Open Access Research Article
SOCIAL MEDIA TRIALS: A THREAT TO THE LEGAL SYSTEM
Published Paper
Article Details
SOCIAL MEDIA TRIALS: A THREAT TO
THE LEGAL SYSTEM
AUTHORED BY - ANISHA KUMARI
First Sem LLM Student, IILM University
Greater Noida
Under supervision of Dr Sonia Khera
Abstract
The 21st century has revolutionized
the media world, and this era witnessed a fundamental shift in the way we
communicate from traditional print media like newspaper, and television and the
modern media like social media. British Member of Parliament, Lord Macaulay,
had, years ago, called the media “the fourth pillar of democracy”. It has since
been quoted often, and a free media is considered indispensable in a democracy.
But the media today is not what it was then. Multiple factors have led to media
organizations compromising their journalistic ethics and principles which harms
the nation in a big way.
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution grants its citizens freedom of
speech and of expression. However, this freedom is subject to reasonable
restrictions pursuant to Article 19(2), which states the
restrictions “in the interests of India ‘s sovereignty and integrity,
state security, foreign relations, public order, morality or contempt of court,
defamation or incitement to an offence.”
Media is the 4th pillar of the country responsible for keeping the other three organs of democracy in check. It’s responsible to report issues that matter objectively. However, since its inception, the media is misusing its power to undermine the judiciary by crossing the ethical line. The media plays a prominent role in our society. Jeremy Bentham said, “There is no right where there is no attention. Publicity is the essence of justice itself. It is the strongest spur to exertion and the surest of all guards against approbation”. The Supreme Court defines media trials as “the effect of television and newspaper reporting on a person’s image by generating a common presumption of guilt, irrespective of any decision in a court of law.” The objective of this analysis is to study the evolution of media trial in India. To investigate the role played by media in a democracy. To study the evolution of freedom of speech and expression in India. To examine the consequence of trial by media and its conflict with the various impact in Indian Judiciary It fails to analyze the vital gap between an accused and a convict keeping at stake the golden principles of ‘presumption of innocence until proven guilty’ and ‘guilt beyond reasonable doubt’. The media sticks to this stereotype. Therefore, a need arises to pull the media’s reins and put reasonable restrictions so that judicial decisions are not undermined shortly.
Media is the 4th pillar of the country responsible for keeping the other three organs of democracy in check. It’s responsible to report issues that matter objectively. However, since its inception, the media is misusing its power to undermine the judiciary by crossing the ethical line. The media plays a prominent role in our society. Jeremy Bentham said, “There is no right where there is no attention. Publicity is the essence of justice itself. It is the strongest spur to exertion and the surest of all guards against approbation”. The Supreme Court defines media trials as “the effect of television and newspaper reporting on a person’s image by generating a common presumption of guilt, irrespective of any decision in a court of law.” The objective of this analysis is to study the evolution of media trial in India. To investigate the role played by media in a democracy. To study the evolution of freedom of speech and expression in India. To examine the consequence of trial by media and its conflict with the various impact in Indian Judiciary It fails to analyze the vital gap between an accused and a convict keeping at stake the golden principles of ‘presumption of innocence until proven guilty’ and ‘guilt beyond reasonable doubt’. The media sticks to this stereotype. Therefore, a need arises to pull the media’s reins and put reasonable restrictions so that judicial decisions are not undermined shortly.
This paper is an attempt to analyze
the impacts caused by the media trial and how it takes the cover of freedom of
speech and expression to continue with the undue interference with the
administration of justice. This article also emphasis on the role of media trials
in legal system. The power of media trial is given under article 19 of the
constitution of India. It provides freedom of speech and expression to each
person. The present article focuses on the influence of media on judges and
courts. It also deals cases of media trial and media ethics. The effects of
media on Indian judiciary and some guidelines given by supreme court in civil
and criminal trials. The thin line between ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and
‘guilt beyond reasonable doubt’ is easily crossed by trial.
Keywords; media, trial, social and legal issues, courts,
proceedings, judiciary.
