Who may ask to inspect or copy the record of a finalised case, and on what grounds may access be restricted?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In the practice file for this exercise we would read the application to inspect or copy, which states the purpose relied on, the papers showing the adjudication has become final, and any notice of restriction, since the provision requires reasons to be notified to the applicant whenever access is restricted.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading treats the door as open to anyone: an application to inspect or copy the record of a case whose adjudication has become final may rest on remedy of rights, academic research or public interest, and the President of the Constitutional Court may restrict access only where argument was held in private, or where disclosure risks seriously infringing national security, good morals, public order or public welfare, or a person concerned's reputation, privacy of secrets, trade secrets, safety of life or body, or peace of daily life.
Another reading notes that restriction is expressed as a power, 'may restrict', and that two of the three grounds turn on a risk of serious infringement, while the provision itself does not say how likely or how grave that risk must be, leaving such necessary matters of inspection and copying to Constitutional Court rules.
Your judgment
If only part of the argument was held in private, how could the file show whether the ground of private argument reaches the record as a whole or only that part?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We revisit this card if the provision is amended to change the grounds or the notice duty, or if Constitutional Court rules made under this provision set out how private argument and the degree of risk are assessed.