The media acts as the watchdog of the judicial process – Supreme Court in the ECI case

The Apex Court heard a plea filed by the Indian Electoral Commission against the oral remarks made by the Madras High Court to hold the officers responsible for the second wave of COVID-19 and book them on charges of murder.

The EBI alleged that such allegations had been made against them without proper evidence and that they were being broadcast by the media outlets. The Commission also argued that it is the responsibility of the government authorities in the context of disaster management to implement the guidelines and ensure COVID-appropriate behavior.

The commission prayed before the court that the power of the media would be limited to reporting on the content of the decision and not on the oral remarks made during the hearing. The commission also prayed for the non-registration of complaints based on such messages or oral remarks.

The bank made it clear that the commission’s prayer did not include contesting the order that the Madras Supreme Court made a comment about the officials’ irresponsibility.

The bank stated that it could not prevent the media from covering the oral remarks that were taking place in a courtroom as they were of public interest and public interest. The bank found that the media acted as a watchdog of the “sanctity of the judicial process”.

The Bank also noted the importance of reporting such exchanges in the courtroom as it increases public confidence in the judiciary, ensures public accountability for such agencies and authorities, and ensures judges remain faithful to their oaths.

The bank also ensured that none of the Madras High Court’s remarks were intended to tarnish the image of the Indian Electoral Commission. The bank has reserved its appointment for this plea filed by ECI.

Comments are closed.