Webinar by NIEV Judicial Education: 'Impact of Public Discourse in Criminal Cases'

The Indian legal system relies on the premise that a Judge will decide a case as per the applicable law, free from bias and influence. However, there are often apprehensions that the decision of a judge may be affected by public opinion/public discourse or popular sentiment. We propose to analyse the said concerns by looking at the different perspectives given by our speakers on 27th June, 2020.
Our speakers were:
1. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph (retired Judge, Supreme Court of India)
2. Ms. Rebecca John, Senior Advocate
3. Mr. Mohit Mathur, Senior Advocate and President Delhi High Court Bar Association
4. Dr. Nagarathna A., Associate Prof. and Chief coordinator, Cyber law centre, National Law School of India University, Bengaluru.

Topics Covered in the Webinar:

1. High standards of conduct to be followed by judges and its practicality;
2. Impact of Public Discourse on crimes, on Judges at all levels of the judicial hierarchy.
3. Positive impacts of Public Discourse on Criminal Trial if any;
4. How Judges can tackle the influence from public discourse, throughout the trial, conviction and sentencing process;
5. How courts can ensure that, even while delivering a counter-majoritarian judgement, still the faith of the public in the judiciary is kept intact;
6. The Constitutional role of the Court in ensuring fair trial, conviction and sentence even if it is Counter majoritarian;
7. Impact of public discourse on sentencing the accused to death penalty: A Judge’s perspective.
8. Victimisation of the accused and/or the victim at a personal level, due to public discourse.
9. Impact of public discourse on the witnesses of Victim (Prosecution witness) when public opinion was in favour of accused (For example in the case like recent Hyderabad Encounter Case where police has encountered the accused involved in the case, the public opinion is in favour of the accused police if Police stand the trial);
10. Impact of Public discourse on the defence witnesses when public opinion is completely against accused;
11. Protection of the victim’s and the accused’s Rights during trial-existing laws and the role of the courts.

12.Efficiency of the courts in protecting such victims (accused or victim) of public discourse.
13. Conduct and Ethics of the advocates who deal with cases under public discourse;
14. Validity of the Resolutions passed by the Bar Associations not defending the accused a particular case;
15. Impact of the said resolutions passed by the Bar Associations on the defence counsel and how should a defence counsel handle such situations and still protect their interests;
16. How can bar associations help the advocates and the court in conducting fair Trial, in cases that are already under public discourse;
17. The need of regulating public comments by Lawyers when their case is sub-judice;
18. The need of regulating the investigative agencies to present their version in the public before Trial commences in Court and during trial.
19. Impact of the public discourse during and after the Trial of a Criminal Case and its relation to the Public’s trust on the Judiciary;
20. Measures which may be required to be taken by the Judiciary to ensure fair trial in these types of cases.