•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences
An estimated 45-minute read
 Email  Facebook  Tweet  Linked-in

National Law University, Delhi and the Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), University of Oxford are organising the 2015-16 South Asia Round of the Price Media Law Moot Court Competition from 26-29 November 2015

The Price Media Law Moot Court Competition was started in 2008 at the University of Oxford to foster an interest in issues concerning media law, communication technologies and freedom of expression. Since then, the Moot has grown in terms of participation and diversity, and now hosts rounds in different regions around the world. The South Asia rounds held at National Law University, Delhi since 2010 have a history of persuading bright young lawyers to work with information policy.

This year’s problem deals with issues of intermediary liability and anonymity in light of hate speech and anti-bullying law and anti-terror legislations over a social media platform.  In that context, the problem also raises critical questions regarding implications of arbitrary and unlawful interference on the right to privacy and freedom as outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is a contemporary problem that raises questions about the liability of a fictitious social media platform “Chatter” for online hate speech by users.

We follow the story of one Umani, a high ranking official in the Omerian government, prosecuted for anonymous and inflammatory messages about the people of Brinnah, a rival neighboring country. He posted these messages on the social media platform ‘Chatter’, which is itself under fire for hosting the messages.

12 teams have made it past the memorial elimination round, and will now be competing for a chance to participate in the International Rounds of the Price Media Law Moot Court Competition 2015-16 which will take place at the University of Oxford. At the end of the competition, the Winners will be felicitated with the Rolling Trophy of the Competition, while the second best team will receive the Runners Up trophy. The team with the Best Memorial, and the Best Speaker of the competition will also be rewarded for their efforts.  

 

26 NOVEMBER 2015: INAUGURATION, COMPETITION BRIEFING AND MEMO-EXCHANGE

 

16.00: The Registrations for the 2015-16 Price Media Law Moot Court Competition (South Asia Rounds) have just ended, and the participants are all sitting in the Moot Court Hall waiting for the Inauguration to begin. On the dais today we have Prof. (Dr.) G.S. Bajpai, Registrar, National Law University and Dr. Ruhi Paul, Competition Coordinator, South Asia Rounds. The teams qualifying for the Oral Rounds, after the Memorial Elimination are (in alphabetical order): 

  1. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow
  2. Gujarat National Law University
  3. Jindal Global Law School
  4. NALSAR, University of Law, Hyderabad
  5. National Law Institute University, Bhopal
  6. National Law School of India University, Bangalore
  7. National Law University Odisha
  8. National Law University, Jodhpur
  9. Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab
  10. Symbiosis Law School, Pune, Symbiosis International University
  11. University of Dhaka
  12. West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata

16.05: Dr. Ruhi Paul begins by introducing the Competition, which was started by the Programme in Comparative Media Law and Policy (PCMLP), University of Oxford in 2008. The Competition currently has 5 regional rounds, after which the qualifying teams meet for the International Rounds hosted at the University of Oxford. She then refers to the case set for this year, which is regarding intermediary liability on social media platforms in the light of 'hate speech'. It is a contemporary problem, and she hopes for great arguments from all the participants! The Judging standard of the Competition is highlighted by her, which are the known to be the best across the nation. She thanks the Organising Committee for putting up a great event, and heartily welcomes the participants again! 

16.10: Prof. (Dr.) G.S. Bajpai now addresses the gathering, welcoming everyone to the NLU Delhi Campus. He mentions that this is the 6th year straight of the South Asian Rounds of the event being organised at NLU Delhi, and in that short span of time have become one of the most sought after rounds in South Asia! He commends the organising committee for maintaining the high standards of the Competition. He then discusses the issue of intermediary liability in the contemporary world, and it's effect on free speech and expression. He mentions how Indian Courts have also discussed the issue, highlighting the importance of the issue to India itself. He wishes best to all the teams, and hopes that everyone has a great learning experience! 

16.20: Dhruv Garg, Assistant Coordinator, South Asia Rounds thanks the Vice-Chancellor and the University Administration for the immense help they have provided in helping organise the competition. He hopes that the participants have a comfortable stay, and asks them to approach the Organising Committee in case of any queries. 

We now take your leave for the day as we move on to the Competition Briefing and Memo-Exchange, which is only for participating teams. We have the Penalty Appeals and the Preliminary Round 1 lined up for tomorrow! Stay tuned!

 

27 NOVEMBER 2015: PENALTY APPEALS AND PRELIMINARY ROUND 1

 Penalty Appeals

09.00: As your Reporter sits sleepy-eyed in the Penalty Appeals Room (trust me, I'm up only because of Coffee!), the teams and the organising committee seems to be working in full-swing ready. Penalty Appeals is a procedure which allows the teams to challenge the formatting penalties deducted from their memorials. If the challenge is successful, they get those extra marks. In a competition that close, every mark matters! 

09.15: And we're off to a start, with the first team going ahead to challenge their penalties. The member of the organising committee follows a simple procedure of downloading their original memorial, and then pointing out the said error...aaaand the challenge fails. As our dearest Vivek causally remarks to the teams, "(Microsoft) Word can be a pain sometimes."

09.25: As we covered Vivek on one end of the room, the other member of the organising committee, DD, has gotten busy dealing with a team on the other end. He adopts a very patient approach, explaining to the teams why their appeal does not stand and how are the rules interpreted. The challenge fails, but the team goes back satisfied with DD's response. 

09.45: As the initial crowd of teams end, the others have decided to take slow it seems. Nothing seems to be happening in the room, but we're hopeful that more teams will show up before the deadline for Appeals end at 11.00. 

