Supreme Court to write archive-only rule for livestream access

The activists, represented by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Cheryl Dsouza, argued the July 24 order reversed the "principle of open justice" upheld by the apex court in multiple judgments. They said open access keeps the judicial process answerable to the public and guards against arbitrariness.

Bhushan proposed that livestreamed content be preserved in court archives, letting users access the authorised version from there. "That is precisely the protocol we want to lay down," Kant responded.

The court allowed the application and asked Bhardwaj and Johri to submit suggestions for framing the protocol. The CJI said the exercise was not adversarial. Digital platforms Meta and WhatsApp have agreed to contribute suggestions. State High Courts and bar bodies across the country have also filed their affidavits.

The activists' application said safeguards should "protect fair and accurate representation, including sharing and dissemination of proceedings that are already open to public view." Their concern was that intentional misuse could be addressed by defining terms and conditions for re-use and sharing, rather than banning those activities based on who the user was.