English Courts to Open Their Doors to Cameras
Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke announced today that Bills will shortly be introduced in Parliament to overturn prohibitions on cameras in the courtroom.
The media will only be allowed to film judges’ summary remarks only – victims, witnesses, offenders and jurors cannot be filmed.
The Guardian reports that Clarke had intended to consult with senior judges but in recent days Downing Street had moved to circumvent this consultation process and support the change, whatever the judges thought.
In addition to allowing broadcasting, Mr Clarke announced that an unprecedented level of information about the performance of courts will be published in future to allow everyone to see how their local courts are working. This will include:
Court-by-court statistics for the time taken for cases to be processed, from offence to conviction, allowing people to compare the performance of their local courts
Details on how many trials were ineffective and why they were ineffective
Anonymised data on each case heard at local courts and the sentences given
Details of how many people have been convicted or released from prisons in each area and how often they re-offended afterwards
From next May justice outcomes will be placed alongside crime data on police.uk so people can see what happens next after crimes are committed in their areas
More information on how the civil and family justice systems, including how long it takes each court to process small claims hearings, larger cases and care proceedings.
They’ll be having a bonfire with Reporting Restrictions in the Crown Court.
The new rules will apply in Wales. No solace to Gavin Hughes, who in April 2003, sitting in the public gallery of Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court, found himself in the dock after a police officer witnessed him taking a photograph of a defendant in the court using his mobile phone. He was brought before the judge and fined £250 for contempt of court. He apologised and explained that “I hadn’t seen my friend for a while, so I took a photo of him for myself and to show his wife”. Snapping the goings on in Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court will still be an offence unless he snaps the judge while summing up.
Not everyone is overjoyed at the prospect: Charles Harris, last year’s president of the Council of Circuit Judges, also told BBC’s Today:
A trial is actually an entity of various parts, and you can’t legitimately split it up into bits and pieces.
What about a defendant who doesn’t agree to [filming], is sentenced in the full light of publicity and then appeals and is acquitted?
Tory MP Roger Gale said
it risked turning justice into a reality show and providing a platform for “eccentric” legal professionals. Mr Gale, a former TV producer, said screening Parliament had resulted in grandstanding by MPs and a concentration on “juicy” extracts at the expense of less entertaining debates.
I believe that the televising of the closing speeches in law courts and the passing of sentences will create the same effect as thrusting barristers seek to impress the media with fee-improving performances and the more eccentric members of the judiciary use the TV platform to address the nation,” he said.
The courts are supposed to be a place where justice is done and where it is, by those actually present and listening to the evidence, seen to be done. That must not be allowed to change. This is not about transparency or democracy, it is about television showbusiness and we do not need our law courts to be turned into yet another reality TV show.”
England has more eccentric members of the judiciary than Canada – His Honour James Pickles and Mr. Justice Cocklecarrot come to mind immediately.
The 1925 Criminal Justice Act states:
41 Prohibition on taking photographs, &c., in court.
(1)No person shall—
(a)take or attempt to take in any court any photograph, or with a view to publication make or attempt to make in any court any portrait or sketch, of any person, being a judge of the court or a juror or a witness in or a party to any proceedings before the court, whether civil or criminal; or
(b)publish any photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made in contravention of the foregoing provisions of this section or any reproduction thereof;and if any person acts in contravention of this section he shall, on summary conviction, be liable in respect of each offence to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds.
(2)For the purposes of this section—(a)the expression “court” means any court of justice, including the court of a coroner:(b)the expression “Judge” includes . . . F38, registrar, magistrate, justice and coroner:(c)a photograph, portrait or sketch shall be deemed to be a photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made in court if it is taken or made in the court–room or in the building or in the precincts of the building in which the court is held, or if it is a photograph, portrait or sketch taken or made of the person while he is entering or leaving the court–room or any such building or precincts as aforesaid.
The Contempt of Court Act 1981 states:
9 Use of tape recorders.
(1)Subject to subsection (4) below, it is a contempt of court—
(a)to use in court, or bring into court for use, any tape recorder or other instrument for recording sound, except with the leave of the court;
(b)to publish a recording of legal proceedings made by means of any such instrument, or any recording derived directly or indirectly from it, by playing it in the hearing of the public or any section of the public, or to dispose of it or any recording so derived, with a view to such publication;
(c)to use any such recording in contravention of any conditions of leave granted under paragraph (a).
(2)Leave under paragraph (a) of subsection (1) may be granted or refused at the discretion of the court, and if granted may be granted subject to such conditions as the court thinks proper with respect to the use of any recording made pursuant to the leave; and where leave has been granted the court may at the like discretion withdraw or amend it either generally or in relation to any particular part of the proceedings.
(3)Without prejudice to any other power to deal with an act of contempt under paragraph (a) of subsection (1), the court may order the instrument, or any recording made with it, or both, to be forfeited; and any object so forfeited shall (unless the court otherwise determines on application by a person appearing to be the owner) be sold or otherwise disposed of in such manner as the court may direct.
(4)This section does not apply to the making or use of sound recordings for purposes of official transcripts of proceedings.
Comments are closed.