10.00: Things have picked up again with both the counters busy. The teams try every possible argument to avoid the penalties, but the members of the organising committee seem to have done a terrific job!  

10.10: Things seem to be getting interesting with a team putting up strong arguments against the penalties awarded to them. There seems to be some error in the word count within their arguments. Let's see what happens with this one!

10.25: After another empty patch, we have a few teams coming in. DD's counter seems to be crowded with teams, but he is taking all his time to make sure he goes over every rule carefully. With 35 minutes to the Appeals deadline, we've still not had any successful challenge.

10.35: Both the counters are occupied with teams trying their best to avoid the penalties. The amount of effort put in by the teams in arguments proves to us the value of even losing a mark in the penalties!

10.50: With 10 minutes left, the room is occupied by the last of teams hoping desperately to get their penalties cancelled. Things are going smooth, and there seems to be no issues. 

11.00: We now come to an end of the Penalty Appeals. You shall hear from us next in the evening, for Preliminary Round 1! Stay tuned!

 

Preliminary Round 1

Team 207 v. Team 215

18.15: And we're off! Team 207 is representing the Applicants, while Team 215 is representing the Respondents in his particular courtroom. The first Counsel has taken the podium, and seeks permission from the honorable Judges to present their pleadings. 

18.30: The first Counsel seem extremely polite in their remarks, though fumbling a little. Judges seems to be concerned regarding every minute detail, and do not hesitate in asking for clarifications!

18:50: After being satisfied by asking all the questions they could to the counsel, the Judges are now looking forward to listening to the arguments put forth by their co-counsel.

19.00: After the Judges point out an apparent contradiction in the oral submissions of the Applicants and their memorial, the counsel has really started to feel the heat!

19:10: As the counsel requests for water, the heat from the constant grilling by the Judges only seems to be rising! Game on!

19.30: The judges leave the counsel from side Respondent stumped when they hint he may be making a circular argument! The Bench seems interested on elucidating evidence for the submissions by the counsel; they ask them three questions at one go! Counsel now seems worried.

19.50: It has been very long 20 minutes for the second counsel from side Respondents. Judges seem intent on asking questions, leading to a fumble, after which the questions are coming at an even greater speed! Hopefully the counsel will get back on track!

20.05: The round has now been concluded, with the Judge's feedback remaining,

Team 217 v. Team 216

18.20: Team 217 is representing the Applicants, while Team 216 is representing the Respondents here. The first counsel from side Applicant takes the floor, and starts off by talking about the very nature of Fundamental Rights. The Judges immediately launch into the round too, and begin with their questions. It is on!

18.35: Counsel one of side Applicants is now being being grilled by the Bench on the issue of Umani's prosecution by Omeria for spreading "hatred", as under the No Hate Act of 2011. Before the counsel can proceed any further, the judges are extremely bent on getting one very important detail out of them - What is 'Hate Speech'?

18.50: With the counsel one from side Applicants having presented their argument, their co-counsel gets ready to take the floor!

Team 205 v. Team 210

18.30: Round has been started with the Applicants being represented by Team 205 and the Respondents being represented by 210. The first counsel has already taken the podium. 

18.45: One of the Judges is bombarding the counsel with constant questions. He's asking for all details relevant to the "derogatory remarks". They are constantly questioning the counsel on the reasoning behind their arguments, and keep referring to the fact sheet to prove their point. They are now looking for the counsel to provide examples.

19.00: The respondents, sitting on the other side of the room, already look intimidated by the constant barrage of questions posed by the Judges. The first counsel ends with a Judge remarking that they failed to answer the fundamental question.

19.25: The second counsel is also hit by a storm of questions, and tries his best to satisfy the Bench with his answers but to no avail! The atmosphere in the courtroom is quite terrific, with all the arguments being scrutinised extensively. The second counsel also gets a two minute extension!

19.50: The counsel starts by making use of the "Three Prong" test with respect to privacy. The judges seem to have no favorites, as they indulge in grilling both the sides! The constant questioning by one of the judge has even led to a fumble by the first counsel of side Respondent. 

20.00: The counsel has been provided with an extension. She has confidently answers all the questions posed to her by the judges. The judges are engaged in asking the minute details about cases cited by them in their memorial. 

Team 202 v. Team 220

18.30: With this courtroom running slightly late, we have Team 202 as the Applicants and Team 220 as the Respondents. The first counsel from side Applicants has taken the podium, and begun with their submissions.

19.00: The judges' questions seem to leave the Applicant baffled at times, yet the counsel manages to utter an answer. The judges have now started questioning them about the 'Three Prong' test, which the speaker answers accordingly. The stream of questions and answers between the Judges and the counsel is flowing in the court room!

19.15:The first counsel is trying to remain calm, and answer the questions raised by the judges. They have now moved on to their second argument.

19.20: The judges don't seem to be convinced with the argument given by the first counsel, with the judges even mentioning their reasons for being unconvinced. They grant an extra minute to the counsel, after the elapse of which the second counsel commences with his arguments!

19.30: The second counsel is trying to answer the questions posed by the judges eloquently, but questions raised by the judges are augmenting as the second counsel of Team 202 moves ahead with his argument. Counsel is now summing up his arguments, after answering the questions posed by the judges with full calm .

19.40: Counsel two from side Applicants has begun with his submission and the Judges move right into grilling him. They show no mercy! They proceed to grant him three extra minutes, during which he sums up his arguments.

19.55: The first counsel from side Respondents commences with his arguments! And it seem like the Judges have come with their minds made to question everyone extensively! He then moves on to referring to the "Three Prong" test, and goes on to explain his arguments

20.15: The atmosphere in the room in heavy, with the Judges constantly questioning the first counsel from side Respondents. He just cannot wait to get back to his seat! 