Introduction
Media trial is a phrase describing
the impact of television and print media coverage on a case through an attempt
by the media to hold the accused guilty even before the trial begins. Article
19(1)(a) of the Constitution grants its citizens freedom of speech and of
expression. However, this freedom is subject to reasonable restrictions
pursuant to Article 19(2), which states the restrictions “in the interests of
India ’s sovereignty and integrity, state security, foreign relations, public
order, morality or contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence.
’Media is the 4th pillar of the country responsible for keeping the other three
organs of democracy in check. It’s responsible to report issues that matter
objectively. However, since its inception, the media is misusing its power to
undermine the judiciary by crossing the ethical line. The media plays a
prominent role in our society. Jeremy Bentham said, “There is no right where
there is no attention. Publicity is the essence of justice itself. It is the
strongest spur to exertion and the surest of all guards against approbation”.
The Supreme Court defines media trials as “the effect of television and
newspaper reporting on a person’s image by generating a common presumption of
guilt, irrespective of any decision in a court of law.” The social media
usually portrays the accused as a villain not based on facts but only to
sensationalize the news, which causes damage to the dignity of the accused.
Media through their trial attempts to reincarnate itself into a ‘public court’
and interfere with court proceedings. It fails to analyze the vital gap between
an accused and a convict keeping at stake the golden principles of ‘presumption
of innocence until proven guilty’ and ‘guilt beyond reasonable doubt’.
According to Ray Surette, ‘trial-by-media’ has three basic flavors- 1. Sinful
Rich type 2. Evil stranger psychotic killer 3. Abuse of Power trial. The media
sticks to this stereotype. Therefore, a need arises to pull the media’s reins
and put reasonable restrictions so that judicial decisions are not undermined
shortly.
What is a
social media trial
Media trials refer to the act of
conducting a trial in the court of public opinion through various forms of
media such as television, newspapers, social media, etc. These media trials
have become increasingly common in India in recent years, with several
high-profile cases being covered extensively in the media. While media trials
can be useful in exposing corruption, injustice, and wrongdoing, they can also have
severe consequences if conducted improperly. In this article, we will examine
recent media trials in India and their consequences.
The Internet provides access to vast
amounts of information in mere seconds and allows users to broadcast their thoughts to millions and
receive near-instantaneous responses through web-based “social networking” or
“social media” services. These services include well known social networks like
Facebook and Twitter. Social media refers to websites and applications which enable
people to share content quickly and efficiently. Social media has become an
integral part of everyone’s life as it is accessible through smartphones,
computers, and tablets. Aristotle described the man as a social animal. Social
media is a platform that makes this objective easily accessible. However, the
intervention of the media in under-trial cases has become a common phenomenon.
With social media into play, each person can indulge in freely giving their
opinions without any communication barrier. The absence of any communication
barrier reflects that the opinions or views expressed are at a global portal,
and these opinions might play an effective role in framing the views of others.
Reincarnated as the public court, the media separately starts an investigation
and forms public opinion. Under the democratic form of the government, it’s
healthy to have a social media functionary to express opinions freely under
freedom of speech and expression. However, most of the time, the freedom of
expression controversy is created due to the sub-clause (2), Article 19 of the
Constitution of India. It does not embrace the freedom to contempt of court.
Though social media helps to bring change in society sometimes it is driven by
selfish or fake reasons. Social media trial is an intrusion and an ethical
breach. It has become a trend that social media performs the function of the
judiciary of investigating the truth. The judiciary system has the key
responsibility to provide justice to society in stipulated time. Nonetheless,
practically it is now hardly seen. Not only people wait to obtain justice for
years, but also they sometimes become bound for oblation to buy justice. Thus,
in the developing countries, media trials are getting prominent day by day due
to the extreme pendency problem and decreasing trend of faith in the judicial
system, the public supports the trend of trial by media.
Case laws
The media has played a significant
role in shaping public opinion in India. However, the way in which the media
has covered certain cases has come under scrutiny in recent years. Some of the
most high-profile cases include the Nirbhaya case, the Sushant Singh Rajput
case, and the Hathras case.
