There is always some form of hesitation or fear of punishment to discuss court judgment and express your views on the judgment. Power to administer justice is vested in a Courts/Tribunals. It is the general rule that court matters be heard in open and in public view. This requirement to hear court matters in open is not a statutory requirement but it is fundamental of open administration of justice.
It is important to maintain public confidence in general in the administration of justice. Participation in open justice system includes discussion on the judgments and conduct of the court. Merely listening to the proceedings and judgment in open court is not the only objective of the open court’s principle.
This rule has the virtue that the proceedings of every court are fully exposed to public and professional scrutiny and criticism, without which abuses may flourish undetected.
For present purposes, it suffices to say that open justice is a fundamental aspect of the common law and the administration of justice and is seen as concomitant with the right to a fair trial. This longstanding common law principle manifests itself in three substantive ways:
- first, proceedings are conducted in ‘open court’;
- second, information and evidence presented in court is
communicated publicly to those present in the court;
- third, nothing is to be done to discourage the making of fair and accurate reports of judicial proceedings conducted in open court, including by the media.
- This includes reporting the names of the parties as well as the evidence given during the course of proceedings