Supreme Court live streaming stirs debate in legal circles

In 2018, the apex court noted that live-streaming of public-interest litigations was important. In the Swapnil Tripathi judgment of September 2018, the apex court had observed that such a move would ‘virtually’ expand the court beyond the courtroom.

It would also be the true realisation of the ‘open court system’ in which courts were accessible to all, The Hindu quoted Justice Chandrachud, who was on the bench then, as saying.

Although a first for the Supreme Court, six High Courts have already allowed live streaming of the hearings. The HCs of Gujarat, Orissa, Karnataka, Jharkhand, Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh, have already live streaming hearings through their own channels on YouTube.

There has always been a strong case for live streaming of hearings in SC for cases of constitutional and national importance as they impact various aspects of people’s lives. It will not just widen the public’s knowledge on legal matters but also enhance their engagement with the Constitution and laws, said experts.

“I think live streaming of Supreme Court proceedings is a welcome move since it results in effective and prompt real-time dissemination of proceedings at the comfort of your home and office. Once live streaming is extended to all courts for all cases, it would enable clients to watch it from the comfort of their homes without having to travel to Delhi. It will give them the entire context, the queries raised by the judges, what was argued and what was not,” said Nipun Saxena, an SC lawyer.

The move would also benefit lawyers and prevent overcrowding in the already clogged courtrooms, he added.

“Until now only the US Federal Court had a proper system of transcribing arguments made by lawyers. Live streaming would ensure that electronic transcription could be carried out sometime in the future,” Saxena stated.

In the United States, Providence Municipal Court Judge Frank Caprio runs a nationally syndicated television show ‘Caught in Providence’, which captures proceedings in his courtroom.

However, even though the US Judge’s televised court proceedings are popular, they cannot be compared with those in the Supreme Court of India.

“This is a court of law and appeal. The considerations before the highest court of this country are very different from a traffic court,” Saxena said.

Live streaming also requires safeguards against misuse of the courtroom proceedings, according to many.

Spliced videos of proceedings from HCs of Gujarat, Karnataka and Patna have been uploaded on YouTube with titles like “husband’s secret revealed when wife approached High Court” and “Angry avatar of Justice….”.

Some of these also end up demonising a judge or a lawyer. As most of these videos are anonymous, they can avoid any accountability, according to Farasat.