'Both Press & Judiciary Have Failed Us, Why?' Kapil Sibal

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal recently stated that if the judiciary and the press, which are two important pillars of democracy, bend to power excesses, it will result in the Republic being hollowed out from within. He stated that the judiciary and the media are meant to protect citizens from majoritarian passions, but if one institution is concerned about self-preservation and the other is busy building narratives suiting the State, democracy will not survive.

Sibal was speaking on the topic "The Two Strongest Pillars of Democracy are the Press and the Judiciary: Both Have Failed Us, Why?" at the Prem Bhatia Memorial Lecture.

Speaking on the judiciary, he stated that it's the last citadel of constitutional morality. Still, recent examples, such as the continued incarceration of student activist and JNU scholar Umar Khalid, and the opaqueness of the Supreme Court Collegium, show that the institution is under severe strain from its own institutional compromise.

He said: "A judiciary that appears more concerned with institutional self-preservation than with the citizen's liberty, that treats bail under special statutes as an exceptional grace rather than a constitutional right, and that leaves systemic distortions of the democratic process to the very political class that benefits from them, ceases to function as the robust check, the Constitution envisaged. Public faith is not an abstract resource; it is the only foundation of judicial authority. Once it erodes, the last citadel stands on increasingly uncertain ground."

Sibal pointed out that Khalid has been in custody since September 2020; since then, he has been denied bail, most recently by the Supreme Court, despite the trial yet to begin. He blamed the judiciary of not applying the 'bail is the rule, jail is the exception' principle to his Delhi riots case and other similarly placed matters.

"When pre-trial detention stretches into half a decade under a law whose design invites abuse, the distinction between investigation and punishment collapses. Liberty becomes contingent on the convenience of the executive."

Sibal said that the case of Khalid  is a "most stark" example but it's not an isolated failure; there persists a continuous pattern of delayed justice and restrictive bail jurisprudence under the Unlawful Activities(Prevention) Act or the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which is often invoked to target political opponents. He particularly called out the two conditions of bail, which require the accused to prove that they are not guilty and that they are unlikely to commit any offence while on bail, both reversing the cardinal principle of innocence. 

Collegium, once a shield against the executive, has now become a total disaster

On the larger structural issues looming over the judiciary, Sibal criticised the Supreme Court Collegium system for being "complicit" in targeting independent judges through sudden transfers and delayed appointments. He stated that the collegium system, once considered an essential shield of judicial independence against executive interference, has now become what many describe as a "total disaster".

"Senior members of the bar, including those who once argued for its creation, have publicly described it as having turned into a “total disaster,” marked by opacity, insufficient resistance to executive pressure, and, at times, complicity in the targeting of independent judges through transfers or delayed appointments. The executive's influence over the process of elevation, confirmation and post-retirement assignments remains a persistent concern. When the political executive commands a decisive parliamentary majority and controls the investigative agencies, the incentives for judicial caution multiply."

He also spoke on the increasing intolerance of the judiciary towards its own criticism. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision to blacklist the authors(later withdrawn)of the Class 8th civics textbook for authoring a controversial chapter on the judiciary, Sibal remarked that the decision sent a "troubling signal" to society.

"The Supreme Court's own decision in early 2026 to ban a Class 8 civics textbook chapter that discussed judicial corruption—while blacklisting its authors from publicly funded work—sent a troubling signal about the institution's tolerance for public examination of its own vulnerabilities. Public faith, as I have said on earlier occasions, is eroding because the judiciary has, in critical moments, brought the erosion upon itself."

Further, Sibal referred to the Court's reluctance to interfere with the interpretation of the anti-defection law. He pointed out that he has filed a writ petition challenging the interpretation of the concept of merger but remarked that the Courts have left the corrective action to Parliament despite the fact that it is the Tenth Schedule on which the integrity of the electoral mandate rests.

"In July 2026 the Supreme Court itself acknowledged that there are “enormous issues” with the Tenth Schedule while hearing a petition I filed in person challenging the prevailing interpretation of the merger provision. Yet the Courts have largely left corrective action to Parliament—the very body whose members benefit from the status quo. When the judiciary declines to read down an interpretation that has made a mockery of the anti-defection law's purpose, the constitutional scheme of democratic accountability suffers."

Media, once a watchdog, now amplifying Govt narratives

On deteriorating standards of the free press, Sibal stated that it was once termed a "watchdog", but now it has been reduced to managing the State's narratives. In the face of this lies India's 2026 World Press Freedom Index at 157 out of 180. 

At the same time, he remarked that independent journalists continue to be targeted through criminal defamation cases. Referring to instances such as the sentencing of investigative journalist Ravi Nair in a complaint filed by giant Adani Enterprises, he said: "The court held that the publications went beyond neutral reporting, used “declaratory and accusatory” language, and lowered the company's moral and commercial standing. Nair's defence of fair comment on matters of public interest was rejected. The sentence was later suspended for a month to allow an appeal, but the conviction itself stands as a chilling marker: powerful corporate interests closely associated with the ruling establishment can still use the criminal process to punish critical journalism."

He also referred to the instances of multiple FIRs being filed against The Wire's Siddharth Varadarajan and journalists Karan Thapar and Abhisar Sharma, and many others, the online harassment, and physical attacks faced by them, especially women journalists, for doing their jobs.

Sibal said that while independent media continues to be targeted, a significant section of television and digital media has been reduced to what many openly call "Godi media" outlets. Adding to this, the deeper crisis is the media ownership vesting in the hands of business houses and those with political interests aligned with the government. 

"The cumulative effect is visible in the public sphere. A significant section of television and digital media has been reduced to what citizens now openly call “Godi Media", outlets that amplify official narratives, marginalise opposition voices, and treat scrutiny of power as disloyalty. The Prime Minister has not held a single open, unscripted press conference in more than a decade. Officials justify this silence by claiming a preference for direct communication with a rural electorate, an argument deeply flawed and chilling."

Sibal also spoke on the recent students' protest on paper leaks and how the public anger spilt over onto sections of media which were widely perceived as close to the government. Condemning the attack on journalists, Sibal stated that while the Editors Guild of India called out the attacks, it was forced to acknowledge the disturbing truth that one-sided partisan reporting has eroded the credibility of media.

"The Editors Guild of India rightly condemned the violence, affirming that no amount of public rage can justify attacks on journalists. At the same time, the Guild was compelled to acknowledge an uncomfortable truth: flawed, one-sided and overtly partisan reporting had itself eroded the media's credibility and thereby weakened its claim to be a pillar of democracy. When large sections of television news function less as platforms for independent scrutiny and more as amplifiers of official narratives, the public ceases to see them as watchdogs and begins to see them as part of the power structure they are meant to hold to account. "

He added that the attack didn't culminate all of a sudden, but it reflects the larger failure of the press as a constitutional institution because it failed to protest critical reporting on corporate-state proximity or failed to call out when newspaper offices were vandalised after criticism from Chief Ministers. Or where the executive, through the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026 is allowed to exercise sweeping powers of takedown of content.

"The hostility that erupted in July 2026 was therefore not merely spontaneous disorder; it was also a symptom of the deeper legitimacy crisis that results when the press abandons its constitutional role and becomes, in the eyes of citizens, an extension of the very authority it is supposed to question."