20.30: Questions by the judges are taking up all the time of the counsel, with him getting two extra minutes to sum up his arguments!

20.40: The Applicants put forth the rebuttal, to which the counsel form side Respondents responds with her sur rebuttal. The judges are very critical of it! And, with that, we come to an end.

Team 214 v. Team 208 

18.55: Team 214 is representing the Applicants and Team 208 is representing the the Respondents. And after an unfortunate delay, the Round is now underway, with the judges having begun by grilling the speaker!

19.25: The judges show no mercy grilling while the first counsel from side Applicants, leaving no stone unturned. But the counsel stays calm and composed throughout, laying down all his points.

19.50: After many questions and clarifications from the judges, the second counsel from side Applicant goes back after abruptly ending his argument due to paucity of time.

20.10: The Respondents have begun on shaky ground with the judges tearing apart their arguments, and using the extra time allotted just to do that. Hopefully, the next speaker will be able to show the judges the strength in their case.

20.45: Though the second counsel from side Respondent side was able to clarify some of the points made by her co-counsel, she still had a hard time holding her ground against the learned judges.

20,55: The rebuttals put forwarded by the Applicants were hard and insightful but lacked substance due to time limit, however, the sur rebuttal was torn apart by the judges with little effort. And with that, we come to an end!

Team 209 v. Team 204

19.00: After a delayed start, side Applicants starts being represented by Team 209. Team 204 is representing side Respondents. The Judges calmly approach the round, with the counsel from side Applicants not being able to answer most of their questions. They seem to take mercy, and let him continue uninterrupted for a bit.

19.45: The only questions the judges now seem to have are for the Court Baliff! They keep asking how much time is left, clearly bored by the events transpiring in the room.

We now come to an end of Day 2 of the Competition. Join us tomorrow for the rest of the Preliminary Rounds!

 

28 NOVEMBER 2015: PRELIMINARY ROUND 2, 3 & 4

Preliminary Round 2

Team 207 v. Team 209

09.20: Team 207 is representing the Applicants and Team 209 is representing the Respondents. The Round is now underway, and as we are two minutes into the first counsel's speech the judges have already started to put in questions.

09.45: After an agonizing 21 minutes, counsel from side Applicants goes back to his seat, failing to address many of his issues due to paucity of time. The judges kept questioning him on the few issues that he raised.

10.10: Counsel from side Applicants was worn down by the hard hitting and 'to-the-point' questions, that left the speaker fumbling and trying to get back on track.

10.40: The counsel form side Respondent has his arguments decimated by the judges. The judges seem frustrated over the circular arguments and try to cull out a substantive argument from his speech.

11.05: The Respondents were unable to put forward their issues due to the extensive questioning by the judges. The judges tested them on the intricacies, and sadly the respondents were unable to see it through.

11.10: With the Rebuttals and Sur Rebuttals getting over, the round now comes to an end!

Team 204 v. Team 210

09.20: The Judges have arrived in the room, and after a minor misunderstanding over the seating arrangements we're good to go. Both the teams are loaded with material, but still fail to hide their nervousness!

09.30: As per the weather report in this room, there is a heavy shower of questions from the judges. The counsel seems to have taken out his umbrella constructed of authorities. More updates, in a while.

09.40: The judges question the counsel on the facts of the case. The judges then comment that the side has made no references to either page or paragraph in their footnotes. Will this cost them? We shall see! 

09.55: The second counsel from side Applicants is in the line of fire, with bombs of questions coming straight at him. But the counsel manages to retain his calm, and answer the questions. 

10.20: The Respondents begin with their submission, and are bombarded with a dozen of questions within the first two minutes. The judges seem very interested in finding out what does the term "Artistic expression" mean! A little bit of humor in the courtroom leaves everyone with smiles on their faces.

10.40: The Judges are raising question on the retrospective application of law and the issue of privacy. The counsel finishes his submissions, ending a minute before full time!

11.00: Standard things are in process, with charters, case laws, articles being thrown around. The second counsel also ends before time, and the rebuttals have started. 

Team 208 v. Team 216

09.30: Team 208 is representing the Applicants while team 216 is representing the Respondents. The first counsel from side Applicants has begun, and the judges are leading him to talk about the neutrality of judicial authority. The counsel seem well prepared, and is answering the questions with ease.

09.45: The first counsel completes his arguments, answering the judges' questions calmly. The Judges seem satisfied with him!

10.05: The second counsel is having a brilliant run, and has already answered the judges' question regarding the posts #4, #5 and #6 by Umani on Chatter. The Applicants seem to have prepared really well!

10.10: Applicants have completed their submissions performing really well, covering all the issues with the issue of intermediary liability being dealt with particularly well. Counsel one from side Respondents is now getting grilled, with the Judges finally coming into their own. But the Counsel seems confident!

10.40: The first counsel from side Respondents completes her submission on a high, to be applauded to suffer the brunt of the questions pertaining to the legislations. Her co-counsel has a troubled start, with the judges making life difficult for him with incessant questioning.

11.00: The Respondent complete their submissions. We move on to the rebuttal and sur rebuttals, both of which were intense.The round now comes to an end!

Team 220 v. 215

09.30: Team 220 is representing the Applicants, while Team 215 is representing the Respondents. Counsel from side Applicants starts, and the Judges seem to be very inquisitive, asking many questions. The counsel is confident and answers every question without any doubt.

