My TakeTime for Hong Kong to allow cameras in court
- A British sentencing broadcast live on TV was literally an example of justice being seen to be done. Our courts should be looking to move in that direction
The jailing of a man responsible for the brutal killing of his bedridden grandfather made English legal history last week. The sentencing was broadcast live on television and streamed on YouTube. It was, literally, an example of justice being seen to be done.
This was the first time television cameras had been allowed to screen part of a criminal trial at one of the country’s crown courts. The broadcast is the latest step in Britain’s use of cameras to further the principle of open justice.
Hong Kong, which often adopts legal reforms in the UK, maintains strict rules against filming in court. But there is much the city’s judiciary could learn from Britain’s efforts to make court proceedings more accessible.
The televised sentencing of Ben Oliver, a deeply troubled 25-year-old with autism and depression, took place at the Old Bailey in London.
A law banning cameras from the courts has been in place in the UK since 1925. But it has been eased over the last decade to permit the gradual broadcasting of proceedings.
The Supreme Court allowed cameras in when it began sitting in 2009. The Court of Appeal permitted cases to be screened in 2013. The aim is to boost public confidence in the legal system by allowing the public to see for themselves how justice is done and better understand the judges’ role.
But there has long been sensitivity about extending the use of the cameras to criminal trials. These are the most dramatic cases. Screening them could have a negative impact on victims, witnesses and jurors. It is also feared judges and lawyers will be tempted to perform for the cameras.