Every trial of a case, whether criminal or civil, must be public to assure the people desirous to observe that justice is afforded to all the parties before the court in keeping with their right to a fair and impartial trial.
In criminal prosecutions, the accused is not only entitled to a speedy trial, but at the same time, speedy disposition of his case, not only before the trial court, but also before a court of appellate jurisdiction.
A trial is said to be public when the proceeding is open to the general public, but precluding the idea, however, that everyone of the public be accommodated. This constitutional requirement of a public trial is duly observed if a reasonable number of the public is permitted to attend under ordinary circumstances. Therefore, secret trials are not authorized, except only when the accused makes a request and in the opinion of the court, the public should be excluded in the interest of decency and morality. (Garcia vs. Domingo, 25 July 1973; 52SCRA 143)
In the a fore cited case of People vs. Domingo, the Supreme Court declared that the trial must be made public, then laid down the criterion of what constitutes a public trial, as follows:
"It possesses that character when everyone who is interested in observing the manner a judge conducts the proceedings in his courtroom may do so. There is no ban on such attendance, His being a stranger to the litigants is of no moment. No relationship to the parties need be shown. There is a well recognized exception though that warrants the exclusion of the public where the evidence may be characterized as "offensive to decency and public morals".
The Supreme Court held: it suffices to satisfy the requirement of a trial being public if the accused could "have his friends, relatives and counsel present, no matter with what offense he may be charged".