10.00: The second counsel from side Applicants has taken the floor, and the judges are comparatively lenient with the speaker, but are not completely letting them get away. They are verifying the authorities being used by them in their arguments.

10.10: The Respondents are now presenting their case before the Court. The judges are talking about the retrospective application of law. The "Three Prong" test has been brought up by the Respondents. The judges are seeking clarification on the arguments

10.40: The Judges are trying to confuse the speaker with their questions. The speaker seems to be lost in a question. The round is in its final moments with only a few minutes left for the second speaker for the Respondents to begin.

Team 217 v. Team 202

09.20: Counsel one from side Applicants moves to the podium, and the Judges begin with their questions right from her first statement! She gets confused between Chatter and Omerians, and judges are quick to pick up on that. The Judges emphasize on right to privacy of Chatter.

09.35: The second counsel also makes the same mistake! But she presents her argument with a well-framed structure; the Judges seem impressed!

10.05: Counsel two from side Applicant faces a barrage of questions when she talks about fundamental rights. Judges try and point out a flaw in her argument but she does a great job of countering the Judges' argument.

10.20: Now, the counsel one from side Respondent begins, and starts by referring to various posts made by Umani. His argument revolves around the idea of "artistic expression".

10.40: The first counsel from side respondents finishes his well framed argument, and now the podium is acquired by his co-counsel. The co-counsel also makes use of a particular case again and again, while also continuously referring to the 'Three Prong' test. The judges extend his time as they want an answer to a particular question. 

11.05: Now, the rebuttal have begun and there seems to be a consensus between speaker and judges. The round finally finishes and feedback begins.

We've now finished the first round for the day. Stay tuned, because the next one will start shortly!

Preliminary Round 3

Team 216 v. 202

11.40: We begin the round with Team 216 representing the Applicants, and Team 202 representing the Respondents. It seems like the Judges already have some queries ready for the first counsel from side Applicants, even before he begins with his submissions!

12.05: As the Judges carry a truckload of questions to dismantle the wills of applicants, they put up a very strong fight while politely presenting their arguments.

12.20: The Applicants seem to be sweating under the pressure of the multiple questions being posed by the judges. Even your reporter feels the heat!

12.40: The first counsel from side Respondents is doing a great job of dodging the questions of the judges very cleverly with his argument. Looks like we have someone who knows his business. 

Team 215 v. 209

11.40: Team 215 are the Applicants in this courtroom, while Team 209 are the Respondents. The first counsel from side Applicants takes the podium, and the grilling begins!

11.55: The judges question the counsel about the language used by Umani in his posts on Chatter, followed by which they question him on the very approach he is taking during his arguments! But even after being barraged by questions, the continues continues unabashed! 

12.00: The counsel pleads ignorance as he is unable to answer a question posed by the judges. He then proceeds with the rest of his case, asking for extra time, with the judges graciously allowing him two extra minutes.

12.15: The second counsel begins, but has a stammery start. The Judges help him get back on track. The judges then point out a mistake in approach of the counsel, and his silence shows agreement.

12.30: The Respondents have begun with their side of the submissions, and the first counsel takes the podium, to be immediately faced with a flurry of questions!

12.55: The second counsel from side Respondents begins with his submissions, but it stopped before he can proceed further. Seems like the judges have a list of queries prepared already, which they want clarified! 

13.05: The Respondents look dejected, as the Judges completely reject a set of arguments they proposed! The second counsel of side Respondents is quick to reply to the Judges' questions, but the side seems lost in the pages of the memorial they themselves submitted.

13.20: We've now begun with the rebuttals and the sur rebuttals. And with that, the round comes to an end! 

Team 208 v. 205

11.40: The round has been started with Team 208 as the Applicants, and Team 205 as the Respondents. The Judges, from the very start, clearly show that they are not interested in listening to baseless arguments, and go on grilling the counsel for appropriate answers.

12.00: The second counsel takes the podium, with Judges questioning the validity of their arguments. They are continuously interrupting the counsel with questions.

12.15: The judges are doubtful about the facts mentioned by the second counsel, and want the operative part. The counsel ends with his submissions!

12.30:The first counsel from side Respondents has the floor. There seems to be some problem in his manner of speaking, as they judge are not able to comprehend certain arguments.

12.45: The counsel seems to be having a nerve racking experience. The Judges seem un-convinced regarding some of his points. But, the counsel goes on with a smile on his face. That's the spirit!

Team 220 v. Team 217

11.45: The first counsel takes the podium and starts off by presenting an overview of his arguments. But, he is never allowed to settle down by the judges' continuos flurry of tricky questions.

12.00: A Judge points out invalid points in the the applicant's arguments and also goes on to say that the test used by the applicant goes against them. There is an evident non-satisfaction that exists in the judges' expression as they also point out a factual error. The barrage of questions end, as the first counsel ends with his part of the submissions.

12.15: The second counsel takes the dais, and has a jittery start as judges are stuck on an argument based on technicalities.  The speaker seemed flummoxed. As the argument goes on, the confidence of the counsel grows as the questions of the judges reduce substantially.

12.30: One of the Judges has asked the same question to both the counsels, and his expression seems to suggest that no satisfactory answer has been provided. There is a wry smile on the judges as the counsel ends with the 

12.40: The Respondents now begin with the fist counsel taking the floor. She exudes confidence as she takes the dais and as the arguments proceed, the demeanor of the judges, which left a scary aura, has changed. They seem extremely impressed with the counsel's submissions.

12.55: An aggressive question comes by, but is answered with absolute authority, which leaves the judge with a satisfied look. But the judges the Judges seem to have gotten to the counsel in her concluding arguments, battering her with questions and the confidence of the speaker seems bleak at this stage. 