The Nirbhaya case:
The Nirbhaya case was a heinous crime
in which a young woman was brutally gang-raped and murdered in Delhi in 2012.
The case received extensive coverage in the media, with many channels
conducting debates and discussions on the issue. While the media played a
crucial role in highlighting the case, it also came under criticism for
sensationalizing the crime and portraying the victim in a negative light.
The Sushant Singh Rajput case:
One of the most prominent recent
media trials in India was the coverage of the death of Bollywood actor Sushant
Singh Rajput. The Sushant Singh Rajput case was another high-profile case that
received extensive media coverage in 2020. The actor was found dead in his
apartment, and his death was initially ruled as suicide. The media coverage of
the case was intense, with news channels reporting on every aspect of the case,
including the investigation, the accused, and the alleged motive. The media's
narrative in the case was that Rajput was a victim of a conspiracy, and the
accused were guilty before the court verdict. The media coverage of the case
was criticized for being sensationalist and for interfering in the
investigation.
The consequences of this media trial
were severe. The accused were subjected to harassment and abuse on social
media, and some even received death threats. The media's portrayal of the case
also led to a trial by public opinion, with many people believing that the
accused were guilty without waiting for the court verdict. The media's coverage
of the case also raised questions about the role of media in the country's
justice system.
However, the media coverage of the
case led to several conspiracy theories being propagated, and the case was
later investigated by multiple agencies.
The Hathras case:
Another recent media trial was the
coverage of the Hathras case. In this case, a Dalit woman was allegedly
gang-raped and murdered by upper-caste men in Uttar Pradesh in 2020. The
media's coverage of the case was intense, with news channels reporting on every
aspect of the case, including the investigation, the accused, and the alleged
motive. The media's narrative in the case was that the victim was a victim of
caste-based violence, and the accused were guilty before the court verdict.
Media trials can have significant
consequences on the accused, the public, and the justice system. The media's
portrayal of a case can impacts the accused's right to a fair trial, which is a
fundamental right enshrined in the Indian Constitution. Media trials can also
create a trial by public opinion, which can lead to the accused being subjected
to harassment, abuse, and even violence. Additionally, media trials can erode
public trust in the justice system and undermine the country's democracy.
The impact of media trials can be
seen in high-profile cases, such as the Aarushi Talwar murder case and the
Sheena Bora murder case.
The Aarushi
Talwar murder case
In the Aarushi Talwar murder case,
the media's portrayal of the case was that the accused, Aarushi's parents, were
guilty before the court verdict. The media's reporting of the case led to a
trial by public opinion, with many people believing that the accused were
guilty without waiting for the court verdict. The accused were subjected to
harassment and abuse on social media, and some even received death threats. The
media's coverage of the case also raised questions about the role of the media
in the country's justice system.
The Sheena
Bora murder case
Similarly, In the Sheena Bora murder
case, the media's reporting of the case was intense, with news channels
reporting on every aspect of the case, including the investigation, the
accused, and the alleged motive. The media's portrayal of the case led to a
trial by public opinion, with many people believing that the accused, including
the main accused, Indrani Mukherjee, were guilty before the court verdict. The
media's coverage of the case also raised questions about the role of media in
the country's justice system and perspectives and methodologies are drawn from
the humanities as well as the social sciences learning Outcomes.
Objectives
of Socio- legal Research
Ø To
understand the fundamentals of socio-legal research and what it is comprised
of.
Ø To
understand the utility of socio-legal research.
Ø To identify
the potential areas of socio-legal research.
Ø To
introduce the socio-legal field.
Ø To
understand the various political science, sociological, anthropological, and
economic approaches to the socio-legal research
2. Studies on the beneficiaries and
victims of administration of justice; 3. Law and poverty.
4. Compensatory, discrimination of a
second of people such as Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes.
5. Study of legal system in
connection with cultural, social, and national legal systems.
