INTRODUCTION-

With the development in technology and complexities of the modern life. There has a been a significant increase in the relationship between the judiciary and the media. Both the elements play a very important role as the organs of the state and are essential for the smooth functioning of the same. Both the organs are articulated in such a manner that they act as a watchdog for each other. 

It is rightly stated by someone ‘Justice is blind’, that is, it is blind to any kind of discrimination, mala fide intentions and all kinds of corruption when it comes to delivering justice. The judiciary is the backbone of human welfare and existence, it is a champion of ideals of justice, liberty and equality. The importance of the judiciary cannot be emphasized enough because it is the judiciary that keeps a watch of the other organs of the state and holds them accountable for any violation. People who are denied their rights are not left helpless but are empowered to seek justice at the doors of courts. 

But if such an important organ is not free from the influence and clutches of the other state actors, the justice dispended is likely to be partial and the pillar on which the judicial ideals are built would appear as shallow and hoax.

Thus, Judicial independence becomes the need of the hour. Judicial independence means the capacity given to a court or the judges to decide a case and perform their duties without any impartiality and without any influence from an external party. The term is used to define the discretionary independence which is given to the judiciary to perform the functions which are given to them under the statutes. This concept of Judicial independence has received not only national but international recognition as a principle of fundamental importance. Some rudimentary traces of this concept can be identified in the Universal declaration for Human Rights under provision regarding equality before law, fair trails etc. This idea received a full-fledged endorsement in 1985 when United Nation adopted ‘The Basic Principles on the Independence of Judiciary’ which laid down important principles regarding the independence of judiciary and also highlighted the importance freedom of expression and association. The principles were designed to ensure that judicial functions are free from any influence and to ensure that fair trails were given to the parties with respect and equal opportunity. At the same time, it enables the judiciary the freedom of speech, to hold a particular belief, join associations etc. This agreement highly influenced the judiciary and many other organs such as Media.

Many International agreements find their roots and origin in the Basic principles on Independence of Judiciary 1985. One such Agreement is the Madrid Principles on the relationship between Media and Judicial Independence (1994). The Principles were signed with two-fold objective- To analyse the relationship that existed between the Media and Judicial independence as given and guaranteed in the ‘United Nation Basic principles on the independence of Judiciary, 1985’ and to formulate postulates to address the relationship that existed between the two.   

Madrid is the capital of Spain, where in January 1994, a group of legal professionals (experts) and representatives of the media from around 40 countries from all over the world met at a meeting convened by-

1-International Commission of Jurists.

2- UNICEF (Spanish Committee)

3- The Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers.

The participants of the meeting represented countries such as Ghana, India, Australia, Sweden, United Kingdoms, Sri Lanka, Germany, Norway etc.

THE MADRID PRINCIPLES 1994:  SALIENT FEATURES

The Madrid Principles are very important as far as relation of media and judicial independence is concerned. Each aspect of the document, from the preamble to the measures designed to be taken, are all made with a special emphasis on the importance of the positive relation that exists between the media and judiciary.

PREAMBLE –

The preamble of the document lays emphasis on the importance of the rule of law. It states that for the rule of law to prevail in the democratic society, freedom of expression especially the freedom of the media become a mandatory element. The document imposes duties and responsibilities on the both the Judiciary and Media. The judiciary is to recognize and respect the Freedom of media to expression and speech and only allow those restrictions which are reasonably permitted under the law or Convention on Civil and Political rights. There is also the duty on the media to comply to its ethics and standards, it is duty bound to respect the judicial independence and the individual rights.

PRINCIPLE-

The basic principle envisaged in the document is the ‘Freedom of expression’ which includes the freedom of the media. Article 19 of the ICCPR ,1966 lays down the meaning of freedom of expression. It stated that the freedom of expression is an existential factor of a democratic society and the Media plays a very important role in this aspect. It is the function of the media to gather information and inform the public about the same. The media has the power to question and comment, even criticize the judicial function in administering justice. They actively participate in covering cases. Such influence is likely to prevent any unjust happenings in the administration of justice. The basic principle is not subject to restrictions which are given in the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights and is immune from any special restrictions.