13.15: The second counsel from side Respondents brings a cheerful din to the podium as she starts with a smile. Her submissions gives us a near perfect balance of arguments being laid down by the respondents and the questions and intersections by the judges. The speakers is absolutely well versed her case and does not allow any road block to hinder her!

Preliminary Round 3 now comes to a close! We shall be back with the updates from Preliminary Round 4 right after lunch. Stay tuned! 

Preliminary Round 4

Team 216 v. Team 220

14.45: The round begins with Team 216 representing the Applicants, and Team 220 representing the Respondents. The counsel from side Applicants takes the floor, and is immediately bulleted by questions.

14.50: The counsel is extremely calm while addressing the questions by the Bench which seem to have occupied the courtroom!

15.10: The second counsel from side Applicants commences with their arguments, and undergoes a phase of nervousness from the questions raised by the bench. 

15.20: The counsel is presenting his arguments on the basis of the "Three Prong" test, and is trying to be composed while answering the questions. But his efforts are somewhat in vain as the constant questioning by the judges is very intimidating! 

15.35: After the blast of questions and answers for side Applicants, the counsel from side Respondents starts with his arguments. He seems to be nervous already! 

15.45: The Judges seem to be unsatisfied by the response of the counsel from side Respondents to their questions. Can they make a comeback here? 

15.55: Detonating questions by the Judges have held the counsel from side Respondent to clarify every bit of the case! And now her co-counsel takes the floor to present her arguments.

16.05: There seem to be no bias in the Judges' mind, as they grill the Applicants and the Respondents equally. Right now, it's the counsel from side Respondents who is facing the brunt of it!

Team 215 v. Team 204

14.45: In this courtroom, we have Team 215 as the Applicants, while Team 204 serve as the Respondents. The Judges take the lead by asking question to the counsel from the minute go.

14.55: The counsel exuberates confidence as he faces the constant stream of questions from the Bench!

15.10: The first counsel exhausts all his time answering the questions posed by the Judges, and now his co-counsel takes the floor. Let's see what they have to offer!

15.15: The second counsel from side Applicants begins with his submissions, and is immediately picked on by the judges for not providing enough substantiation to his arguments. 

15.25: The side is under a constant fire of questions, which is causing them a lot of trouble. At the cost of being insensitive, the reporter cannot help but see the humor in the situation as a neutral party! 

15.40: The first counsel from side Respondent starts off well, as he answers questions posed by the judges confidently! But, it seems that he's going ahead too fast, as the Bench asks him to slow down.

16.05: The Judges reject the request of the counsel to give him some extra time, and the counsel from side respondents is now on! The counsel has a shaky starts as he pleads ignorance regarding some information sough by the Judges. 

16.20: The round has taken a turn for the worse, with the judges looking bored by the atmosphere in the courtroom. One of the judges tries his hands at humor, but fails miserably. Teams, if you're reading this, buck up! 

Team 209 v. Team 205

14.50: Team 209 is representing the Applicants , while Team 205 is representing the Respondents. And we begin! The first counsel from the side Applicants begins his submissions, and the bench indicates that it's not going to let it be easy! What is "Artistic Expression" after all, they ask him? The counsel is already beginning to sweat. He faces the barrage of questions, and waits for the next question bravely!

15.00: It's getting pretty hot in here. The whole bench is posing questions together at the same time. They're questions on law, questions on fact, and the counsel has lost himself in the huge number of questions. He has to request their excellencies to repeat. He's already overshot his time, but seems like nobody heard the bell!

15.15: The second counsel from side Applicants continues to feel the heat. The counsel has to pause to collect her documents, but before she can continue, there's another question! Yours truly is in awe of this bench, and also of the counsel!

15.30: The reporter is very glad that he's not the one pleading. Bailiffing seems a beautiful job right now! The bench will "never say it's satisfied." Keep speaking. We'd like to see you try. 

15.40: The Respondents begin their arguments. Counsel already had a dry throat when he began. Will he last? So far so good. The bench is just getting warned up to the respondents

16.00: " 'May I proceed further?' 'Just one question.' 'And now?' 'Just one question.' 'And now? Yeah... Wait...' " The counsel from side Respondent is reminded by the bench to answer the question asked. It's truly commendable how none of the counsels are shaken by the number of questions directed at them!

16.15: The counsel from side Respondent is "much obliged" to take address the bench's concerns. But the 'Night Watcher' seems to be causing some problem. Is he a terrorist just because he's Night Watcher? Yours truly wonders what will become of Jon Snow, after all.

16.25: Rebuttals are nowunderway. The Applicants are determined to leave a bold impression. Much loudness, and speed. And just the contrary is true for the respondents. As the round gets over, over and out.

Team 210 v. Team 208

14.50: Team 210 are representing the Applicants in the case, while Team 208 are the Respondents. The first counsel seem to be well-prepared as they are answering tough questions well, speaking smoothly and confidently. This shall be exciting! 

15.20: The second counsel continues in same manner, answering well and speaking smoothly. This team seems to be truly prepared!

15.30: The second counsel draws a beautiful distinction from case laws, even as the Judges question them relentlessly!

15.45: The counsel from side Respondents now takes the floor. So far so good for him, as he seems well prepared and quotes the footnotes from his memorial directly.

Team 202 v. Team 207

15.00: Team 202 is representing the Applicants and Team 207 is representing the Respondents. As the first counsel begins, Judges have already started the grilling. The counsel fumbles a little bit due to the constant interjections in the form of questions. The minute legal details are being thoroughly raised as threshold issued by the judges.