We can add some more specific areas
of socio-legal research, such as, Directive principles of Constitution of India
and effect of their implementation; Criminal tendency in some tribes and
sections in India; Tax imposition and social change; International Economic Law
and the increase of international trade; White-collar crimes and their impact
on society; Labor laws and the welfare of the working classes; Land Reform Acts
and the social and economic change; Provision of contributions to political
parties in Company Law and its implications; Sex offences and their effect on
social life; Feeble-mindedness and criminality; Relationship between physical
anomalies and crime tendency; Effects of customs of society on crime rate;
Alcoholism and crime rate; Urbanization and increase of crime rate; Contribution
of motion pictures and T.V. programs to delinquency and crime; Effects of
bribery on efficiency of administration; Preventive detention and public opinion;
Efficiency of police department and crime rate; Condition of under-trial criminals
in jails; Effects of punishment and need for reforms; Delay in trials and its effect
on judicial administration; Abolition of death sentence and its desirability; Prison
reforms in treating the prisoners; Protection to tenants under Rent Control Law.
The list is endless and many more can be added to it.
Different
approaches to socio-legal research
The socio-legal approach may be seen
to occupy space between two extremes of a methodological spectrum. At one end,
a strict doctrinal approach relies predominantly on self-informed analysis of
legislation and judicial decisions from the superior courts. Approaches at the
other end, such as critical legal studies and economic analysis of law, are
tuned to the concerns, theory, and informants of external perspectives. While
contextual analysis is increasingly the norm in legal scholarship, external
informants are essential to a socio-legal approach. The socio-legal lens widens
to observe operational and everyday legal situations, and diverse textual sources,
disciplinary and cultural perspectives are considered.
Introduction
to the Socio-Legal Field
H. L. A. Hart’s Concept of Law offers
an accessible analysis of a mature legal order which is attuned to law’s social
character and its role in ordering a society. The key concepts in Hart’s
account of law are social rules, of which legal rules are one kind, and the
acceptance of law by officials. It examines the notion of a social rule, what
it means to accept a rule, and the rule of recognition as the master rule of a
legal order, the role of officials in a legal order, and Hart’s contrast
between officials and citizens. At this point the question arises as to whether
there are other systems of law besides state law, and, if so, why prominence is
given to state law. This leads to questions about legal pluralism, by which
means different legal orders exist side-by-side, or overlapping, or one
dominating another. Understanding law and the legal system as a social
formation is the first part of a law and- society approach; the second is the
inter-relationship between law and other aspects of society. One issue is how
law as a system of social rules interacts with other systems of social rules,
such as those of civil associations, religious bodies, private institutions,
family networks, and so on. What happens when legal rules conflict with or try
to change other networks of rules? Here the notion of social spheres is developed
and used in explaining the inter-relationship. Another issue is why we need law
at all. If society is constituted by sets of social rules, all of which help to
maintain social order, achieve social goods, and advance social values, what
extra value does law add? One answer is that law has distinct social functions
which cannot be carried out effectively by other rule-based systems. Another
answer, which is skeptical of functional approaches, claims that law, in the sense
of state law, being backed by the institutions and organizations of the state,
can contribute to the achievement of social goods. In developing this analysis,
law needs to be broken down into different kinds of laws, such as criminal,
civil, constitutional, and regulation. The last issue is about the
effectiveness of law. If state law is explained (and justified) on the basis
that it has certain social advantages over systems of social rules, then the
assumption is that law is effective in influencing behavior. Here notions of
implementation, compliance, and enforcement come into picture.
Political
Science Approaches to Socio-Legal Research:
Legal Mobilization
There exists a complex relationship
between law and social movements. Social movement actors use a wide range of
legal tactics – including lobbying, litigation, and administrative advocacy –
in their campaigns for social, political and economic change. On one hand,
movements rely on rights to frame their grievances, to define and reinforce
collective identity and to mobilize activists. The realm of the law can provide
social reform campaigns with opportunities to influence policy, regulation, and
enforcement practices. On the other hand, the use of legal strategies and
reliance on lawyers can exert a conservative pressure on social movements
channelings protest and other forms of radical action into conventional
political and legal institutions. These tensions inherent in legal mobilization
activity have raised a few theoretical and empirical questions: What are the
conditions under which individual and collective actors will turn to the courts
to pursue political or social goals? What is the best way for researchers interested
in social movements to determine social movement success within the courts,
within the policy realm and beyond? What is the impact of legal mobilization on
a social movement’s collective identity? The literature on the mobilization of
law by social movements – by providing a “bottom-up” perspective – draws on,
complements, and provides alternatives to Disputes.
