Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 16951, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control', 'metaKeywords' => 'media,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 16951 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control' $metaKeywords = 'media,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Lines of control</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 16951, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control', 'metaKeywords' => 'media,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 16951 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control' $metaKeywords = 'media,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Lines of control</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f10107c5f07-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 16951, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control', 'metaKeywords' => 'media,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 16951 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control' $metaKeywords = 'media,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This &ldquo;doctrine of postponement&rdquo; of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What&rsquo;s more, India&rsquo;s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen&rsquo;s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/lines-of-control-17079.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Lines of control</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 16951, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control', 'metaKeywords' => 'media,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...', 'disp' => '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 16951, 'title' => 'Lines of control', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div style="text-align: justify"> -The Indian Express </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> <br /> </div> <div style="text-align: justify"> While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now. </div>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Indian Express, 12 September, 2012, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/lines-of-control/1001175/0', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'lines-of-control-17079', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 17079, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 16951 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Lines of control' $metaKeywords = 'media,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well...' $disp = '<div style="text-align: justify">-The Indian Express</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping.</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention?</div><div style="text-align: justify"><br /></div><div style="text-align: justify">While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.</div>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
Lines of control |
-The Indian Express Concerned about instances of reporting that breached confidentiality and threatened to hurt litigants, the Supreme Court has been, for a while, contemplating the way to regulate the journalistic coverage of ongoing cases. While the court has done well to refuse to lay down any overarching rule for all sub-judice cases, it did make a significant and troubling change by allowing a case-by-case appeal for postponing media coverage. Essentially, it laid down a constitutional principle to allow aggrieved parties to move the courts to temporarily debar media coverage if it is seen to prejudice a trial or interfere with the administration of justice. This “doctrine of postponement” of reporting is meant to be a preventive measure, rather than a punitive one, and is intended to balance the right of free speech with the right to a fair trial. The courts, the SC said, will evaluate each appeal carefully, guided by considerations of necessity and proportionality. However, the very outlining of the principle, in effect, leaves journalism at the mercy of the high court, rather than being internally regulated with better editorial gatekeeping. Around the world, exceptions can be carved out in special cases where there is a compelling chance of media exposure clouding the outcome. But to indicate that these restraints can be routinely sought and given has chilling implications. India has an open justice system, which rests on the premise that a vigilant, watching public and operational transparency in judicial proceedings has a role in keeping the trial fair. What’s more, India’s media culture is relatively restrained, compared to the live drama in countries like the US. Should mere misgivings about its influence lead to a system where sensitive legal proceedings could be off-limits? The other question, of course, is about what kind of publicity can be restrained. These are digitally networked times when anyone can be a journalist, publisher and broadcaster, where citizens can break a piece of news, and comment is free. How will the trial be sealed off from all public attention? While the Supreme Court has been cautious in wording this principle, it must also remember its own long tradition as protector of press freedom. In the absence of a First Amendment-style provision, it is the court that has upheld media freedoms with its expansive interpretation of Article 19(a), as part of a citizen’s fundamental right to free expression. They must not dilute that commitment now.
|