Central Idea

• The significance of live-streaming court proceedings as an extension of the ‘open justice’ and ‘open courts’ principle remains largely unrealized in India.
• Only nine out of the 25 High Courts in the country have implemented live streaming, while the Supreme Court restricts it to Constitutional cases.

What is live-streaming technology?

• At its core, streaming content is meant to help people attend events, expos, and experiences they cannot attend in person.
• Live streaming technology is how videos are streamed over the internet, live, in real-time, as they are being recorded.
• Live streaming technology is the internet’s response to live television broadcasts, with the most popular being news shows and sports.

Why discuss this?

• The Supreme Court emphasized the need for live streaming in district courts and High Courts as these are the courts where most citizens seek justice.
• Time and resource constraints, as well as the inability to travel long distances, limit public access to court hearings.
• Videoconferencing became essential since the COVID-19 pandemic, as physical hearings were not possible.

Early Adopters

• The Gujarat HC pioneered live streaming in October 2020, streaming proceedings on YouTube as an experiment.
• Other HCs, such as Karnataka and Meghalaya, followed with varying degrees of success.
• The Gujarat HC’s YouTube channel gained 1.24 lakh subscribers and 1.9 crore views.

Existing Restrictions

• Model Rules for Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings: These exclude certain case categories from live streaming, including matrimonial matters, child adoption and custody, sexual offences, child sexual abuse, and juvenile cases.
• Broadcasting rights issue: The Delhi High Court notified rules for live streaming proceedings but imposed restrictions such as a ban on reproducing or transmitting audio-visual recordings.

Significance of live streaming

• Instilling Faith in the Judiciary: Allowing ordinary people to view the workings of the highest court without barriers builds faith in the judiciary.
• Empowering the Masses: Live streaming enables the legal system to empower the masses and develop an informed citizenry.
• Respect for Rule of Law: Understanding the importance of the rule of law and how the judiciary protects the rights of marginalized sections of society.
• Living up to Constitutional Expectations: Live streaming aligns with public interest and the preservation of constitutional Article 19 and 21.
• Increased Transparency: Encourages the principle of open court, reduces reliance on second-hand information, and allows the public’s right to know.
• Elevating Legal Standards: Lawyers become better prepared, refrain from irresponsible remarks, and take justice delivery more seriously.
• Level Playing Field: Provides equal opportunities for younger lawyers to showcase their skills and competence.
• Academic Advancement: Inspires law students and encourages legal research on the functioning of the judiciary and the legal profession.
• Easy Accessibility: Eliminates the need for physical presence, allowing litigants to access proceedings from anywhere.

Issues with such policy

• Contempt of Court: Existing video clips of court proceedings on social media platforms often lack context and sensationalize events, potentially undermining the dignity of the court.
• Disinformation and Sensationalism: There are concerns that misuse or selective use of live streaming content may contribute to the spread of disinformation among the public.
• Unnecessary Activism: Increased visibility through live streaming could lead to justices behaving like politicians, seeking individual exposure rather than focusing solely on justice.

Physical barriers for it

• Internet Connectivity: Issues related to internet connectivity may hinder seamless live streaming, requiring attention for reliable access to court proceedings.
• Adequate Infrastructure: Provision of well-equipped spaces where lawyers can effectively present their cases is crucial for a smooth transition to live-streamed proceedings.
• Awareness and Training: Judges, court staff, and lawyers may lack familiarity with digital technology and its benefits. Efforts should be made to raise awareness and provide comprehensive training to ensure their proficiency.

Global examples

• Several countries, including the United States, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Canada, and China, have implemented live streaming of court proceedings in various formats.
• Live streaming formats include audio recordings (US), video recordings streamed on television (Brazil), video streaming on court websites (UK, Canada), and live streaming from trial courts up to the supreme court (China).

Way Forward

To promote open justice and improve access to justice, the following steps are recommended:

• Implementation of live streaming in all courtrooms of the Supreme Court and across all High Courts and district courts.
• Ensuring adequate infrastructure for videoconferencing and live streaming beyond the pandemic.
• Reviewing and revising restrictions on live streaming to strike a balance between transparency and privacy concerns.
• Conducting awareness campaigns to educate the public about the availability and benefits of live-streamed court proceedings.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now