Polity

KEY POINTS

·         There has been a rapid increase in cases where the judges asking for material in a sealed cover in India.

·         For example, in the ongoing case of Rafale controversy and the updation of National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam, the courts use the sealed cover jurisprudence.

·         The “sealed cover” was also at play in the recent hearings involving the Judge Loya investigation, as well as the challenge against the Bhima-Koregaon arrests.

·         The growth of the jurisprudence of the “sealed cover” — which effectively involves the court in a secret dialogue with (in most cases) the State — is a disturbing trend.

Concerns with the “Sealed cover”

·         The rationale behind such sealed cover is based on the presumption that certain information is too “sensitive” for public scrutiny, and that therefore, it is only the court that is entitled to see it, and to decide. 

·         But, it contradicts with the constitutional values of open justice and the culture of justification.

·         Open justice – The dealing of justice must, at all times, be transparent and subject to public scrutiny.

·         Once the Court admits a case — thereby acknowledging that it is beyond the domain of “reasons of State” and subject to judicial scrutiny — openness must be the universal norm.

·         Culture of justification – Every exercise of public power must be justified to its citizens.

·         Among the three wings of State, the judiciary alone is bound by the requirement that for every judgment or order that it passes, it must give reasons — reasons that are open to public scrutiny.

·         When a court decides on a case based on materials provided in a sealed cover, it degrades the court’s openness and obstructs the people’s right to know the reason for such a decision.

·         Also, not only it violates the principles of open justice and culture of justification, but also infantilises the public.

Review please

Kindly  review.