Judges Cannot Editorialise, Must Speak Only Through Judgments: Former CJI Sanjiv Khanna at Editors Guild Event
Speaking at the Prem Bhatia Journalism Awards Ex-CJI Sanjiv Khanna warned judges against editorialising, stressed media’s influence on public thought, and cautioned against bias, fast news, and declining democratic dialogue;
Former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna has cautioned that judges, as constitutional functionaries, must refrain from editorialising or commenting outside the courtroom, warning that any departure from this discipline would amount to a betrayal of the oath of judicial life.
Delivering the keynote address on “Judiciary and Media: Shared Principles, Similarities and Dissimilarities” at the Prem Bhatia Journalism Awards and Memorial Lecture organised by the Editors Guild of India, Justice Khanna underlined the crucial distinction between the two institutions, describing the judiciary as an institution of law, and the media as an institution of opinion.
“Judgments do have an impact on society, but news reporting can change the way we think and behave. We underestimate the impact of news. News coverage is not a benign source of facts, but subconsciously meddles with our lives. We may not realise we are constantly simmering in a soup of news,” he said.
“We respond to the facts on record, interpret the law, and speak through our judgments. We do not choose our cases, nor do we comment on them outside the courtroom. We cannot and must not editorialise,” the former CJI said.
Justice Khanna emphasised that while both the judiciary and the press act as watchdogs in a democracy, they do so in different ways. “Both, when functioning well, speak truth to power, not to provoke, but to preserve and strengthen democracy,” he said, adding that legitimacy of both institutions flows not from elections, but from public trust grounded in neutrality, fairness and integrity.
Stressing the centrality of free speech, Justice Khanna said that 75 years after independence, the question is no longer about the existence of freedom of expression, but whether it has become “more capacious, more inclusive, and more resilient” in accommodating dissent and evolving modes of discourse. He cautioned that free speech continues to face challenges from political overreach, digital distortion, economic pressures and even public fatigue.
Calling both judiciary and media “mirrors held up to power”, he warned that bias, misinformation or loss of independence could distort these reflections, with rights being the first casualty. “Bias can creep in quietly, but can be judged in framing, in language, in selection of views,” he remarked.
He further cautioned against the rise of “yellow journalism” and the perils of fast news. “Cognitive reasoning is declining. The best ideas do not rise to the top. Look at TV debates today, no topic is truly safe. We witness flame wars every evening. Acrimonious exchanges online do not build bridges,” he remarked.
Justice Khanna also underscored the media’s responsibility in fostering dialogue rather than division. “Language must be respectful and not denigrating or threatening. It should not pour fuel onto sites of active conflict. Over time, constant toxic exposure can narrow minds, create echo chambers and weaken democracy’s legitimacy,” he cautioned.