Judicial Review and Human Rights
Political science approaches to the
study of the law particularly explore how political science can be applied to
study of the role of the courts in protecting human right. The Role of Courts
in a Democracy. The judiciary is a high-impact institution. When functioning
properly, it profoundly affects social well-being, facilitating economic
development and shielding the individual from arbitrary State power. In
countries transitioning from authoritarian rule to democracy, a judiciary
empowered to vindicate the constitution is by consensus regarded as essential
to democratic consolidation. Given the important role courts are believed to
play, it is not surprising that sociologists and political scientists have in
recent decades paid ever more attention to judicial affairs. One post World War
II trend, identified, documented, and analyzed by a diverse sub-group of these
investigators, stands out for its ubiquity – the worldwide expansion of both
domestic and supranational judicial power. Informed by a paradigm that blames
the vulnerabilities of parliamentary democracy for World War II and its
horrors, many have come to see the judiciary as a check on the alleged evils of
untrammeled democracy. In one jurisdiction after another, even in the most conservative
and authoritarian civil law traditions, courts have been empowered or have
empowered themselves to ‘strike down’.
Historical aspects
Certainly, the notion that mass media
would affect the legal process clearly goes back to the beginning of the
printing press, and perhaps much further. One of the first trials prosecuted by
the media in the 20th century was Roscoe ‘Fatty’ Arbuckle who was convicted by
the courts but lost his career and reputation because of the media coverage.
There was another A-G v. Frail case where Joanne Frail was sentenced in 2011 by
London’s High Court to eight months in jail for contempt of court for sharing
Facebook messages with the accused in a drug trial when she sat on the jury. A
UK juror had been removed from a court for child abduction and sexual harassment
after asking her Facebook friends to help her decide on the verdict. Convictions
have been overturned and mistrials declared when it was discovered that juries
had accessed information on the Internet that had not been presented in court.
In Benbrook v. The Queen, the
Victorian Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal in which it had been argued that
Internet searching by jurors had tainted the trial. The notion that discussions
between friends on Facebook might be considered less serious than other
publications was reinforced in a 2012 Western Australian Supreme Court case
where Hall J refused to relocate a trial because prejudicial and threatening
statements about the accused had been posted to Facebook.
Families and relatives of people
accused of crimes have recently used the influence of social media to reopen
proceedings. In the cases of the murder of Jessica Lall Priyadarshini Mattoo,
Nitish Katera, BMW, and Aarushi, media influence was observed in full swing. In
2015, a Delhi woman, Jasleen Kaur, posted a photo of a man, Surjeet Singh, on
Facebook and accused him of sexual harassment. The Facebook post went viral
which was followed by a media trial labeling the man a ‘pervert’, ‘Delhi ka
Dorinda’ (the Delhi’s predator). Four years later, the man was later found out
to be innocent by the Delhi court and was acquitted of all the charges. The
widespread use of social media influences the legal process. More importantly,
the regular usage of platforms such as Twitter and Facebook are present threats
to the fair trial ideal.
Problems associated with it Justice
Sikri commented that the media has undergone a complete transformation in the
digital age and “we are in the era of paid and fake news”. Social Media has a
broad coverage which can easily sway the opinion of an individual. The problems associated with it are- Media’s
portrayal of previous crimes of the accused creates prejudices in the minds of
people and judges during a trial. Moreover, discussion of social and economic
factors related to the cases also causes hindrance on the road to impartiality.
Social media is a strong medium influencing and molding public opinion.