15.15: The counsel from side applicants has been left in the dust by the judges. He does not seem to be well versed with his own memo! One does need to know his memo and facts inside out, the judges comment. Lack of authorities is being pointed out. Judges have had a blast destroying his argumentation to bits and pieces.

15.30: Describing the clock as an irritating animal, judges have categorically asked second counsel from side Applicants to clearly lay down four propositions substantiating the position of the his clients. The counsel starts on a confident note, hits a six only to be bowled out by the questions on the very next ball. 

16.00: The first counsel from side Respondents begins on a smooth and humble note. And the usual questions follow. He manages to convince the judges of his interpretation of certain terms in the statute used in his argumentation. But that turns out to be a grave he has dug for himself, as judges have turned his argumentation on its head making his client seem sinister.

16.30: The Judges seem to have taken offence to one of the argument alleging liability on a court order by the counsel. The facts of the moot proposition have been used beautifully to tear his arguments apart. Evidently, he fails to convince the judges who ask him to wrap up the submission. As the round nears its end, the atmosphere becomes calm. Judges now seem settled after putting all the argumentation of the counsel to a peaceful death. 

And the last Preliminary Round also comes to a close! The teams and the judges shall now travel to Lodi - The Garden Restaurant for the Formal Dinner of the competition. The names of the breaking teams shall also be announced there. Do follow this space for the relevant details! 

And we have the breaks! The top eight teams progressing to the quarter-finals are, according to rank:

  1. National Law Institute University, Bhopal
  2. West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata
  3. Jindal Global Law School, Sonepat
  4. National Law University Jodhpur
  5. NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad
  6. Symbiosis Law School, Pune
  7. National Law School of India University, Bangalore
  8. National Law University Odisha

We congratulate all the teams!

 

29 NOVEMBER 2015: QUARTER-FINALS, SEMI-FINALS, FINALS & VALEDICTORY

Rise and shine, everyone! Today is a big day as we move into the final day of the competition! We shall begin with the Quarter-Finals in a short while, so hold on to your seats!

Quarter-Finals

Team 202 v. Team 205

10.00: Team 202 represent the Applicants while Team 205 represent the Respondents. The Quarter-Finals are underway, and 1st counsel takes the podium. Counsel says that State should protect individuals, and not group identities from cyber bullying. The bench seems perplexed, but counsel maintains his stand will full confidence. So far so well!

10.10: First speaker from appellants seems to have satisfied the bench fairly with his novel arguments. Second counsel has taken the podium, and it can only be hoped if he'll maintain the calmness of his co-counsel.

10.30: The same calmness, the same questions. The bench seems concerned about riots and mass violence in response to digital posts on social networking websites. And here I'm concerned about dozing off. Give me something, people!

11.00: Appellants have made a convincing stand; Respondents have taken the stage now. Things are finally getting hot here. The bench had increased the frequency of their interjections. The bench has some difficulty pronouncing the name of a country. The framers of the problem have finally achieved their objective!

11.10: 2nd counsel from side respondent is "much obliged" to have a go with the judges now. She cites a Russian Law which has not yet been struck down. With Putin controlling everything, is that even likely, I wonder...?

11.25: Yours truly woke up just in time to ring the bell as the final speaker rested their arguments. Rebuttals begin, and both the sides try to make the best of the two minutes.

Team 214 v. Team 207

10.10: Team 214 represent the Applicants, while Team 207 are the Respondents. Here we go!

10.15: It is the clash of the titans, with the ultra confident and composed counsel from side Applicants going up against the judges, as the barrage of questions is being deftly handled by him. Yet, there exists a mixed facial expression among the judges.

10.35: A similar round if arguments continue, which primarily revolve around the "Three Prong" test, to which the counsel encounters an array of questions. The judges somewhat satisfied with his answers. Yet his confidence remains high which gives a positive aura to the court room.

11.05: As the arguments proceeded the counsel for the Respondents seems a little flustered with the questions that come by. He seems realize the non-satisfaction of the judges, as they reiterate their questions time and again. There is a smirk of bewilderment on one of the judges!

11.30: As the second counsel takes the podium, the judges expect him to tie up loose threads of his co-counsels arguments. But at the end of the argument the judges look discontent, as the counsel goes round and round for each question. One of the judges lets out a yawn as the answers fail to interest him!

Team 215 v. Team 217

09.55: We begin with Team 215 representing the Applicants, while Team 217 represent the Respondents. The first has begun, and faced no intervention from the judges yet. Is this rosy picture gonna stay?

10.05: - Aaand...it won't! Counsel gets slightly flustered as he is being grilled by the judges continuosly! 

10.20: The second counsel from side Applicants make an impressive start after his teammate gets a good grilling. Can he recover the lost ground? We shall see!

10.45: The Respondent's now proceed with their arguments, after the Applicants got grilled badly by the Judges. 

11.25: The second counsel form side Respondents begins, with his counsel overshooting on his time by a HUGE margin!

Team 210 v. Team 216

09.50: We have Team 210 as the Applicants, and Team 216 as the Respondents.The counsel has taken the podium, and started with some journalistic and artistic comments. Then the conversation moves and now revolves around the post #3 of the @VigilanteInsider. But, this discussion takes up a lot of time and counsel is not able to make all her points! 

10.20: The second counsel form side Applicants faces a barrage of questions from the starting, and he's made to move to his second submission without completing the first. After a shaky round of arguments presented to judges, the podium is taken by Respondents.

10.50: The counsel is questioned about the retrospective effect of law., and faces another storm of questions when she referrs to the intention or mens rea ebhind speech!

