this Court, in no uncertain terms, expounded that open trial is the norm but, at the same time, cautioned that there may be situations where the administration of justice itself may make it necessary for the Courts to hold in-camera trials. Applying the underlying principles,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 10. We must hasten to add that our attention was invited to the decision taken by the Advisory Council of the National Mission of Justice Delivery and Legal Reforms on the proposal to initiate audio video recording on an experimental basis in the Courts. In its meeting held on 26th August, 2014, it was noted that audio video recording of Court proceedings was proposed in the Policy and Action Plan Document for Phase II for the e-Courts Mission Mode Project. However, in the meeting of the E-Committee held on 8th January, 2014, the issue was taken up but was deferred as it required consultation with Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts. Indeed, consultation with the Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts may become essential for framing of rules for live streaming of Court proceedings so as to ensure that the dignity and majesty of the Court is preserved, and, at the same time, address the concerns of privacy and confidentiality of the litigants or witnesses, matters relating to business confidentiality in commercial disputes including prohibition or restriction of access of proceedings or trials stipulated by the Central or State legislations....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....asis and on certain conditions, including that the proceedings are not disturbed, that no artificial lighting is used, that cameras remain in fixed positions once proceedings have commenced, and that the Court retains the right to veto the use of any part or of all footage recorded. iii. The website of the Federal Court also contains a video archive of certain judgment summaries, accompanied by text versions^8. iv. Rule 6.11 of the Federal Court Rules, 2011^9 seems to indicate that private parties may also take recordings of proceedings, subject to restrictions laid down therein. b. Supreme Courts: Permission for broadcast varies, depending on the court. i. The Supreme Courts (having trial jurisdiction) for the various Australian districts differ on permission for media broadcasting. For example, the Queensland Supreme Court allows for a live or delayed broadcast of only 'judgment remarks'^10 and has also issued practice directions in that regard^11. ii. Filming court proceedings is permitted in certain situations in certain Supreme Courts like New South Wales^12, Northern Territory^13, Western Australia^14 and Tasmania^15, after an appl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....22 and has an archive of its previous broadcasts^23. 2. Lower Courts a. Federal Courts: Permit media coverage by broadcasters The Federal Court of Appeal allows audio-video media coverage of proceedings as per published guidelines^24. The Federal Court also has its own set of guidelines regulating coverage of proceedings^25. A written application has to be made for permission to record proceedings but the general policy is to allow such applications if they are made within a reasonable time. b. Courts of Appeal^26: Courts of Appeal in the provinces allow or deny permission to broadcast court proceedings based on their own guidelines^27. c. Courts of first instance/Trial Courts: Broadcast of proceedings is rare. Although each province maintains its own guidelines for coverage, in practice, approval for broadcast of proceedings is rarely given. IV. China: Live streaming and recorded broadcasts of court proceedings are being implemented across the judiciary, from the trial courts right up till the Supreme People's Court of China. 1. Supreme People's Court: a. The Supreme Court has allowed proceedings o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... are governed by protocols with such broadcasters. The Supreme Court has also issued a practice note which broadly sets out the scope and structure of such broadcasts^39. d. The Supreme Court allows for hearings to be live streamed on its own website^40 with a delay of around one minute and also has a Youtube channel which shows selected broadcasts from the live stream^41. Broadcast of proceedings is subject to the discretion of the Law Lords, who reserve the right to withdraw coverage for sensitive appeals. 2. Lower Courts: The Crime and Courts Act, 2013 amended the existing laws to facilitate broadcasting in courts and tribunals by providing exceptions to the Criminal Justice Act, 1925^42 and prescribing conditions subject to which recordings could be made. Broadcast of court proceedings is allowed in a limited number of courts across the country. a. Court of Appeal for England and Wales^43: The Court broadcasts its proceedings live with a 70-second broadcast delay system i. The broadcast system is operated by a specialist video journalist who takes orders from the court. ii. The broadcast is conducted by cameras, some of which are ope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... interests of parties to the proceedings or even of third parties. c. The recordings will not be made public but will be handed over to the German Federal Archives or a State Archive where they can be accessed subject to certain conditions. d. Broadcasts of proceedings will happen in separate media rooms. The decision to provide broadcasting in the media room or to even to permit broadcasting or recording at all, is the judge's discretion and cannot be appealed. e. Since there are restrictions imposed by the law regarding broadcast of proceedings and owing to the strict privacy protection granted to parties to proceedings, combined with the narrow scope of what constitutes a case of 'historical significance', actual broadcasts of court cases in Germany rarely occur. 2. Lower Courts: The amendment act only mentions the possibility of broadcasting proceedings of the Federal Constitutional Court and Supreme Federal Courts and makes no mention about broadcast of proceedings in lower courts. VIII. International Criminal Court (ICC) 1. The ICC allows for live streaming of its proceedings with a 30-minute delay to allow for any necessary red....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the government has indicated its intention and willingness to allow court proceedings to be recorded^58, actual broadcast of lower court proceedings remains restricted. XI. Ireland (Republic): Although there are no statutory provisions which prohibit photography or sound, television or video recordings in courts, broadcast of court proceedings, whether photography or audio-video recording, without permission, is restricted as a practice ^59. 