By publishing inadmissible evidence
and bringing it into the public domain, the media could bring facts to the
attention of the judge (and the public) that cannot be taken into consideration
when adjudicating the matter. Those facts may subconsciously affect the
decision of the judge. Social media causes defamation to persons who are
acquitted from the Courts on grounds of lack of proof beyond a reasonable
doubt. They face difficulty to resurrect their reputation in society. The media
in its quest for sensationalism fails to realize that such exposure jeopardizes
the right to a life of dignity of the accused.
in cases of a sexual offense, the
explicit description of the ordeal on television creates mental torture to the victim.
Also in such cases, the media instantly places public domain initial statements
of the victim in verbatim form. Thus, it is evident that media trials lead to a
breach of privacy, a bias in public opinion, as well as interferes with the
sentencing process. With the advent of social media, the information on legal
cases is reaching the multitude through Facebook, Twitter, and other social
media platforms.
Though they are a platform for
discussion, they have of late become a place of hatred, trolling, and bullying
too. In high profile cases, Twitterati goes berserk and starts taking sides
without checking facts. Social media has
been, in the aftermath of the # me-too campaign, a medium for demonizing, thrashing,
and attacking.
The social media usually portrays the
accused as a villain not based on facts but only to sensationalize the news,
which causes damage to the dignity of the accused. Media through their trial
attempts to reincarnate itself into a ‘public court’ and interfere with court
proceedings. It fails to analyze the vital gap between an accused and a convict
keeping at stake the golden principles of ‘presumption of innocence until
proven guilty’ and ‘guilt beyond reasonable doubt’. According to Ray Surette,
‘trial-by-media’ has three basic flavors- 1. Sinful Rich type 2. Evil stranger
psychotic killer 3. Abuse of Power trial. The media sticks to this stereotype.
Therefore, a need arises to pull the media’s reins and put reasonable
restrictions so that judicial decisions are not undermined shortly.
By publishing inadmissible evidence
and bringing it into the public domain, the media could bring facts to the
attention of the judge (and the public) that cannot be taken into consideration
when adjudicating the matter. Those facts may subconsciously affect the
decision of the judge. Social media causes defamation to persons who are
acquitted from the Courts on grounds of lack of proof beyond a reasonable
doubt. They face difficulty resurrecting their reputation in society. Thus, it
is evident that media trials lead to a breach of privacy, a bias in public
opinion, as well as interferes with the sentencing process. With the advent of
social media, information on legal cases is reaching the multitude through
Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms.
Though they are a platform for
discussion, they have of late become a place of hatred, trolling, and bullying
too. In high profile cases, Twitterati goes berserk and starts taking sides
without checking facts. Social media has
been, in the aftermath of the # me-too campaign, a medium for demonizing,
thrashing, and at Impact on the society and legal system.
Social media trial is wherein the
individuals themselves do a separate investigation and form public opinion
against the accused even before the court takes cognizance of the case. It
creates prejudices in the public and sometimes even judges. Due to this the
accused, instead of being assumed innocent is presumed to be a criminal. It not
only interferes with the “administration of justice” but also propagates a
false message to society. The society starts forming their opinions based on
their own notions rather than relying on the judiciary.
Social media is a very powerful
medium that affects mold’s public opinion. Through reporting inadmissible
evidence and putting it into the public domain, the media draws the judge’s
attention to details that are not to be addressed in adjudicating the case and
could subconsciously influence the judge’s judgment. The other thing is
organizational fairness. The court’s judgment is based on biases and challenges
in the path to justice and fairness. Under our law a suspect/accused has the
right to a fair trial and is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in a
court of law. Thus, their prejudices emerge as a vice to society that
influences public minds. The most famous example is the KM Nanavati Case, where
public opinion affected the conviction of the accused.
Legal provision
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution
of India guarantees freedom of speech and expression and Article 19(2) allows
for reasonable restrictions to be imposed by law for the purposes of ‘Contempt
of Court’ including. Art. 19(2) does not apply to ‘administration of justice,’
but interference in the administration of justice is specifically referred to
as contempt in the definition of ‘criminal contempt’ in Section 2 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and Sec. 3 thereof. Consequently, publications
that interfere with or appear to interfere with the administration of justice
constitute criminal contempt under that Act, and where the terms of that Act
enforce restitutions to avoid such interference, the provisions of that Act
impose reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech, such restrictions would be
valid.
