That’s what BC Attorney-General, Mike de Jong, would like to see.
BC does not allow cameras in their courtrooms at the moment and de Jong says changing this policy would give the people of the province an opportunity to learn about the court process.
Citing what he calls “a growing disconnect between citizens and their justice system,” de Jong is suggesting court proceedings be allowed to be filmed and broadcast on television and the Internet. He says this will give people an opportunity to develop a greater understanding of how the system works.
He told the Globe and Mail,
“There will be times in any proceeding where it will be necessary for protection of a minor, of an informant, a vulnerable witness to restrict media access. That is not an issue,” he said. “But I think it is time to throw the doors open a lot wider than they have been, and say to people, this is your justice system.”
The proposed changes are part of a larger project of justice reform in the province. These reforms are being looked at after an investigation by Victoria’s Times-Colonist which revealed access to public information about cases was being denied.
The announcement has been met with mixed reactions. While some people think this is a great opportunity to open up the court system to the public, others worry that the implementation will end up diminishing access to justice.
Canadian courts are open to the public, and if someone wants to watch the proceedings they are allowed to go to a courthouse and do so. However, many things – including time and space – can limit someone’s ability to attend. Broadcasting would allow people to watch proceedings regardless of their location.
There are concerns, however, about privacy – especially for vulnerable witness and jurors, about how the presence of cameras may effect the behaviour of people within the courtroom, and about what the media will broadcast.
One of the main problems with the idea is the lack of government funding for cameras. Relying on the media to broadcast cases has potential downfalls. From the Globe and Mail article:
Prominent Vancouver criminal lawyer Peter Ritchie, who defended serial killer Robert Pickton, said putting cameras in a criminal courtroom was “a very bad idea.”
He anticipated that the media would come to court with cameras only on high profile cases. “They [the media] are not going to be there on the average Tuesday when Joe Blow is being charged with impaired driving. They are going to be there in high profile cases and will be a distraction to people involved, despite efforts to prevent that,” he said. The temptation to play to the cameras that witnesses, lawyers and judges may face would be “an extraordinary distraction,” Mr. Ritchie said. “You should not be playing to the cameras. You should be dealing with the matters at hand.”
Reactions reported by The Province were mixed.
Vancouver lawyer and journalist Donna Turko, who wrote her University of B.C. master’s thesis on cameras in the courtroom, said she’s “swung back and forth on the issue.”
“It’s going to take a lot of energy and cost to get to the right spot, that it benefits rather than hurts everybody,” Turko said.
The B.C. Civil Liberties Association welcomed de Jong’s ideas.
“It’s very important to increase the opportunities for the public to see the work of the court, and television is clearly the way to reach the people,” said policy director Micheal Vonn.
The Canadian Encyclopedia has a great article on Cameras in the Court with information on the history of cameras in Canadian courtrooms, arguments for and against, and how the Charter figures in to the debate.
What do you think? Would allowing cameras in to courtrooms increase Canadians understanding of the justice system? Or would it lead to sensationalism and make people hesitate to pursue cases? Or would it lead to something in between? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.
Like us on Facebook