The Supreme Court of India has devised a new procedure, known as the “public interest immunity claim,” to address claims involving state secrets as a less restrictive alternative to sealed covers. In this essay, we will discuss what the public interest immunity claim is, how it differs from sealed cover jurisprudence, and the concept of amicus curiae.
What is the public interest immunity claim?
The public interest immunity claim allows the State to remove material from proceedings if its disclosure would harm public interest. If such a claim is allowed, the concerned document cannot be used as evidence. The validity of a claim involving national security considerations must be based on whether there is material to conclude that the non-disclosure of information is in the interest of national security and whether a reasonable prudent person would draw the same inference from the material on record.
Comparison with sealed cover procedure
The court assesses the validity of public interest immunity claims based on the “structured proportionality” standard. Public interest immunity claims constitute a less restrictive means. While public interest immunity claims also impact the principles of natural justice, sealed cover proceedings go a step further and infringe on the principles of natural justice as well as the principles of open justice. Only the court and the party seeking non-disclosure of the material are privy to the public interest immunity proceedings.
Concept of amicus curiae
To safeguard the claimant against a potential injury to procedural guarantees in public interest immunity proceedings, the court has the power to appoint an amicus curiae. The appointment of an amicus curiae balances concerns of confidentiality with the need to preserve public confidence in the objectivity of the justice delivery process. The court-appointed amicus shall be given access to the materials sought to be withheld by the state.
The amicus curiae will be allowed to interact with the applicant and their lawyer before the proceedings to ascertain their case and enable them to make effective submissions on the necessity of disclosure.
However, the amicus curiae shall not interact with the applicant or their counsel after the public interest immunity proceeding has begun and the counsel has viewed the document sought to be withheld.
Finally, the amicus shall represent the interests of the applicant to the best of their ability and would be bound by oath to not disclose or discuss the material with any other person.
Article 145
One of the considerations behind the court giving directions to appoint an amicus was Article 145 of the Constitution, which warrants that all judgments of the Supreme Court be delivered in open court. While the court recognized that public interest immunity proceedings will take place in a closed setting, it stated that the Court is required to pass a reasoned order for allowing or dismissing the claim in open court.
What is sealed cover jurisprudence?
Sealed cover jurisprudence is a practice used by the Supreme Court and, in some cases, subordinate courts, in which material from government agencies is requested or accepted in sealed envelopes that can only be viewed by judges.
Why In News
The Supreme Court of India introduced the “public interest immunity claim” as a more balanced approach to deciding claims involving state secrets. This procedure allows the state to remove the material from the proceedings on the ground that its disclosure would harm the public interest, while still upholding the principles of natural justice and open justice.
MCQs about public interest immunity claim
-
What is the “public interest immunity claim”?
A. A claim by the state to remove material from proceedings due to potential harm to public interest.
B. A claim by a citizen to access classified information.
C. A claim by the state to keep proceedings confidential.
D. A claim by a citizen to remove material from proceedings.
-
What is the difference between “public interest immunity claims” and “sealed cover proceedings”?
A. Public interest immunity claims impact the principles of natural justice, while sealed cover proceedings do not.
B. Sealed cover proceedings infringe on the principles of open justice, while public interest immunity claims do not.
C. Only the court and the party seeking non-disclosure of the material are privy to the public interest immunity proceedings, while sealed cover proceedings involve multiple parties.
D. Public interest immunity claims and sealed cover proceedings address different harms.
-
What is the concept of “amicus curiae” in the context of public interest immunity claims?
A. An amicus curiae is a judge who presides over public interest immunity proceedings.
B. An amicus curiae is a lawyer who represents the state in public interest immunity proceedings.
C. An amicus curiae is an independent third-party appointed by the court to assist the party seeking disclosure of the material.
D. An amicus curiae is a confidential informant who provides information to the court in public interest immunity proceedings.
Boost up your confidence by appearing our Weekly Current Affairs Multiple Choice Questions
