The Independent National Commission has submitted that the court is a public place accessible to everyone and satisfies all constitutional requirements.This is in response to an application filed by the People’s Democratic Party seeking live transmission of the court’s proceedings
Counsel to INEC noted that Live streaming is different from televising, in jurisdictions like the UK where live streaming is done, it is controlled by the court.
It is also a matter of jurisdictional policy done with procedure and guidelines.
Counsel to the president-elect on his part prayed the court to dismiss the application with cost.
He says no court can make or grant the order sought by the petitioners as the court is not a stadium or a film house.
The courtroom already has a press gallery, with various media houses represented.
It is a policy decision that the court as constituted can not make, it can only be through the president of the court of appeal to issue practice directions and guidelines.
There must be a statutory provision permitting it.
He prayed the court not to make an order that the court can not enforce or supervise.
The UK only issued a practice direction for live televised proceedings at the sentencing state for criminal proceedings.
The APC also urged the court to dismiss the application.
Counsel to the APC stressed that in jurisdictions where live streaming is done certain elements of the proceedings are not captured.
There is a distinction between a trial for the public and a trial by the public, if this is done other tribunals will be seeking the same order.
Court reserves ruling on the application.