1. Supreme Court: Has allowed cameras into the Court on rare instances. The first broadcast of Court proceedings was in October 2017, when the delivery of two judgments of the Supreme Court was broadcast live on the state broadcaster, RTE, using small robotic cameras inside the court room^60. 2. Lower courts: Do not appear to allow broadcasting of proceedings, as on date. XII. Israel^61: 1. Supreme Court: Has approved of live-broadcasting court proceedings. a. The Israeli Courts Act, 5744-1984^62 imposes criminal punishment for taking and publishing pictures in a court room unless the court grants permission. The media however can report on events occurring in most Israeli courts, sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d any other Tribunal which chooses to adopt the same, subject to the discretion of the presiding judge. These broadcasts are guided by the In-Court Media Coverage Guidelines, 2016^65. c. Members of the media make an application to the Registrar of the concerned court atleast 10 days in advance, setting out which aspect of the court process they wish to film. A copy of the application is sent to the other parties, and after submissions have been received, the judge determines whether to approve or decline the application. Whether to grant permission is a matter of discretion for the judge, and the judge also has the power to remove media at his/her discretion. d. These guidelines do not have legislative force nor do they create any rights in that regard and merely ensure that applications for media coverage are dealt with expeditiously and fairly. e. They also set out that recordings must not be broadcast until at least 10 minutes have elapsed, although there are certain exceptions made for this rule as well. f. In addition, there is a separate protocol for application of the said guidelines to the District Court summary jurisdiction^66. There are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Court allowed for broadcast of proceedings in criminal trials, holding that courts should not restrict the nature and scope of broadcast of court proceedings unless prejudice was demonstrable and there was a risk that such prejudice would occur. b. While refraining from laying down rigid rules on broadcast of such court proceedings, the Court set out general guidelines to assist in determining whether proceedings should be broadcast: i. The trial court would exercise its discretion to allow broadcast of proceedings on a case-to-case basis, after balancing the degree of risk involved in allowing the cameras into the court room against the degree of risk that a fair trial might not ensue; ii. The trial court could always direct that some or all of the proceedings before it could not be broadcast or could only be broadcast in certain forms, like audio recording; iii. A judge could terminate coverage at any time upon a finding that the rules imposed by the judge had been violated or the substantial rights of individual participants or the rights to a fair trial would be prejudiced by such coverage if it was allowed to continue; iv. An accuse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he consent of parties was required. Proceedings could be recorded only with the approval of the presiding judge, and parties had to consent to the recording of each proceeding in a case. Unless the presiding judge decided not to make the recordings publicly available, they would subsequently be posted on the federal courts website, as well as on local participating court websites at the court's discretion. Judges would have a switch or be able to direct cessation of recording if deemed necessary^80. c. The Judicial Conference in 2016 decided not to alter the guidelines set out in the 2010 conference. Three districts that participated in the 2010 pilot programme were authorised to continue filming proceedings under the same terms and conditions as in 2010. d. Federal Courts of Appeals have the option of providing audio or video recordings of appellate hearings, and rules are available on each circuit's website. The Ninth Circuit Court for example, live-streams oral arguments^81. 3.Lower Courts/District Courts: Courts in all states have framed rules for broadcast of court proceedings, each varying in the degree and extent to which broadcasts are allowed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the North-East and therefore run the risk of being excluded from attending court hearings involving cases filed by them. 3. Furthermore, on miscellaneous days of hearing, the Apex Courts is highly congested, with practically no space available in the Courtrooms and in the public gallery to accommodate litigants, lawyers and law students and interns. 4. On account of such shortcomings, it may be advantageous to build an appropriate infrastructure for live-streaming or audio/video recording of court proceedings to enable the court proceedings to be viewed without the constraints of time or place. It would be ideal if a separate space is allocated by building a hall in the Court for lawyers, clients and interns to watch the live proceedings, so that, the crowds in the Court will be decongested. This will obviate the need for clients coming from far away distances and reduce their inconvenience in witnessing their case. This may also be one of the relevant factors for the Court to consider. Such a system would also enable the lawyers, law students and anyone interested in the workings of the highest court in the country to supplement their learning with practical s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... c. As held famously in the case of Scott vs. Scott, (1913) AC 417, "While the broad principle is that the Courts must administer justice in public, the chief object of Courts of justice must be to secure that justice is done", broadcasting must not be permitted in the cases involving: i. Matrimonial matters, ii. Matters involving interests of juveniles or the protection and safety of the private life of the young offenders, iii. Matters of National security, iv. To ensure that victims, witnesses or defendants can depose truthfully and without any fear. Special protection must be given to vulnerable or intimidated witnesses. It may provide for face distortion of the witness if she/he consents to the broadcast anonymously, v. To protect confidential or sensitive information, including all matters relating to sexual assault and rape, and vi. Matters where publicity would be antithetical to the administration of justice. vii. Cases which may provoke sentiments and arouse passion and provoke enmity among communities. d. Use of the footage would be restricted for the purpose of news, current affairs and educationa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts. Open justice, after all, can be more than just a physical access to the courtroom rather, it is doable even "virtually" in the form of live streaming of court proceedings and have the same effect. 