The Supreme Court in A.K. Gopalan
v. Noordeen 1969 (2) SCC 734 held that a publication which is made after
the ‘arrest’ of a person amounts to contempt if it is biased to the suspect.
Criminal contempt is divided into three types: scandalizing, prejudicing trial
and hindering the administration of justice. The principle of natural justice
states that “every accused has a right to a fair trial” and the principle
“justice may not only be done it must also seem to be done” reflects the need
of a fair trial. Contempt was introduced to prevent unjust and unfair trials.
Publications of any sorts should not poison the minds of jurors or attempt to
intimidate the witnesses in which the administration of justice is impossible,
amounts to contempt.
Fair trial
Parties have a constitutional right
to a fair trial in the court of law. This trial is conducted by an impartial
tribunal or uninfluenced by newspaper dictation. Democracy demands fair play
and transparency, and if these are curtailed then the very concept of democracy
is at stake. Any act is done or writing published which attempts to lower the
authority of the Judge, or interferes with the course of justice amounts to
contempt of Court. In the case of R. v. Gray, [1900] 2 Q.B.D. 36, it was held
that contempt by speech or writing may be by scandalizing the Court itself, or
by prejudicing against a party before the cause. Speeches or writings
misrepresenting against the proceedings of the Court or prejudicing the public
for or against a party is contempt. To make a speech tending to influence the
result of a pending trial, whether civil or criminal is a grave contempt. The
issue is not regarding the publication but with interference in the
administration of justice.
In Sushil Sharma v. The State
(Delhi Administration) and Ors, the Delhi High Court held that conviction
should be based, if any, on record facts and not on media reporting. The judge
who is dealing with the case should be neutral. With Gupta and Ors in Saibal
Kumar. B.K.V. Sen & Anr. the Supreme Court held that no comparison existed
between a media trial and a court-run trial. The right to a fair trial is the
absolute right of each citizen within India’s territorial boundaries vide
Article 14 and Article 20, Article 21 and Article 22 of the Constitution. The
right to a fair trial is a significant right deriving from Article 21 of the
Constitution r / w Article 14. In contrast to one’s right to freedom of speech
and expression, one’s life with dignity is also given priority.
In India, Section 499 of the Indian
Penal Code governs the defamation law and has extended to “electronic
documents” as well. Section 469 of the IPC (forgery for the purposes of harming
reputation) was amended by the Information Technology Act, 2000 to include
‘electronic record fabricated’ Section 66A of the Information & Technology
Act 2000 (IT Act), which was quashed by the Supreme Court of India in Shreya
Singhal v. Union of India, due to confusion in the section’s meaning of the
term ‘negative.’ The section suggested that sending offensive messages to a
computer or to some other means of communication would be an offense. Under
Section 66A, such unfettered power was exploited by the State in curtailing and
curtailing people’s freedom of speech and expression, and therefore abolished.
The trial is essentially a process to be carried out by the courts. The trial
by social media is definitely an undue interference in the process of justice
delivery.
Right to
Privacy:
This is a fundamental right
recognized by the Indian judiciary as part of the right to life and personal
liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It refers to an
individual's right to be left alone and to control the dissemination of their
personal information. In the context of media trials, this provision could be
invoked if media coverage reveals the identity of a victim or other sensitive
personal information without consent.
Protection
of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012:
This legal provision is aimed at
protecting children from sexual abuse and exploitation. It includes provisions
for protecting the identity of child victims and for ensuring that media
coverage of such cases is conducted responsibly. In the context of media
trials, this provision could be invoked if media coverage of a case involving a
child victim is deemed to be insensitive or inappropriate Ethics for
Journalists: This is a set of guidelines developed by the Press Council of
India to ensure that media coverage is conducted ethically and responsibly. The
code includes provisions for protecting the privacy and dignity of individuals,
for avoiding sensationalism and bias, and for verifying the accuracy of
information before publishing it. In the context of media trials, adherence to
this code could help ensure that media coverage is conducted in a manner that
is respectful and responsible.