11.15: Now, the second counsel begins after a well structured submissions by the first counsel ends. He tries to satisfy the two elements of intent, followed by which he beautifully answer the judges questions with reference to case. In the extension provided to him, he summarises his argument with reference to 'Chatter'. 

And we have the results for the Quarter-Finals! The team moving on to the Semi-Finals are:

1. National Law Institute University, Bhopal
2. West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata
3. Jindal Global Law School, Sonepat
4. National Law University Jodhpur

Semi-Finals

Due to a technical error, the updates from the individual courtrooms cannot be put up right now. We shall get them up by tonight positively. 

The teams going forwards into the Finals for the 2015-16 Price Media Law Moot Court Competition (South Asia Rounds) are:

  1. National Law Institute University, Bhopal
  2. Jindal Global Law School, Sonepat

The teams have already qualified for the International Rounds to be held at University of Oxford, and we wish them best for the Finals!

Finals

We are now beginning with the finals of the the 2015-16 Price Media Law Moot Court Competition (South Asia Rounds). The Judges on the bench are Justice Gita Mittal, Judge, Delhi High CourtMr. Shyam Divan, Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India and Mr. Deepak Jacob, President & General Counsel, Legal & Regulatory Affairs, Star India Pvt. Ltd. It is anyone's dream to plead in front of this bench!

17.20: And we are off with Jindal Global Law School, Sonepat representing the Applicants and National Law Institute University, Bhopal as the Respondents. The counsel from side Applicants takes the floor, and begins with her submissions after a brief revision of facts. 

17.30: The counsel starts by highlighting that her client, Umani even though he held a Political position, posted whatever he did through an anonymous account and did it to encourage public discourse and debate. He, she argues, should be afforded the protection of being "artistics and journalistic expression". But wait, we have the first question! Mr. Divan asks the Counsel how would she limit the definition of "artistic expression", as under hers all 'chatters' could be classified as artistic. The counsel now prepares to answer this question. 

17:35: The counsel has now moved onto the question of the Retrospective application of law to book Umani under the No Hate Act. Mr. Jacob has now posed a question to her in respect of the Section 10 of the Act. He asks the counsel to specifically refer to what part of Article 19 of the ICCPR does this violate. The counsel relies on the 'Three Part' test for her answer, arguing that the law fails the first and the third limb where the law, even though may be necessary, has not come about lawfully. As she moves on to arguing the non-existent mens rea, Justice Mittal questions the counsel on where does she get the idea that every penal offence must have mens rea. Mr. Divan supplements that with a question of his own, and now Mr. Jacob has asked the counsel two questions pointed to two specific case laws. The counsel is under a lot of pressure, but goes on with calm and grace!

17.45: The counsel now moves on to her second issue,where she directly borrows from a US Supreme Court Judgement to argue her case. Mr. Jacob, however, uses her principle against her and says that post #4 by Umani qualifies under her own test. She offers a twofold response to the same. She now offers move examples from other cases to strengthen her case. However, Mr. Divan is unconvinced as he says that nothing but an incitement of violence can be made out of the posts by Umani! Mr. Jacob adds on to it offering context of the situation of Omeria. The counsel moves forward to answer this by challenging the Section 1 of the Act, saying that it is overbroad enough to acommodate any form of speech! The bell rings, and she is granted a two minute extension. Justice Mittal goes on question the counsel on her prayer to this court. 

17.50: The second counsel takes the podium, arguing for the non-liability of 'Chatter'. But before he can utter a word, Mr. Divan asks him to outsline the profits of 'Chatter' for the last fiscal year, specifically form the jurisdiction of Omeria. Mr. Jacob adds on and asks him the kind of advertisement system it has in place. The counsel's simple answer is to the questions are "the facts of the case are silent on this", before he moves on with his part of the submissions. The counsel is now being questioned on when does a intermediary like 'Chatter' obtain 'actual knowledge'. Mr. Jacob has his opinions about the same, but the counsel argues that the standard across the globe is different.

18.00: Mr. Jacob has again posed a pointed question to the counsel on the basis of a particular case filed against Twitter. He uses the judgement delivered to support the current facts too, to which the counsel tries to offer a two-pronged response. Mr. Jacob, however, does not seem satisfied and is grilling the counsel on the specifities of "Chatter"! The counsel now submits that the liability of Chatter does not stand, and putting liability on them will only serve to have a chilling effect.

18.10: The counsel argues that the law does not meet the standard of foreseeability, hence making it impossible for 'Chatter' to have understood their liability and hence, making in impossible for them to decide when to take action. He argues that 'Chatter' did take down the posts when served with a court order, which was the "actual order".Mr. Divan points out an apparent hipocrisy in the free specch standard of Chatter, while Mr. Jacob has his issues with the fact that the court order was only passed because Chatter refused to cooperate with the Government. Time is up for the counsel, and quickly summarises his submissions on the Anti-Terrorism Law and the Right to Privacy violation. Mr. Jacob questions the Right to Privacy in comparison with the larger public good. 

18.15: The counsel from side Respondents takes the floor, and is immediately faced with a question by Mr. Divan who wants to know how does the State propose to defend the retrospective application of law unde the No Hate Act, since two of the posts were before the Act got passed in 2011. The counsel refers to Section 8 of the Act to defend the actions of the State. She now goes on to defend the law under the 'Three Prong' test under the Article 19(3) of the ICCPR. She argues by showing the very difference in the nature in which information is disseminated online as opposed to otherwise. And hence, their siddemination is far-raniging and prosecution can be allowed. 

