New Delhi: Senior advocate Indira Jaising has written to the Chief Justice of India and other judges of the Supreme Court to begin live streaming of proceedings of matters of public and constitutional importance, and also to keep a permanent record of the arguments by counsel on all sides along with the proceedings of the court.
Jaising said a number of matters of national importance, which includes petitions challenging the EWS quota, hijab ban, Citizenship Amendment Act are being heard by the apex court and urged it to allow live streaming of cases as per 2018 judgment, as a part of the fundamental right of every citizen to freedom of information and also the right of access to justice.
“There is no substitute for first-hand knowledge, especially in the era of what has come to be known as ‘fake news’ and hence, there is an urgent need for real time information. Since the judgement was pronounced, I have made repeated requests to the Hon’ble court to commence live streaming cases of national importance,” she said.
“It is pertinent to note that in accordance with Article 129 of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court is a court of record. I, therefore, request you to start live streaming these proceedings as also to keep a permanent record of the arguments by counsel on all sides to be part of the record that is preserved along with the proceedings of the court.”
Jaising said the apex court should have its own channel and, in the meantime, the court can start streaming its proceedings on its own website, as well as on YouTube.
She added there is adequate infrastructure and the ceremonial proceedings were live streamed on the date of retirement of former Chief Justice N.V. Ramana.
Jaising said: “We are passing through times when issues of great national importance are being discussed, debated, and decided upon in the Supreme Court of India. A few examples will suffice: the Constitutional validity of the 103rd amendment is currently being challenged before the Constitution Bench in Court No 1.”
She added that the arguments revolve around issues of social and political justice for discriminated castes and whether reservations in public employment and education can be made purely on economic grounds. “Also in the field of reservations are two other cases relating to sub-categorising within castes and the issue of extending reservations to Muslims and Christians,” she said in her letter.