by Somasekhar Sundaresan.Social media is abuzz with chatter (some expressing anger, some others, shock) about whether journalists must at all be subjected to a dress code when covering court proceedings. The Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court is reported to have wondered aloud at the dress sense of a particular journalist if there is any applicable dress code. Journalists are reported to have walked out in indignation..I am unaware of what exactly the journalist in question was wearing (reportedly jeans and t-shirt) or about what exactly was said (reportedly something about “Bombay culture”). I do know (taking the liberty of having been a full-time journalist nearly two decades ago and a columnist for nearly 15 years now) that journalists can push the envelope with their attire..Courts worldwide have indeed stipulated that journalists in their precincts must be formally attired. As indeed have Parliaments. Temples of law – in their making and their enforcement – can be quite akin to temples of faith when it comes to expectations of dress sense..Starting right here, the Supreme Court of India expects journalists “while in court precincts be in a formal dress, in a manner befitting the décor of the Court”. The Kerala High Court was reported in the Bar and Bench as requiring journalists to be “in formal dress in a manner befitting the decorum of the court”..How prescriptive the stipulation can be, is a function of social realities. The Supreme Court of Victoria in Australia has only gone so far as to say that appropriate dressing means not wearing hats or sunglasses..Last year, the Council of States in the Swiss Parliament adopted a formal rule on how to comply with the requirement that journalists must wear “appropriate dress” – requiring men to wear “a shirt, jacket and tie or bow tie, with the tie not being compulsory in the press gallery”. For women, “the shoulders must be covered”. The perception of exposed shoulders being inappropriate is quite the norm applicable when entering synagogues, churches and mosques in Israel and the Middle East. The norm for entering temples in India can require serious coverage too, unless of course you are in Kerala, where, if male, you may have to take your shirt off – also, to conform to the applicable dress code..Self-regulation does it well in Canada. The Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery, an organisation of journalists, photographers, cameramen camerapersons and soundpersons, who cover Parliament and Ottawa politics have a self-imposed handbook that mandates a dress code for male journalists – they must sport a jacket and a tie even when sitting in the Press Gallery. Women there are not told how to dress appropriately..Shabby-journalistic attire worries the British royalty. “Journalists wishing to cover Royal engagements, whether in the United Kingdom or abroad, should comply with the dress code on formal occasions out of respect for the guests of The Queen, or any other member of the Royal Family,” reads the British monarchy’s guidelines for overseas visits. “Those wearing jeans or trainers will not be admitted and casually dressed members of the media will be turned away. This also applies to technicians.”.But this is not a monarchic trait alone. The Republican National Convention in the United States made news for emphasising disdain for bare shoulders. The House Periodical Press Gallery has rules that require correspondents to “conform to the dress standards as applicable to the Members of each House of Congress”. Rob Zatkowski, Director, House Periodical Press Gallery is reported to have been worried about “a pervasive jeans-and-sneakers issue” and the lack of style among American journalists: “People are coming in jeans and sneakers, just slobbish attire. We used to have problems with Europeans wearing jeans, but they were always stylish jeans.”.We in India are not a monarchy. And, who cares a damn for the royalty whose Era of Darkness we shrugged off to create our Republic? But before you write off respect for our Republic’s institutions as another condemnable British legacy, do take a look at Newscastic, a journalistic community portal that says it well..A safe rule to adopt for deciding what is “appropriate attire” would be one that Justice Potter Stewart ruled in Jacobellis vs. Ohio – 378 U.S. 184 (1964). Commenting on what constitutes “hard core pornography”, he wrote: “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description……I could never succeed… But I know it when I see it….”.The author is a counsel based in Mumbai.Tweets @SomasekharS
by Somasekhar Sundaresan.Social media is abuzz with chatter (some expressing anger, some others, shock) about whether journalists must at all be subjected to a dress code when covering court proceedings. The Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court is reported to have wondered aloud at the dress sense of a particular journalist if there is any applicable dress code. Journalists are reported to have walked out in indignation..I am unaware of what exactly the journalist in question was wearing (reportedly jeans and t-shirt) or about what exactly was said (reportedly something about “Bombay culture”). I do know (taking the liberty of having been a full-time journalist nearly two decades ago and a columnist for nearly 15 years now) that journalists can push the envelope with their attire..Courts worldwide have indeed stipulated that journalists in their precincts must be formally attired. As indeed have Parliaments. Temples of law – in their making and their enforcement – can be quite akin to temples of faith when it comes to expectations of dress sense..Starting right here, the Supreme Court of India expects journalists “while in court precincts be in a formal dress, in a manner befitting the décor of the Court”. The Kerala High Court was reported in the Bar and Bench as requiring journalists to be “in formal dress in a manner befitting the decorum of the court”..How prescriptive the stipulation can be, is a function of social realities. The Supreme Court of Victoria in Australia has only gone so far as to say that appropriate dressing means not wearing hats or sunglasses..Last year, the Council of States in the Swiss Parliament adopted a formal rule on how to comply with the requirement that journalists must wear “appropriate dress” – requiring men to wear “a shirt, jacket and tie or bow tie, with the tie not being compulsory in the press gallery”. For women, “the shoulders must be covered”. The perception of exposed shoulders being inappropriate is quite the norm applicable when entering synagogues, churches and mosques in Israel and the Middle East. The norm for entering temples in India can require serious coverage too, unless of course you are in Kerala, where, if male, you may have to take your shirt off – also, to conform to the applicable dress code..Self-regulation does it well in Canada. The Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery, an organisation of journalists, photographers, cameramen camerapersons and soundpersons, who cover Parliament and Ottawa politics have a self-imposed handbook that mandates a dress code for male journalists – they must sport a jacket and a tie even when sitting in the Press Gallery. Women there are not told how to dress appropriately..Shabby-journalistic attire worries the British royalty. “Journalists wishing to cover Royal engagements, whether in the United Kingdom or abroad, should comply with the dress code on formal occasions out of respect for the guests of The Queen, or any other member of the Royal Family,” reads the British monarchy’s guidelines for overseas visits. “Those wearing jeans or trainers will not be admitted and casually dressed members of the media will be turned away. This also applies to technicians.”.But this is not a monarchic trait alone. The Republican National Convention in the United States made news for emphasising disdain for bare shoulders. The House Periodical Press Gallery has rules that require correspondents to “conform to the dress standards as applicable to the Members of each House of Congress”. Rob Zatkowski, Director, House Periodical Press Gallery is reported to have been worried about “a pervasive jeans-and-sneakers issue” and the lack of style among American journalists: “People are coming in jeans and sneakers, just slobbish attire. We used to have problems with Europeans wearing jeans, but they were always stylish jeans.”.We in India are not a monarchy. And, who cares a damn for the royalty whose Era of Darkness we shrugged off to create our Republic? But before you write off respect for our Republic’s institutions as another condemnable British legacy, do take a look at Newscastic, a journalistic community portal that says it well..A safe rule to adopt for deciding what is “appropriate attire” would be one that Justice Potter Stewart ruled in Jacobellis vs. Ohio – 378 U.S. 184 (1964). Commenting on what constitutes “hard core pornography”, he wrote: “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description……I could never succeed… But I know it when I see it….”.The author is a counsel based in Mumbai.Tweets @SomasekharS
