Cameras in Courts: to be Welcomed?

Today, the Government has confirmed that it will allow filming in the courts from October.

Initially, filming will be allowed in the Court of Appeal and broadcasters will be permitted to show pictures of the lawyers involved and the judges. The Government hopes to then extend filming to the Crown Court, where images of judges passing sentence would be allowed to be broadcast. The Government says broadcasting court proceedings will make the justice system more transparent and will build trust in the justice system.

So is broadcasting court proceedings a good idea? I shall now summarise some of the main arguments for and against filming in the courts.

Arguments in favour of filming in court 

1) Filming court proceedings would make the justice system more transparent and build trust in the justice system because the public could see justice in action.

2) Filming court proceedings would improve understanding of the justice system.

3) It would allow the public to see the very important work of legal professionals and the court system, and encourage appreciation of them.

4) Finally, and related to the third point, the public would support a fully funded court and legal aid system because it would see the value of them.

Arguments against filming in court

1) Filming in the courts would not necessarily build trust in the justice system. For example, televising MPs in Parliament has not made the public trust politicians any more.

2) Televising the courts would not necessarily improve public understanding. The public sees Parliament on television but does not seem to understand it much better. Moreover, it could positively cause misunderstanding. If only part of the proceedings are televised it might mislead the public as to the true nature of a case.

3) Seeing the work of the courts would not inevitably mean that the public appreciates it any more. The public sees Parliament in action but does not appreciate it any more.

4) The public would not support more funding for the courts and legal aid simply because proceedings are televised. Once again, Parliament is televised but the public certainly does not support a salary increase for politicians.

5) Filming court proceedings could affect the behaviour of those involved. Witnesses and, to a lesser extent, lawyers may ‘act up’ for the cameras.

All of these arguments do not deal with the issue of whether the public would even find televised court proceedings interesting. For example, the appeal courts almost exclusively deal with questions of law, they do not deal with the facts of a crime. Would the public be that interested in listening to, often complex, legal arguments? That said, proceedings in the Supreme Court (the highest court in the land), which also deal with complex legal arguments, are televised already (see here) and apparently have 90,000 daily viewers.

What are your thoughts? Do you think televising court is a good idea? Would you find it interesting?