13. Publication of court proceedings of the Supreme Court is a facet of the status of this Court as a Court of Record by virtue of Article 129 of the Constitution, whose acts and proceedings are enrolled for perpetual memory and testimony. Further, live streaming of court proceedings in the prescribed digital format would be an affirmation of the constitutional rights bestowed upon the public and the litigants in particular. While doing so, regard must be had to the fact that just as the dignity and majesty of the Court is inviolable, the issues regarding privacy rights of the litigants or witnesses whose cases are set down for hearing, as also other exceptional category of cases of which live streaming of proceedings may not be desirable as it may affect the cause of administration of justice itself, are matters which need to be identified and a proper regulatory framework must be provided in that regard by formulating rules in exercise of the power under Article 145 of the Const....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the learned Attorney General for India as noted in paragraph 11 above, while keeping in mind the basic issues, such as:- (i) To begin with, only a specified category of cases or cases of constitutional and national importance being argued for final hearing before the Constitution Bench be live streamed as a pilot project. For that, permission of the concerned Court will have to be sought in writing, in advance, in conformity with the prescribed procedure. (ii) Prior consent of all the parties to the concerned proceedings must be insisted upon and if there is no unanimity between them, the concerned Court can take the appropriate decision in the matter for live streaming of the court proceedings of that case, after having due regard to the relevancy of the objections raised by the concerned party. The discretion exercised by the Court shall be treated as final. It must be non-justiciable and non-appealable. (iii) The concerned court would retain its power to revoke the permission at any stage of the proceedings suo motu or on an application filed by any party to the proceeding or otherwise, in that regard, if the situation so warrants, keeping in mind that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent to be used in that regard. (ii) Specialist video operator(s) be appointed to handle the live broadcast, who will work under the directions of the concerned Court. The coverage itself will be coordinated and supervised by a Court- appointed officer. (iii) The focus of the cameras in the courtroom will be directed only towards two sets of people: a. The Justices/Bench hearing the matter and at such an angle so as to only show the anterior-facing side of the Justices, without revealing anything from behind the elevated platform/level on which the Justices sit or any of the Justices' papers, notes, reference material and/or books; b. The arguing advocate(s) in the matter and at such an angle so as to not to reveal in any way the contents of notes or reference material being relied upon by the arguing advocate(s). This will also apply to parties-in-person arguing their own matter. c. There shall be no broadcast of any interaction between the advocate and the client even during arguments. (iv) Subject to any alteration of camera angles for the purpose of avoiding broadcast of any of the aforestated papers, notes, reference materia....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t A Open Justice B Indian Jurisprudence C Technology and Open Court C.1 ICT in Indian courts C.2 Technology and Implementation C.3 Platforms created for service delivery C.4 National Judicial Data Grid C.5 Other facilities created to speed up justice delivery C.6 Concept of Video Streaming/Web Cast C.7 Virtual reality as an extension of the open court D Comparative Law E Model guidelines for broadcasting of the proceedings and other Judicial events of the Supreme Court of India Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J A Open Justice 1 The issue in this batch of cases is whether there should be live dissemination of proceedings before this Court with the aid of Information and Communications Technology (ICT). The basis of the petitions is that this would enable litigants and society to have wide access to judicial proceedings. It is urged that cases of constitutional and national importance have a significant impact on the social fabric. Citizens have a right to know about and to follow court proceedings. It has been submitted that live or online transmission of court proceedings with the aid of ICT enabled....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olars indicate that the principle of open justice encompasses several aspects that are central to the fair administration of justice and the rule of law.^8 It has both procedural and substantive dimensions, which are equally important. Open justice comprises of several precepts: (i) The entitlement of an interested person to attend court as a spectator; (ii) The promotion of full, fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings; (iii) The duty of judges to give reasoned decisions; and (iv) Public access to judgments of courts.^9 The principle of an open court is a significant procedural dimension of the broader concept of open justice. Open courts allow the public to view courtroom proceedings. Black's Law Dictionary defines an "open court" as follows: "... a court to which the public have a right to be admitted... This term may mean either a court which has been formally convened and declared open for the transaction of its proper judicial business, or a court which is freely open to spectators..."