LNAT Practice Test Essay – Can there be valid reasons for withholding information from the public during a trial? If so, under what circumstances?

In the LawMint LNAT Practice Test Series for 2024 and 2025, there are 30 full length tests, with 360 passages – 1260 MCQs and 90 essay prompts or essay questions.

The essay below is a sample that can be written for the prompt:

Can there be valid reasons for withholding information from the public during a trial? If so, under what circumstances?

This LNAT essay question is included in LawMint LNAT Practice Test series.

While the model essays may include both sides of an argument, the question may require you to state your stance - either for or against; and support it with arguments.

Read our articles and watch the videos on our YouTube channel for guidance on how to structure and write the LNAT Essay.

Introduction

The principle of open justice is a cornerstone of democratic societies, ensuring transparency, accountability, and public confidence in the legal system. However, there are instances when withholding information from the public during a trial may be justified to protect the rights of the parties involved or to maintain the integrity of the judicial process. This essay will discuss the circumstances under which withholding information from the public during a trial may be deemed valid and explore the balance between open justice and the need to protect the rights of individuals and the integrity of the legal system.

Protecting the Rights of the Accused

One of the primary reasons for withholding information from the public during a trial is to protect the rights of the accused. In high-profile cases, extensive media coverage can create a prejudicial atmosphere, potentially influencing jurors and undermining the defendant’s right to a fair trial. In such cases, courts may impose reporting restrictions or hold closed hearings to minimize the risk of prejudice and ensure that the accused receives a fair trial.

For example, courts may suppress the publication of evidence that could be highly prejudicial to the defendant, such as prior convictions or unproven allegations, until the conclusion of the trial. This is done to avoid influencing the jury’s decision-making process based on information that may not be relevant to the case at hand.

Protecting the Rights of Victims and Witnesses

Another valid reason for withholding information from the public during a trial is to protect the rights and privacy of victims and witnesses. In cases involving sexual offenses, child abuse, or other sensitive matters, the court may choose to protect the identity of the victims or witnesses to minimize the potential harm and distress caused by public exposure.

In some cases, courts may also restrict the publication of certain details or testimony to protect the safety and well-being of witnesses, particularly if there is a risk of retaliation or intimidation. This can be particularly important in cases involving organized crime or gang-related offenses, where witnesses may face significant threats to their safety if their identities or testimonies are made public.

National Security and Public Interest

In rare cases, courts may withhold information from the public during a trial to protect national security or other public interests. This can occur in cases involving classified information, intelligence matters, or ongoing criminal investigations. In these situations, the court must balance the public’s right to know and the principle of open justice against the potential harm that may result from the disclosure of sensitive information.

For instance, disclosing classified information during a trial could compromise ongoing intelligence operations or reveal the identity of covert operatives, placing their lives at risk and undermining national security. Similarly, disclosing details of ongoing criminal investigations could jeopardize the ability of law enforcement agencies to gather evidence or apprehend suspects.

Conclusion

While the principle of open justice is a fundamental aspect of democratic societies, there can be valid reasons for withholding information from the public during a trial under certain circumstances. Protecting the rights of the accused, victims, and witnesses, as well as safeguarding national security and public interest, are all legitimate reasons for restricting the disclosure of information in specific cases.

The challenge for courts is to strike a balance between the public’s right to know and the need to protect the rights and interests of individuals and society. By carefully considering the potential risks and benefits of disclosing information during a trial, courts can uphold the principles of open justice while also ensuring the fair and effective administration of justice.