Consequences
of Media Trials:
The media has a significant impact on
public opinion, and media trials can have severe consequences if conducted
improperly.
Some of the consequences of media
trials are discussed below:
Ø Prejudices the Investigation:
Media trials can prejudice the
investigation of a case. The media coverage of the Sushant Singh Rajput case
led to several conspiracy theories being propagated, which diverted attention
from the actual investigation. The media coverage of the case was also
criticized for interfering with the investigation and influencing the outcome.
Ø Undermines the Judicial Process:
Media trials can also undermine the
judicial process. The media coverage of the Hathras case was criticized for
being insensitive and for revealing the identity of the victim, which is a
violation of the law. Such actions can undermine the judicial process and
affect the outcome of a case.
Ø Violates the Rights of the Accused:
Media trials can also violate the
rights of the accused. The media coverage of the Nirbhaya case was criticized
for portraying the accused in a negative light and for influencing public
opinion before the trial. Such actions can violate the right to a fair trial
and can affect the outcome of a case.
Media trial
vs Judiciary
In India, media trials have assumed
significance. There have been many cases where media had taken the case into
their own hands and declared judgement against an accused contrary to fair trials
in court. There have been quite a few cases such as.
Jessica Lal Case [2010]
In this case media rejoiced over
their efforts in bringing justice to jassica lal and trial court had acquitted
the accused of all the charges.
Priyadarshini Mattoo case [2006]
Where the law student was raped and
murdered, and the judgment of this case was suspected to have been influenced
by Media Trial.
Conclusion
The importance of freedom of
expression in a true democracy is undeniable. No democracy can work without an
effective platform to express opinions. The social media has immense power, and
if the power is misused, it can severely harm a nation. The onus of
responsibility falls on the individuals themselves to check and ensure that no
harm is committed, and the public should be more media literate and understand
fact from fiction. Though social media acts as a platform to bring people’s
voice to the notice of society and legislatures, in present times it creates
negative influence rather than a positive effect. This is evident through the
present cases such as the bios locker room incident. A 12th class student
committed suicide due to false allegations posted on him through social media
platforms. This revelation highlights the toxic mentality of the one who incited
rape allegations. Through Snapchat conversations, a very important lesson has
been learned- to stop the instant social media trials. The Judiciary and the
Media are the third and fourth pillars respectively of a democratic setup. They
are indispensable for the smooth functioning of the system. While the former
should duly consider the latter’s freedom and right to cover and disseminate
news of court proceedings in an open justice system, the latter, on the other
hand, should also show due diligence and extreme caution while reporting the
latter to preserve the former’s sanctity and to ensure a free and fair trial.
The most appropriate way of regulating the media is to exercise the Court’s
contempt jurisdiction to punish those who breach the basic code of conduct.
Social media cannot allow freedom of speech and expression to an extent as to
prejudice the trial itself. An ideal proposal at this time will be not to allow
the trial on social media. It is certainly an ideal proposition to require
regulated media coverage of cases until the media is expected to benefit from
the profit and sensational considerations. Social media must play a
facilitator’s role, rather than tilting the scales in favor of one party or
another. The widespread use of social media in the community, prevailing
attitudes that social media discussions are less ‘official’ than a traditional
press, and ready access to jurors’ online information present unique challenges
to the 21st-century justice system.
References
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/commercial-law/effect-of-trial-by-media-b
efore-courts-law-essay.php#:~:text=In%20India%2C%20trial%20by% 20media, and %20Bijal%20Joshi%20rape%20case.
https://www.legalbites.in/media-trial-big-problem/
https://www.latrobe.edu.au/nest/social-media-and-the-fair-trial/#:~:text=Perhaps%
20the%20most%20notorious%20example,was%20serving%20on%20the%20jury.
Article Information
SOCIAL MEDIA TRIALS: A THREAT TO THE LEGAL SYSTEM
Authors: ANISHA KUMARI
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/03/15
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.