The relationship between journalists specializing in court coverage and lawyers is not just a transient professional communication, but rather a partnership based on a fundamental goal, spreading legal and legal culture among people, and enhancing public deterrence by informing the community of judicial rulings in major cases of public opinion.
This cooperation was not limited to lawyers alone, but also included the judges and members of the Public Prosecution, as everyone agreed that transparency in judicial work and publishing responsible in the press is two basic pillars of community service. The sessions are publicly publicly, except in issues that require privacy, such as family issues or those that affect children and the victims of rape.
For this reason, the Supreme Judicial Council and the Public Prosecution were keen to use all technical means to protect these privacy.
Journalists realize that their role is not excitement, but rather awareness and transfer of information from its official sources, and for this they have always sought to preserve the bridges of confidence with the judges, the prosecution and the lawyers, but what happened recently with colleague Ali Tarif from his exposure to a verbal assault from one of the lawyers was a shocking matter, and outside the ordinary within the framework of this relationship.
How can journalists be accused of excitement, while some lawyers themselves resort to publishing the details of their cases through newspapers to deliver the legal message to society? And achieve the common goal of the two parties.
The newspapers have published over the years dozens of cases that occupied public opinion, starting with the murders and embezzlement, through the incidents of violence, to cases of commercial fraud, and the purpose of this was never only consolidating awareness, protecting society from repetition, and achieving public deterrence.
The question that must be asked frankly: Which is more dangerous for society? That people read the facts of cases from a specialized journalist committed to controls, or should the square leave to chaos on social media platforms where the facts turn into rumors, and events into a theater of malicious interpretations?
The answer is clear. The committed professional media is the safety valve for public opinion, which is the way to ensure that the truth will reach the same, away from the irresponsible excitement. The press here performs its societal message, and confirms that public sessions were only approved for the sake of people, and for their awareness and protection.
The journalist who transmits the truth from the courtroom is not an opponent of anyone, but rather the eye of society and its conscience, and in the end we confirm that what happened is unfamiliar and the relationship between journalists and lawyers is based on friendly and mutual respect.
