SC says it can bar reporters from court without assigning a reason

These norms appeared on the court’s website on August 20 in a note that’s unsigned and does not specify when it comes into effect.

“The accreditation,whether permanent or temporary,can be withdrawn,at any time,without assigning any reason,” says the 11th condition in the note. No government department or legislature has any such condition for media coverage.

Accreditation for journalists covering the Supreme Court — decided by a panel of SC judges — is linked to their daily routine of attending proceedings in open court. Only accredited correspondents get a free causelist or copies of judgments or orders.

As per existing norms,to be an accredited legal correspondent in both electronic and print media,a journalist must have a law degree recognised by the Bar Council of India under the Advocate Act. Print journalists are required to have seven years’ experience to cover Supreme Court proceedings,of which at least five must be at the High Court or Supreme Court level. Of this five,at least three and a half years should be immediately prior and continuous to the application for accreditation.

An electronic media journalist should have five years’ continuous regular court reporting experience immediately prior to the application for accreditation,of which at least two years must be at the Supreme Court or High Court level.

An applicant for press accreditation should also have regularly reported the proceedings of the Supreme Court for at least six months (for print) and one year (for electronic media) on the basis of “temporary accreditation” granted to him. The press accreditation is valid for a year and renewed annually. The conditions however may be relaxed in case of a “deserving candidate” for “special reasons”.

As of now,accredited legal correspondents are a minority within the reporting community at the SC. Condition 6 in the revised rules mentions a separate category called “temporary accreditation” for “working journalists desiring to report regularly the Supreme Court proceedings”. The conditions are almost similar to that of an accredited legal correspondent.

There is a third category of working journalists who can access the court “for a day/short duration or for a specific case”. This category of journalists should be accredited by the Press Information Bureau.

“This is just to ensure that people report responsibly,” said senior advocate P P Rao. “There is no requirement of law that compels the Supreme Court to give accreditation. It is a courtesy extended from the Supreme Court to the media to report a public forum like the Supreme Court. Accreditation gives you a status,easy access. You can on the other hand also be a visitor,sit in court and report.”

Former Chief Justice of India V N Khare questioned the norms. “This is not fair. When on one side you are talking of transparency…why is even a law degree necessary? You,as a correspondent,are not going to the SC to argue a case but to report. Journalism is a profession by itself. So when you report a matter concerning engineering,do you as a reporter need to have an engineering degree? So how many degrees do you need?”