^10 The idea of open courts is crucial to maintaining public confidence in the administration of justice: "The public must be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n films. These dramatised accounts rarely portray what happens in court accurately. With the range of technology now available, it should be easier for people to access better information on court proceedings." ^16 In the decision of the US Supreme Court in Richmond Newspapers, Inc. vVirginia, Burger CJ observed: "The early history of open trials in part reflects the widespread acknowledgment, long before there were behavioural scientists, that public trials had significant community therapeutic value... ... People in an open society do not demand infallibility from their institutions, but it is difficult for them to accept what they are prohibited from observing."17 7 Public confidence in the judiciary and in the process of judicial decision making is crucial for preserving the rule of law and to maintain the stability of the social fabric. Peoples' access to the court signifies that the public is willing to have disputes resolved in court and to obey and accept judicial orders. Open courts effectively foster public confidence by allowing litigants and members of the public to view courtroom proceedings and ensure that the judges apply the law in a fair and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s the decision of a nine-judge Bench in Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v State of Maharashtra18 ("Mirajkar"). While upholding an oral order of the High Court prohibiting the media to publish the evidence of a witness in a defamation suit, the majority emphasised the importance of open courts. Chief Justice Gajendragadkar, speaking for the majority observed: "20... It is well settled that in general, all cases brought before the courts, whether civil, criminal, or others, must be heard in open court. Public trial in open court is undoubtedly essential for the healthy, objective and fair administration of justice. Trial held subject to the public scrutiny and gaze naturally acts as a check against judicial caprice or vagaries, and serves as a powerful instrument for creating confidence of the public in the fairness, objectivity, and impartiality of the administration of justice. Public confidence in the administration of justice is of such great significance that there can be no two opinions on the broad proposition that in discharging their functions as judicial tribunals, courts must generally hear causes in open and must permit the public admission to the court-room." Justic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....therefore, necessary that the trial should be open to the public and there should be no restraint on the publication of the report of the court proceedings. The publicity generates public confidence in the administration of justice. In rare and exceptional cases only, the court may hold the trial behind closed doors, or may forbid the publication of the report of its proceedings during the pendency of the litigation. 141. Hegel in his Philosophy of Right maintained that judicial proceedings must be public, since the aim of the Court is justice, which is a universal belonging to all." Key takeaways emerge from the opinions in Mirajkar: (i) Open courts serve as an instrument of inspiring public confidence in the administration of justice; (ii) Open courts act as a check on the judiciary; (iii) Publicity of the judicial process is the soul of justice; (iv) Open justice must yield to the paramount object of the administration of justice, in case it becomes necessary to restrict access in the facts of a particular case; and (v) Open courts are essential for the objective and fair administration of justice. 10 Almost two decades....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rumentality of the State. Writing for the two-judge Bench, Justice A.M. Ahmadi (as the learned Chief Justice then was) dwelt on the significance of disseminating information in a democracy: "8. ...The print media, the radio and the tiny screen play the role of public educators, so vital to the growth of a healthy democracy... ...It cannot be gainsaid that modern communication mediums advance public interest by informing the public of the events and developments that have taken place and thereby educating the voters, a role considered significant for the vibrant functioning of a democracy. Therefore, in any set-up, more so in a democratic set-up like ours, dissemination of news and views for popular consumption is a must and any attempt to deny the same must be frowned upon unless it falls within the mischief of Article 19(2) of the Constitution..." 12 More recently, in Mohd. Shahabuddin v State of Bihar,22 a two-judge Bench of this Court was examining a challenge to a notification by the Patna High Court declaring the premises for conducting a trial. Justice M K Sharma, in his concurring opinion, described open courts: "215... In my considered view an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er in his Judicial Studies Board speech (2011): "...if justice is seen to be done it must be understandable. Judgments must be open not only in the sense of being available to the public, but, so far as possible given the technical and complex nature of much of our law; they must also be clear and easily interpretable by lawyers. And also to non-lawyers. In an age when it seems more likely than ever that citizens will have to represent themselves, this is becoming increasingly important."24 16 This Court and the High Courts in India have pro-actively adopted technology to make the judicial process more accessible, organised, transparent, and simple. For instance, many courts in the country, including this Court, now have display boards in the court premises and on their official websites which enable legal practitioners and the public to view the progress of the cause list. This Court and the High Courts maintain websites where they upload cause lists, daily orders, and judgments. They also maintain an archive of previous judgments, allowing users to search for a specific judgment using various inputs. 