Supreme Court Justice Warns Against Misuse of Livestreamed Court Proceedings
Last Updated on March 11, 2025 by Amit Patra
Supreme Court Justice BR Gavai has raised significant concerns about the unauthorized usage of livestreamed court proceedings, warning that the practice threatens both judicial integrity and intellectual property rights when sensationalized clips spread misinformation.
Speaking at a conference organized by the Supreme Court of Kenya, Justice Gavai highlighted how content creators and YouTubers are extracting short clips from court proceedings, often presenting them out of context in ways that distort the actual judicial discussions. This practice, according to the judge, necessitates clear guidelines on the usage of livestreamed court material.
“Short clips from court hearings are often circulated on social media, sometimes in a way that sensationalizes the proceedings. These clips, when taken out of context, can lead to misinformation, misinterpretation of judicial discussions, and inaccurate reporting,” Justice Gavai observed.
While acknowledging that livestreaming has enhanced access to justice and improved transparency, Justice Gavai questioned the ethical implications when third parties monetize court proceedings without authorization. “Many content creators, including YouTubers, re-upload short excerpts from court proceedings as their own content, raising serious questions about intellectual property rights and ownership of judicial recordings,” he noted.
The judge also addressed broader technological challenges facing the judiciary, particularly those posed by artificial intelligence. While recognizing AI’s benefits in case management and administrative tasks, he warned about its limitations in legal research, citing instances where platforms like ChatGPT have generated fake case citations and fabricated legal facts.
Justice Gavai expressed particular concern about AI tools designed to predict judicial outcomes, questioning whether algorithms could ever adequately replace human judgment in legal matters that require moral reasoning, empathy, and contextual understanding.
His remarks underscore the delicate balance courts must maintain between embracing technological innovations to improve efficiency and transparency while safeguarding the integrity of judicial proceedings in an increasingly digital landscape.