SCOPE-     

The principle of freedom of expression has a very vast scope. It does not exclude the preservation by law of secrecy. It is observed where the secrecy is mode for investigation in judicial process. It is mostly done to protect and benefit the person involved. Such a person is free to approach the media and communicate information regarding the case. The scope further extends to cover proceeding which are held in camera to deal with private matters and conciliation. There is no requirement of any special right to broadcast live or recorded court proceeding as that rights is already covered under the scope of the basic principle of freedom of expression. 

RESTRICTIONS-    

One important feature of the Madrid principles is the explanation which allows the extend and nature of restrictions that can be imposed on the freedom of expression especially that of the media. It says that restrictions which are allowed to be imposed must be prescribed by the law. If the restricting law allows a discretionary power, it will only be exercised by the judges and no other person holds such authority. In case of the restrictive authority of judges, Media has the right to be heard and have the right to appeal. The restrictions must be designed in a manner necessary for the democratic society and for the protection of minors etc. Necessary restriction can be imposed in criminal and civil proceedings where it is observed that if information flow is allowed it will likely cause prejudice or harm to the parties or to the decision. National security is another aspect where restriction can be implemented subject to right to contest the restriction. Restriction must follow a rational and non-discriminatory manner when they are imposed etc. 

The imposition of principles on restriction makes the document more inclusive and allows the laws which are further influenced by it to be more organized and systemic.

IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES/ STRATEGIES-

The Madrid principles’ importance lies in the fact that apart from laying down guiding principles, it also devices certain strategies which can be used to achieve the desirable relationship between the judiciary and media. All the strategies designed have a particle implication and are adopted by many countries to uphold the relation between the media and judiciary.

Certain measures such as legal resources, press council, code of ethics for media etc. should be made available at the disposal of the affected parties in an attempt to achieve the balance. 

JUDICARY AND MEDIA’S RELATIONSHIP IN INDIA

India is the largest democracy in the world and all the laws that are designed for the subcontinent are made with due respect to the ideal of justice, liberty and equality. India has been a principal advocate of independence of judiciary and of freedom of speech and expression especially the freedom of media. The relationship between the media and Judicial independence in India appears to be very strong and impactful. India is also a signatory of the Madrid principles on the relationship between the media and judicial independence 1994. The Constitution of India guarantees the freedom of Speech and Expression Art 19 (1) (a) which includes the freedom of the media and press. Indian judiciary has time and again played a crucial role in  highlighting the same.

The Indian press plays a pivotal role as the representative of the people and helps in making essential information available tothe public, which in turn influences the public opinion and helps in shaping the laws and functioning of the country. Therefore, it is important that the Press and Media is not obstructed by putting unnecessary restriction on their freedom. And the Judiciary has taken some important decisions in this regard. In the case of Saroj Iyer v. Maharastra Medical (Council) of Indian Medicine  , the court was of a view that it is the role of the journalist to inform the public about the administration of justice. Therefore, they have the right to attend the court of behalf of the public. This right is available vis-à-vis Judicial and Quasi-Judicial proceedings  This decision of the Court is an example of the practical implication of the Madrid Principle in the Indian system. It not only encourages the media to perform its function without any hindrance but also revives the faith of people in the justice system as they are able to witness its power through the information gained.

There are a number of cases in India that have highlighted the importance of the freedom of media and relationship they build with the independence of Judiciary.

CONCLUSION-   

For the smooth functioning of the State and for the welfare of its people, it becomes evident that a substantial relation is developed between the Independence of Judiciary and the freedom of speech and expression of the Media. If unnecessary influence or restrictions are imposed on the independence of Judiciary, the democratic laws and ideals would be reduced to rubble and it would appear as a mockery of the romanticized ideals of justice and equality in which the innocent people have put their faith . Similarly, Media is an important bridge that connects the people and the state. Through Media, people are informed about the how the government and judiciary are functioning and they are also held responsibility for any violations.

No doubt India is one of the ideal states which encourages and promotes the relation between freedom of media and independence of Judiciary but in reality, there is still a long way to go. It is very important to emphasize that the freedom of speech and expression are the fundamental rights and unnecessary restriction on the media while exercising this freedom will only hamper the functioning of democracy.  Stringent media policies promoting unnecessary restriction would only violate the fundamental rights which are guaranteed under the Constitution of India. To conclude, it is important state that we have to do away with such draconian laws which obstruct the functioning of media freedom, as in the words of Safwat Zarger, who writes for the forum Scroll, ‘Such a policy is detrimental to the freedom of speech and expression and has no place in democratic framework’.    

END.