17 Recent judgments of this Court also indicate the willingness o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of our judicial system. The Indian judiciary has incorporated Information and Communication Technology (ICT) under the aegis of the e- Courts Integrated Mission Mode Project (e-Courts Project). This has been a part of the National e-Governance Plan (NeGP) which has been implemented in all High Courts and the District Courts of India. It was based on the 'National Policy and Action Plan for Implementation of Information and Communication Technology' prepared by the e-Committee of the Supreme Court of India in 2005. The 2005 e-Committee Report proposed three phases for implementation of the e-Courts Project. The e-Committee of the Supreme Court of India and the Department of Justice, Government of India, through a proper management of the e-Courts Project have ensured efficiency in the judicial process across 21,000 courts in the district judiciary in India. Phase-I of the e-Courts Project was approved in 2010 and enabled computerisation of 14,249 courts in the district judiciary by 2015. The objective of the ongoing Phase-II of this project is to enhance judicial service delivery for litigants and lawyers by improving infrastructure and providing technology-enabled judicial ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ict judiciary. (ii) Mobile App: e-Courts Services mobile app available on Android and iOS provides facility for all stakeholders including advocates and parties, to create a portfolio of cases in which they are associated and track them for future alerts. A facility to search the case by a QR Code is also provided and the App has been downloaded multiple times. (iii) SMS Push: Litigants and advocates get an SMS alert on their cell phones, in case of any adjournment, scrutiny, registration, transfer of case, disposal, uploading of orders, etc. (iv) SMS Pull: This facility allows advocates and litigants to send the CNR number (which is a unique number tagged for every single case in the country) and receive a response with the current status of the case. (v) Automated e-Mails: Litigants, advocates and police stations receive information on regular e-mails in relation to the cause lists, transfer of cases, disposal, copies of orders and judgments. (vi) Touch Screen Kiosks and Service Centre: Dissemination of case status has been made simple with the installation of touch screen kiosks in various court complexes across the country. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ming of court proceedings in real time can be implemented through available technological solutions. Live-webcast or streaming is the fastest method for communicating and is most suited for connecting geographically dispersed audiences. C.7 Virtual reality as an extension of the open court The time has come for this Court to take a step further in adopting technology and to enable live-streaming of its proceedings. Live-streaming of courtroom proceedings is an extension of the principle of open courts. Live-streaming will have the ability to reach a wide number of audiences with the touch of a button. It will enable litigants and members of the public to have a virtual experience of courtroom proceedings even outside the courtroom premises. 18 There are multiple reasons why live-streaming will be beneficial to the judicial system: a. The technology of live-streaming injects radical immediacy into courtroom proceedings. Each hearing is made public within seconds of its occurrence. It enables viewers to have virtual access to courtroom proceedings as they unfold; b. Introduction of live-streaming will effectuate the public's right to know about court procee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the judicial process. Major common law jurisdictions across the globe have already embraced the concept of live-streaming and broadcasting courtroom proceedings. It may be useful to look at the evolution of the concept in a few jurisdictions, and the practices followed by them. D Comparative Law 19 This section takes a measured look at the development of the principle of open justice in common law and other jurisdictions. It examines how courts in other countries have addressed concerns of privacy, confidentiality and sensitivity of litigants, witnesses and cases. (i) United Kingdom The Supreme Court of UK permits broadcasting of its courtroom proceedings.29 The Eighth Practice Direction of the Supreme Court permits "video footage of proceedings before the Court to be broadcast where this does not affect the administration of justice."30 Three national broadcasters- BBC, ITN, and Sky News31 are permitted to film and broadcast the Supreme Court proceedings, "in accordance with the protocol which has been agreed with." 32 The protocol prohibits recording of certain types of proceedings like private discussions between litigants and their counsel.33 The footage is o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Association news agency.48 Only the appointed journalist or his substitute is permitted to take pictures in court.49 Although the appointed journalist has the permission to film any of the fifteen courtrooms in which the Court of Appeals may sit, practically, the media organisations pick only one court at a time for live broadcast.50 The Court of Appeals was opened for broadcasting upon the recommendations of the Ministry of Justice, in its 2012 Report.51 Making a case for extending technological change to the remaining courts in the UK, the Ministry of Justice had reasoned that: "In principle the majority of our courts are open to all members of the public who wish to attend, but in practice very few people have the time or opportunity to see what happens in our courts in person. In addition, the extent of press coverage of court cases, particularly in local courts has declined in recent years. In cases of particular interest to the public, there may not be sufficient space in the public gallery for all those who wish to attend." 52 The Ministry had recommended broadcasting the Court of Appeals' proceedings as they do not involve victims or witnesses: "Cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rately apprised of such proceedings. Broadcasting of court proceedings enables this to occur."59 Witnesses are granted the freedom to object to broadcasting their testimony, subject to the court's final discretion. This discretion, Ponna JA (speaking for the bench) emphasised, must be exercised by the courts on a case-by-case basis, by conducting an individualised enquiry.60 Where the judge finds that the objections of the witness are valid, the court considers alternatives to regular photographic or television coverage.61 (iii) Canada The Canadian Supreme Court is considered a pioneer for adapting itself to technology and permitting audio-visual broadcasting of its proceedings.62 In 1993, the Canadian Supreme Court conducted a successful pilot project, live televising the hearings of three high profile cases. The broadcasts were governed by the following guidelines: "(a) The case to be filmed will be selected by the Chief Justice. (b) The Chief Justice or presiding Justice may limit or terminate media coverage to protect the rights of the parties; the dignity of the court; to assure the orderly conduct of the proceedings; or for any other reason consider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st progressive live broadcast policies among common law countries. 