18.25: The counsel now defends the passage of the No Hate Act under Article 20(2) of ICCPR, thereby arguing that it cannot be in violation of Article 19(3) of the same as it was passed in furtherance of Article 20(2) of the ICCPR. She now refers to a judgement to show how it is necessary for an Act such as this to ensure dignity for all the Brennian's. She also mentions that the passage of the Act was also called for under the last limb of Article 19(3) whereby the immediate social need of the two countries called for the passage of the Act.  

18.35: The counsel now moves on to showing how the roghts of 'Chatter' were not violated. She refers to the Delphy case, and compares the facts of the same case to the present one showing how Chatter helped in the dissemination of information. The judegs have been silent for a long time, clearly impressed by the counsel's submissions! The counsel refers to the fact sheet to show how complaints have continuosly been received by Chatter, and hence it was aware of the problems associated with Umani's account. However, Mr. Jacob differentiates the complaints from a complaint by the State saying that they are submitted from private users. However, the counsel responds by saying that Chatter should have taken notice of the posts, and taken them down as hate speech.

18.40: The Right of Privacy issuee is now brought up by the cousnel. However, Mr. Divan immediately takes an issue saying that the society must adapt to a world where internet is wide-spread and allow for some amount of discussion to take place. The counsel goes back to the fact matrix to show, how in the current context, the use of the internet by Umani added to already rising tensions between the two countries. She concludes her privacy argument against Umani by saying that his IP address could have been obtiane din light of pressing social need. As for Chatter, she first argues that ICCPR does not accord Right to Privacy to private entities. But ad arguendo if it does have that right, even then the order was legal. 

18.45: As the last counsel takes the floor, Mr. Divan starts off by asking what are the privacy standards followed by the Omerian government. The counsel first questions what is a reasonable expectation of privacy, and says that in the current situation the IP address of Umani does not satisfy it. The counsel refers to judgements from multiple jurisdictions to show that intrusions into provacy are legal if made under prima facie order. She argues that such intrusion was not arbitary since it was necessary and proportional.  

18.55: Mr. Jacob is now questioning to the counsel to show how Chatter can be bound to release information about it's clients. The counsel relies on a US Supreme Court judgement, to show that the protection offered to the intermediaries does not stretch to their meta-data which is what IP address is. Mr. Jacob, however, believes that the State has taken the most drastic measures available without going to the other available recourses. The counsel is now questioned by Mr. Divan, if is a terrorism case or one of extremism. The counsel says that the present act is one which can be tried for being an act that incites terrorism. However, Mr. Jacob picks on that by saying that what Umani is doing is ecourgaing debate and discourse within the country, however the counsel respectfully disagrees and uses the words of the actual posts to prove her point. 

19.10: The counsel goes over posts #4, #5 and #6 in detail to show how exactly do all three satisfy the requirements of the present Act. She says that the post shows that Umani was calling for immenent lawless actions. Mr. Divan however feels that her argument involves a reading of only selective words within the post. However, the cousnel contextualizes them in terms of the facts of the case, and how it still falls as a violation. She argues how the outcry, which was particularly strong for the lastter 3 posts, was what provided for the court order in Omeria. The counsel then relies on a US Supreme Court judgement on an Anti-Terror Law to prove her point. As for Chatter's prosecution, the counsel summarizes that the intermediary was liable as they could be called reckless as per the definition offered by Granville Williams. They refer to the fact that multiple complaints were received by them against Umani's account, and hence should have excercised control and monitored their own website. 

19.15: We now have the Rebuttals and Sur Rebuttals. The Applicants first refer to the Delphy case and show how the case cannot be used in this particular factual scenario. She also argues that online speech cannot be deemed to be a continued offence, otherwise the idea of a limitation period would be rendered useless. The Respondents argue that the judgement of Delphy was relied on for a limited context of the way internet works, hence the operative parts does not work. The counsel also responds to the point of the online speech by saying that speech should be judged by dissemination, which is unlimited for online content. And with that, we come to an end! Surely, the most interesting round we have had in the competition, and we wish both the teams best for the results. Stay tuned!

Valedictory Ceremony

19.45:  Dr. Ruhi Paul, Competition Coordinator, South Asia Rounds welcome everyone to the ceremony, thanking everyone for being present for the ceremony. She thanks the final's  judges for taking out time for coming to judge the finals. She thanks the Vice-Chancellor and Registrar of NLU Delhi for their immense help.

19.50: Prof. (Dr.) G.S. Bajpai, Registrar, National Law University congratulates the organising committee for organising a extremely successful competition! He specially thanks the judges for coming to judge the rounds and providing valuable feedback to the teams. He now goes on to announce the results. 

19.50: Mr. Deepak Jacob announces the award for the Best Memorial which is won by National Law University, Jodhpur. Hearty congratulations! 

19.55: Mr. Shyam Divan presents the award for the Best Speaker of the competition to Gaganjyot Singh from National Law School of India University, Bangalore

19.55: Announced by Justice Gita Mittal, the Runners Up for the 2015-16 Price Media Law Moot Court Competition (South Asia Rounds) are National Law Institute University, Bhopal. And that leaves us with no surprises, the Winners are Jindal Global Law School, Sonepat! We congratulate both the teams, and wish them best for the Internationa Rounds at University of Oxford, where they will be joined by University of Dhaka

20.00: Dhruv Garg, Assistant Coordinator, South Asia Rounds takes the floor and thanks the University Authorities and the University Staff for having been immensly helpful in conducting the entire competition. He calls out all the members of the organising committee, thanking them for making this event possible. With that, we leave you at the end of 4 very long but memorable days. See you next year! 

Click to show 1 comment
at your own risk
(alt+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.