Why Can't The Judges Brief The Media?

Why Can’t the Judges brief the Media

Supreme Court today gave the final judgment on the 2G issue and canceled all the 122 licenses issued by the then telecom minister, A Raja that were issued with great controversy in 2008.

The judgment was interpreted in different ways. The honorable court canceled licenses of these companies that were issued licenses by the UPA government in 2008, but Mr. Zero Loss, Kapil Sibal claimed that it was NDA policy of issuing licenses that has been indicted and squarely blamed the BJP and their first-come-first-serve telecom policy. This has raised serious questions and doubts in people's mind. After all, who is to be blamed for the monumental loss that came to light after the CAG report.

This has happened many times earlier as well that whenever a judgment on a much publicized issue comes out, it is interpreted by various concerned parties with an obvious bias and the layman is left in a dilemma that after all who is at the fault here, just to name a few is the case of Maria Susairaj.

We have seen several post-judgment press conferences and debates on television and read about them in the newspapers, but they always create confusion in our mind and we are left with doubts, which never go away. We see eminent lawyers fighting on television defending how their client is not at fault by twisting and turning the judgment.

I believe there is a ambiguity here and needs clarity from our judicial system. An unfavorable judgment can be easily concocted with effective media management.

To stop this, firstly, the honorable Supreme Court should not allow any concerned party to express their interpretation of the judgment to media without studying the judgment, especially the final judgments. Any concerned party should express their interpretation only after studying the judgment and should be held accountable for any misinterpretation.

Now my question is why can't the honorable judges themselves brief the media and explain what their judgment exactly means? After all, they are ones who have done all the hard work on it by listening to arguments of lawyers and by studying the issue with full sincerity and honesty. I believe at least the final judgment of the cases of public and national interest should be briefed by the judges as they are final and their correct interpretation is necessary. This way even the judges can explain the rationale and circumstances that led to their judgment and will leave no room for any debate.

Most people do not understand the legal terms and their implications. Therefore, I feel it is necessary that the judges brief the media or appoint someone on their behalf to interpret the judgment, and explain in simplest possible way what the judgment exactly says.

This will make our democracy and more than that our judiciary more simpler, sensible, transparent, effective, and that is what we all want.... right?