82 Traditionally, members of the media were only permitted to make hand-written notes of court proceedings, without the use of any electronic device.83 From 1996 to 1998, New Zealand conducted a three year pilot project which covered more than twenty cases.84 All courts in New Zealand were covered under the pilot, contingent on two main rules: "1. Material obtained from expanded media coverage which is broadcast shall be presented in a way which gives an accurate, impartial and balanced coverage of the proceedings and of the parties involved. Any such broadcast is to be without editorial comment and to be of at least two minutes duration per news item. 2. There shall be no use of material obtained from expanded media coverage otherwise than for normal news programmes or articles unless prior approval for that use has been given by the trial judge or, where that judge is unavailable, another judge of the relevant court."85 New Zealand permits media houses to broadcast court proceedings with the approval of the court.86 The broadcast is governed by a set of guidelines which balance the principle o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... parties or aid the conduct of proceedings.96 The video and audio recordings of the federal judiciary are hosted on YouTube and are also available on the court's official website.97 The district and lower courts in each state permit some form of audio or video broadcasting and recording of its proceedings, subject to guidelines and rules.98 (vii) Brazil In 2002, the President of Brazil sanctioned a law enabling the creation of a public television channel dedicated to the judiciary and to the Supreme Court.99 The court sessions of the Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal) are broadcast online100 on either 'TV Justica'101 or 'Radio Justica'102 and operated by the Supreme Court. Aside from being aired on television and radio, the proceedings can also be streamed online as the Court maintains a Twitter account 103 and a YouTube channel. 104 The unique feature of the Brazilian Supreme Court is that cameras are permitted into the conferences where the judges deliberate.105 (viii) International Courts International courts have also embraced the idea of broadcasting their court proceedings. The International Criminal Court (ICC) permits televising of its cases, although with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....atest interface. It is to the Courts comprised in the district judiciary that citizens turn as a point of first access for remedying injustice. At the tip of the pyramid is the jurisdiction of this Court. In terms of volume, the largest amount of litigation emanates in the district judiciary, followed by the High Courts. The engagement of the district judiciary in resolving injustices faced by citizens requires that every citizen should have full access to and knowledge about the proceedings before those courts. Equally, the principle of an open court which has been espoused in this judgment would merit that proceedings before the High Courts should also be live-streamed. 23 Live-streaming of proceedings is crucial to the dissemination of knowledge about judicial proceedings and granting full access to justice to the litigant. Access to justice can never be complete without the litigant being able to see, hear and understand the course of proceedings first hand. Apart from this, live-streaming is an important facet of a responsive judiciary which accepts and acknowledges that it is accountable to the concerns of those who seek justice. Live-streaming is a significant instrument ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ensitive cases like matrimonial or sexual assault cases should be excluded from the process of live- streaming; c. Live-streaming will be carried out with a minimal delay to allow time for screening sensitive information or any exchange which should not be streamed; d. The final authority to regulate suspension or prohibition of live-streaming in a particular case where the administration of justice so requires, must be with the presiding judge of each court; e. Live-streaming will be carried out only by persons or any agency authorized under the directions of the Chief Justice of India, or as contemplated in the Rules. The streaming and broadcasting will be hosted by this Court on its website with the assistance of the National Informatics Centre and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology; f. The copyright over all the material recorded and broadcast in this Court shall vest with this Court only; and g. The recordings and broadcast may not be used by anyone for commercial purposes. h. Archives shall be maintained of all live-streaming, to be hosted on the web-site of the Court. 26 The model guidelines are of a suggested nature and will not detr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ast shall be made available on the official website of the Supreme Court. The recordedbroadcast of each day shall be made available as archives on the official website of the Supreme Court by the end of the day; 2. Live-streaming shall commence as soon as the judges arrive in the courtroom and shall continue till the Bench rises; 3. The presiding judge of the courtroom shall be provided with an appropriate device for directing the technical team to stop live-streaming, if the Bench deems it necessary in the interest of administration of justice; 4. Live-streaming of the proceedings should be carried out with a delay of two minutes; 5. Proceedings shall only be live-streamed during working hours of the court; 6. Courtroom proceedings will continue to be live-streamed unless the presiding judge orders the recording to be paused or suspended; 7. To give full effect to the process of live-streaming, advocates addressing the Bench, and judges addressing the Bar, must use microphones, while addressing the Court; 8. Recording of courtroom proceedings shall be done by the Registry with the technical support of National Informatics Centre or any other public/ private ag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oceedings in the broadcast room(s). Special arrangements will be made for the differently abled. F. Miscellaneous 1. The Supreme Court shall hold exclusive copyright over videos streamed online and archived with the Registry; and 2. Re-use, capture, re-editing or redistribution, or creating derivative works or compiling of the broadcast or video footage, in any