ISLAMABAD: Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) expressed serious reservations on Wednesday regarding the live broadcast of judicial proceedings from higher courts. He pointed out that this practice has, in certain situations, led to unintended and detrimental consequences, affecting the decorum and effectiveness of the judicial process.
The judge’s remarks came amid a hearing focused on a petition related to the promotion criteria for teachers employed at various public sector universities. During the session, the court’s proceedings were interrupted when it was discovered that a teacher present in the courtroom was recording the hearing on a mobile phone, an act strictly prohibited under court regulations. Upon Justice Kayani’s request, the individual was asked to identify himself, after which court officials promptly confiscated the device to maintain order.
The teacher, accompanied by his legal representative, immediately issued an unconditional apology, clarifying that the recording was not intentional but rather an inadvertent mistake. Justice Kayani accepted the apology with understanding, noting the individual’s professional background by saying, “These are teachers; I do not want to say anything to them myself,” signaling a degree of leniency given the circumstances.
During the hearing, the court also examined a detailed policy report submitted by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) concerning the promotion framework for teachers at BPS levels in public universities. Justice Kayani directed the petitioner’s counsel to prepare and present their formal arguments in the subsequent hearing. The court then adjourned the case, scheduling the next session to take place after the Eidul Fitr holidays, allowing time for further review and preparation.
Justice Kayani further reflected on the broader implications of live-streaming judicial proceedings, referencing several high-profile cases that had been broadcasted, including disputes over the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party’s electoral symbol, allocation of reserved seats, and review hearings related to the landmark Article 63-A judgment. He observed that while some ruling political factions appeared to welcome the transparency brought about by live coverage, opposition parties, notably PTI, had voiced strong objections. This dynamic, he suggested, underscores the complexities and potential drawbacks of televising sensitive court matters, which can sometimes exacerbate political tensions and influence public perception.
The judge’s comments highlight an ongoing debate within Pakistan’s legal community about balancing transparency with the need to preserve judicial integrity and prevent external pressures on court proceedings. As live-streaming becomes more common, courts are grappling with how to manage its impact on both the conduct of trials and the broader political environment. The Islamabad High Court’s cautious stance reflects a desire to maintain the sanctity of judicial processes while adapting to modern demands for openness and accountability.
