It is the job of the judiciary to interpret the laws set in place by the legislature, to carry out justice. The judiciary can do this only if it acts as an independent body away from the influence of all the other functionaries of the government and external bodies. The judiciary has proven time and again that it is capable of working in such a manner take for instance the judgement of our supreme Court delivered in 1978 in menka Gandhi's case. In this judgement the interpretation of article 21 in respect of life and personal liberty of a person , not only contrary to the intention of our constituent assembly went on to broaden its scope to include even right to education and right livelihood. This law was appreciated not only in our country but all over the globe. In this scenario one can not say that our judiciary is not independent and works under the influence of any other authority like media.
in democratic society it is the role of the media to present everything that it has attained through it's own methods which may or may not be ethical to the judiciary but the motive of the media is to boost its trp in the easiest way possible whereas the role of the judiciary is to listen to everything presented in front of it and its motive is to interpret the information in such a way that it can provide an unbiased and unquestionable verdict.
Moreover one could argue that media is influenced by the judiciary as some high ranking individuals of the judicial system control or have ties with media outlets and influence their broadcasting to such a manner that it justifies the stance of the judiciary and the judge which sometimes to an outside observer may look as if the media influenced the verdict of the judiciary. This was seen in the farkhunda mob murder where the media presented the situation in such a manner that the viewer felt as if the media were the ones to discover this hanous crime but the actual scenario was that the court was already prosecuting the mob leaders and to make the Afghani judiciary look good in the eyes of the public the already low profile, on going case was making headlines almost 2 months later . In this case the viewer might have felt that the media had influenced the judiciary in prosecuting the mob leader rather the contrary was correct that the judiciary to put itself in a good light had influenced the media into broadcasting the incident
in democratic society it is the role of the media to present everything that it has attained through it's own methods which may or may not be ethical to the judiciary but the motive of the media is to boost its trp in the easiest way possible whereas the role of the judiciary is to listen to everything presented in front of it and its motive is to interpret the information in such a way that it can provide an unbiased and unquestionable verdict.
Moreover one could argue that media is influenced by the judiciary as some high ranking individuals of the judicial system control or have ties with media outlets and influence their broadcasting to such a manner that it justifies the stance of the judiciary and the judge which sometimes to an outside observer may look as if the media influenced the verdict of the judiciary. This was seen in the farkhunda mob murder where the media presented the situation in such a manner that the viewer felt as if the media were the ones to discover this hanous crime but the actual scenario was that the court was already prosecuting the mob leaders and to make the Afghani judiciary look good in the eyes of the public the already low profile, on going case was making headlines almost 2 months later . In this case the viewer might have felt that the media had influenced the judiciary in prosecuting the mob leader rather the contrary was correct that the judiciary to put itself in a good light had influenced the media into broadcasting the incident
No comments:
Post a Comment