form, shall not be permitted except as may be notified in the terms and conditions of use and without the written permission of the Registry. I would like to acknowledge and appreciate the efforts and assistance rendered by Mr K K Venugopal, the learned Attorney General for India, Ms Indira Jaising, learned Senior Counsel, Mr Mathews Nedumpara, learned Counsel and by the law student, Mr Swapnil Tripathi, who also moved a petition under Article 32. FOOTNOTE:- 1 (1966) 3 SCR 744 2 Available on the Australian High Court website at: http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/recentav-recordings 3 Media Release: Audio-Video Recordings of Full Court proceedings available on the Australian High Court website at:http://www.hcourt.gov.au/index.php?option=com_acymailing&ctrl=archive&task=view&listid=6-judgment-delivery-not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....recording device for the purpose of recording or making a transcript of the evidence or submissions in a hearing in the Court. (4) A person must not use a communication device or a recording device that might: (a) disturb a hearing in the Court; or (b) cause any concern to a witness or other participant in the hearing; or (c) allow a person who is not present in the Court to receive information about the proceeding or the hearing to which the person is not entitled. Note 1 The Court may have regard to any relevant matter, including the following: (a) why the person needs to use the device in the hearing; (b) if an order has been given excluding one or more witnesses from the Court - whether there is a risk that the device could be used to brief a witness out of court; (c) whether the use of the device would disturb the hearing or distract or cause concern to a witness or other participant in the hearing. Note 2 The Court may dispense with compliance with this rule - see rule 1.34. available on the website of the Australian Government at: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2011L01551 10....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a. A media request to cover a specific proceeding must be made sufficiently in advance to allow for necessary permissions to be obtained. b. A decision as to whether to allow media coverage will be made by the Chief Justice, after consultation with the panel of judges hearing the particular case, as well as with the parties. c. The Chief Justice or panel of judges hearing the proceeding may limit or terminate media coverage to protect the rights of the parties; to assure the orderly conduct of the proceedings; or for any other reason considered necessary or appropriate in the interest of the administration of justice. d. Nothing in these guidelines shall prevent the Chief Justice from placing additional restrictions, or prohibiting altogether, media access to the Court's facilities. e. Only equipment which does not produce distracting sound or light shall be employed to cover proceedings. f. The Chief Justice or his designate may limit or circumscribe the placement or movement of the media personnel and their equipment." Guidelines on Public and Media available on the website of the Federal Court of Appeal of Canada at: http://www....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any material generated through electronic media coverage, media are to provide the Court with a copy." Policy on Public and Media Access available on the website of the Federal Court of Canada at: http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc_cf_en/MediaPolicy.html 26 See In-Court Media Coverage - a consultation paper at footnote 6 27For example, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal has its own guidelines while the Ontario Court of Appeal introduced a pilot for broadcast of court proceedings but permanent implementation of such scheme was hampered by express prohibitions on broadcast of proceedings laid down in Section 136 of the Ontario Court of Justice Act, 1990. 28 Official website for streaming at: http://tingshen.court.gov.cn/court/0 29Available at: http://www.law-lib.com/law/law_view.asp?id=324868 30 Article 2: The people's court may choose the openly tried cases of higher public attention, greater social impact, and of legal publicity and education significance to make live broadcasts of and rebroadcast court trials. The live broadcasting and rebroadcasting of court trials are prohibited for the following cases: (1) Cases that are not openly tried in accordance with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....travention of the foregoing provisions of this section or any reproduction thereof; and if any person acts in contravention of this section he shall, on summary conviction, he liable in respect of each offence to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds. (2) For the purposes of this section- (a) the expression " court" means any court of justice, including the court of a coroner : (b) the expression "judge" includes recorder, registrar, magistrate, justice and coroner : (c) a photograph, portrait or sketch shall be deemed to be a photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made in court if it is taken or made in the court-room or in the building or in the precincts of the building in which the court is held, or if it is a photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made of the person while he is entering or leaving the court-room or any such building or precincts as aforesaid." Available on the website of the UK Legislature at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo5/15-16/86/section/41 36 Section 9 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1981 (as originally enacted): "9. Use of tape recorders (1) Subject to subsection (4) below, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ideo footage of proceedings before the Court to be broadcast where this does not affect the administration of justice and the recording and broadcasting is conducted in accordance with the protocol which has been agreed with representatives of several UK broadcasters. Permission to broadcast proceedings must be sought from the President or the presiding Justice on each occasion and requires his or her express approval. Where the President or the presiding Justice grants permission, he or she may impose such conditions as he or she considers to be appropriate including the obtaining of consent from all the parties involved in the proceedings." Available at: https://www.supremecourt.uk/docs/practice-direction-08.pdf 40 See official website at: https://www.supremecourt.uk/live/ 41 Official Youtube channel