Live reporting of court proceedings gives a chance to young lawyers & the world at large to first hand see the views of the 'legends' of bar in cases most critical to personal liberty & constitutional democracy. They were/are elevated to a pedestal of almost being demigods.

Arguing the brief is one thing but taking a position blatantly contrary to grundnorm of constitutional principles is quite disappointing. Niren De is still infamously remembered for that courtroom exchange. History hasn't judged him well for that.

The halo/aura created around senior lawyers comes crashing down once we objectively analyse their "contribution" to law in moments when their brilliance/legendary prowess was most needed. It's crushing & disheartening to see them disappoint us. And the Constitution.

What's worse is that they are the one's who chart the course of legal jurisprudence & give it a direction that can take years to mend. Such is the cost of their unconscionable stance. There are many Niren De's amongst us. Live reporting saves us the obvious embarrassment. End.