Fetter on open circulation of livestreamed proceedings reverses open justice system, activists tell SC
Activists have challenged a Supreme Court order that restricts the circulation of livestreamed court proceedings on social media. They argue that the restriction undermines the principle of open justice and suggest that better regulation, rather than a ban, is the appropriate solution.
Why it matters
This case highlights the tension between judicial transparency and the protection of court participants from digital harassment.
Two activists have opposed a Supreme Court order barring the circulation of livestreamed proceedings on social media and digital platforms as a reversal of the ‘principle of open justice’ upheld by the apex court itself in a plethora of judgments
The application filed by activists Anjali Bhardwaj and Amrita Johri, represented by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Cheryl D’Souza, said the July 24 order veers away from the principle of open courts, which is a constitutional guarantee under Article 21 of fair, just and reasonable procedure.
“Open access to justice ensures that the judicial process remains answerable to the public and guards against arbitrariness,” the application argued.
The intervening application of the activists would be put forth for consideration on July 31 (Friday) before a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant which had passed the interim order in a petition filed by Harshita Grover.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in