Live-streaming of court cases is a welcome move long overdue
- Allowing cameras in the court can be transformative and the judiciary should now press ahead so that justice is – literally – seen to be done
The making of legal history can take many forms, often the dramatic delivery of a landmark court judgment that reshapes society.
Hong Kong’s judiciary broke new ground in a different way this month, with little fanfare. The development can, however, be transformative. Two cases were streamed live, marking a radical departure from the decades-old restriction on cameras in court. The move is long overdue.
The live broadcasts, later briefly available for playback, were screened on the Court of Final Appeal’s website. The initiative is intended to boost public confidence in the justice system by providing greater access and understanding.
Viewers hoping to witness proceedings in a high-profile national security case or gruesome murder trial would have been disappointed.
The cases were both rather dry civil appeals before the top court involving technical legal arguments. But this is just the beginning. It is to be hoped further broadcasts will quickly follow.
Hong Kong judiciary conducts first live stream of court hearing
Hong Kong court cases are mostly open to the public. Few people have the time or desire to attend. Live-streaming allows viewers to sit in via their laptop or mobile phone. The two cases combined drew almost 10,000 views, with a peak of 5,000 watching at one time. Sticking with the proceedings, which both lasted a full day, would have required fortitude and persistence.
The first arose from a case brought by a lesbian, known as MK, who challenged Hong Kong’s ban on same-sex marriage. The live-streamed hearing concerned a side issue, whether or not her legal aid should have been revoked. It raised important issues concerning the extent to which a litigant’s communications with their lawyers should remain confidential.
This was followed by a dispute between the developer of a shopping centre and the incorporated owners over who is responsible for the maintenance of an external wall. Don’t expect Hollywood producers to be in touch any time soon.
The judiciary helpfully provided links to a brief summary of the cases and previous judgments. This should be done for more hearings, not only those that are live-streamed.
Anyone wishing to avoid being baffled, at least in the early stages of the live streams, would need to read the documents before watching. The lawyers did not provide an easy-to-understand overview of the facts, issues and precisely what they wanted from the court.
The judges are already familiar with the details. Much knowledge is, therefore, assumed by the barristers addressing them. There were frequent references to documents the viewer cannot see. Little concession was made to public understanding of the cases. Some will welcome that. Legal issues are often complex and there is no need for arguments to become either shallow or sensational to make them more appealing to general viewers.
But it would help not only the public, but also the parties, media representatives and even the judges if each hearing begins with the thrust of the case being explained in a way which everyone can grasp. There should also be a move away from arcane language and legal jargon.
Hong Kong’s judiciary to air 2 final appeal hearings next month for trial scheme
Lawyers need to remember to speak into the microphones when the court is sitting and be aware that their private courtroom discussions, prior to the arrival of the judges, might also be picked up.
Hong Kong has a long way to go to replicate the success of Britain’s broadcasting of proceedings. The Supreme Court opened its doors to the cameras in 2009 and streaming was extended to the Court of Appeal in 2013. The first sentencing of a criminal was screened in July 2022.
Clips of judges delivering rulings and imposing jail terms regularly feature in television news broadcasts. Hong Kong should be treading a similar path. All sorts of abuses were feared, but they have not emerged in the UK.
The first live streams of Hong Kong cases did not provide much courtroom drama. But they are welcome, removing a long-standing barrier limiting public access to proceedings. Now, the judiciary should press ahead with further screenings to ensure that justice is – literally – seen to be done.