at: https://www.youtube.com/user/UKSupremeCourt 42 Amended Section 41 of Criminal Justice Act, 1925: "41. Prohibition on taking photographs, etc., in court. (1)No person shall- (a) take or attempt to take in any court any photograph, or with a view to publication make or attempt to make in any court any portrait or sketch, of any person, being a ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w.echr.coe.int/Documents/Rules_Court_ENG.pdf 46 Available on the official website of the ECHR at: https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=hearings&c 47 "Section 169 The hearing before the adjudicating court, including the pronouncement of judgments and rulings, shall be public. Audio and television or radio recordings as well as audio and film recordings intended for public presentation or for publication of their content shall be inadmissible." English version of The Court Constitution Act available at: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gvg/englisch_gvg.html 48 English translation; In German, Gesetz zur Erweiterung der Medienöffentlichkeit in Gerichtsverfahren und zur Verbesserung der Kommunikationshilfen für Menschen mit Sprach- und Hörbehinderungen (Gesetz über die Erweiterung der Medienöffentlichkeit in Gerichtsverfahren- EMöGG), available on the website of the German Judiciary at: https://www.bmjv.de/SharedDocs/Gesetzgebungsverfahren/Dokumente/BGBl_EM%C3%B6G G.pdf;jsessionid=B96F37ED7F0163627DB7B0BF3343C555.2_cid297? blob=publicationFile& v=1 49 Official website for streaming at: https://www.icc-cpi.int ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce Briefing Paper on Broadcasting in Courts, available on the website of the northern Ireland Assembly at: http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/globalassets/documents/raise/publications/2012/justice/381 2.pdf 59 See Report on Contempt of Court by the Law Reform Commission of Ireland, Chapter 4.43, available at: http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/Reports/rContempt.htm 60 See: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41732226 61 See Audio-Visual Coverage Of Court Proceedings In A World Of Shifting Technology by Itay Ravid available at: http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/35.1-Ravid.pdf 62 Title 70(b) of Act, 'Prohibited Publications'; Israeli Courts Act available in Hebrew at: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/details.jsp?id=15289 63 See: https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4592208,00.html 64 "10.5 Appendix E: Supreme Court media guidelines 1. Subject to paragraph (5), all applications to televise or otherwise record proceedings of the Supreme Court will be deemed to be approved unless a party indicates, within three days of being advised by the registrar of the application, that the party objects to it. 2. Any such objection must be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....udiciary.org.uk/Upload/Documents/ConsultationDocument.pdf 69 [2005] CSOH 80 70 See Appendix IV to the Cameras and live text-based communication in the Scottish courts: a consultation link at footnote 68 71 See Para 5.5 onwards of the Cameras and live text-based communication in the Scottish courts: a consultation link referred to at footnote 68 72 See: Report of the Review of Policy on Recording and Broadcasting of Proceedings in Court, and Use of Live Text-Based Communications available on the official website of the Scottish judiciary at: http://www.scotland-judiciary.org.uk/25/1369/Report-of-the-Review-of- Policy-on-Recording-and-Broadcasting-of-Proceedings-in-Court--and-Use-of-Live-Text-Based- Communications 73 [2017] ZASCA 97 (21st June 2017) 74 See Senate hearings on 'A Bill To Permit The Televising Of Supreme Court Proceedings' on the official website of the US Congress available at: https://www.congress.gov/110/crpt/srpt448/CRPT-110srpt448.pdf 75 See Letter by Counselor to the Chief Justice, rejecting live broadcast of oral arguments, available at: https://arstechnica.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/scotusletter.pdf 76 See: Above Politics: Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and engaged in judicial business... The term is distinguished from a court that is hearing evidence in camera or from judge that is exercising merely magisterial powers. 2. A court session that the public is free to attend..." 11 Supra note 7. 12 Supra note 2 at page 316-317. 13 House of Lords, as per Lord Diplock in AG v Leveller Magazine, [1979] AC 440, at page 450. 14 Ibid. 15 High Court of Australia, as per Gummow J in Grollo v Palmer, [1995] HCA 2. 16. Ministry of Justice, UK, Proposals to allow the broadcasting, filming, and recording of selected court proceedings, making recommendations, 2012. Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/217307/broa dcasting-filming-recording-courts.pdf 17 Supreme Court of United States in Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v Virginia, 448 US 555 (1980). 18 (1966) 3 SCR 744. 19 Supra note 1. 20 (1985) 3 SCC 545. 21 (1992) 3 SCC 637. 22 (2010) 4 SCC 653. 23 Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, The Indian Telecom Services Performance Indicators January-March, 2018. Available at: https://trai.gov.in/sites/default/files/PIReport27062018_0.pdf ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to the Court. Available at https://www.scc-csc.ca/media/acc-eng.aspx 65 Daniel Stepniak, 'Audio Visual Coverage of Courts, A Comparative Analysis,' Cambridge University Press (2008). 66 Ibid. 67 Supra note 62. 68 Ibid. 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid. 71 Ibid. 72 Supra note 65. 73 Ibid. 74 Ibid. 75 See supra note 65. 76 High Court of Australia, Press Release, 01 October 2013. Available at: http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/news/MR-audio-visual-recordings-Oct13.pdf. 77High Court of Australia, Photography and Recording Guidelines. Available at: http://www.hcourt.gov.au/about/photography-and-recording 78 Ibid. 79 Ibid. 80 Supra note 65 at page 210-211. 81 Ibid. 82 See supra note 65. 83 New Zealand, Report to Chief Justice on In-Court Media Coverage (2015), at para 7. Available at https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/In-Court-Media-Review/In-Court-Media- Review/ReporttoChiefJusticeonincourtmediacoverageF6_7_15_20150720.pdf 84 Ibid, at para 15. 85 Ibid, at para 14. 86 New Zealand, In-Court Media Coverage Guidelines (2016). Available at: https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/going- to-court/media/rules-and-resources/INCOURTMEDIACOVERAGEGUIDELINES2016T....