It must be the dream of every person to witness the court hearing at least once in their lifetime(just not as an accused). The thrill of arguments, formality, complex procedure & stake of life and death that depends on the advocate representing you, these stereotypes are deeply rooted in the mind of every person, which creates the main attraction for the general public.

“Anti-vaxxers (antivaccinationists) fear the use of vaccines”

Similarly, the majority of the public also dread courts, as they do not have enough knowledge about the courts. To begin with the knowledge, first thing first, courts are an independent body that has been a backbone for a healthy country and the courts have been working throughout the generations of lawyers and judges for the welfare of the public at large. With one of the finest people who interpret the bare writing of constitutions. 

However, Courts throughout the world work on their best potentials, the public at large is unaware of that. Mostly in undeveloped countries where the public doesn’t have enough to eat and survive, less do they care for justice. So, how will these people know what exactly is going on in the courts, and how they will be made aware of it?

Imagine if your English teacher taught you 10% of a story in a lecture, you will probably remember 5% of the things. Similarly, if he teaches you 50% of the story you’ll recall 25% of it. Guess what’s better: 10% or 50%? The answer is 50%. But what if the teacher was forced by the Principal to teach you only 10%. 

In the above example, think of the Teacher as ‘Journalist’ and Principal as ‘Court. The court restricts journalists to maintain the privacy of the courts. 

Now comes the answer, ‘Video/Audio Recordings of Court proceeding’, if recordings of the courts will be made public, it will substantially increase the knowledge which is being instructed to the general public and it’ll also satisfy the eyes of people who are eager to witness the court hearing.

“Allow public to see how justice is carried”- News Reporters

Video recordings of courts throughout the world have different laws revolving around them with a lot of ambiguity. But how did the video recording of the courts start?

History of Video recordings in Courts

In the UK, At the beginning of the 20th-century, the newspaper was the main source of information and data. The owners of newspapers at that time understood the importance of pictures along with news, as the reader would see that news first which has images because it’s easy to relate with the news along with pictures

“Photographers began to take photographs in courts, mainly for the purposes of publishing images of salacious trials and society gossip from the divorce courts.”

As the situation got worse, the court banned taking pictures in the courtroom in courts in England & Wales in 1925. 

The US, in 1972 prohibited every kind of camera in court i.e. broadcasting, televising, recording, or taking photographs in the courtroom and areas immediately adjacent thereto, the decision was taken in the Judicial Conference. After the case of Chandler v Florida, courts Soon in the Judicial Conference,1990, it was decided to use the camera on a ‘Temporary’ basis along with a few guidelines.  

American Courts were still in the process to implement cameras but they strongly believed that allowing cameras would implement “fairness of trial” because many star cases were influenced by the personnel. Video recording & telecasting will make sure that no corruption is done and the due process is followed.  A  three-year pilot program also started on July 1, 1991following the implementations. 

Impact of Camera in Courts

“A picture says a thousand words” so the role of a picture in a newspaper is prominent, which has been the main focus of every journalist throughout the decades. They focus on getting a picture of the accused and make their whole news around it. Many of the readers just see the main picture and read the headline to get the gist of the news. 

“Having photographers can change the dynamics of the courtroom,”

A picture gives a feel and brings chills around the reader while reading a serious case.

Laws around the World

Every country has a different set of rule for allowing cameras in the court, some allow T.V. broadcasting while other will not allow even a sketch artist. Below is the list of countries with respective laws in those countries;

United States of America

At present, the US has allowed Video recordings with restrictions, from the report of the Committee on Court Administration and Casement Management (CACM) in its Judicial Conference, which was held on March 15, 2016. 

Judges are allowed to Record, Broadcast & Televise the courtroom, but they should ensure that:

1- The rights of parties are not violated.

2- Participants are not distracted by it.

3- Doesn’t interfere with Justice. 

Recording, Broadcasting, Televising & Taking photographs is  allowed by the judges only for:

1- Presentation of evidence 

2- Perpetuation of the record of the proceeding

3- Security purposes

4- Other purposes of judicial administration

5- Photographing, recording, or broadcasting of appellate arguments

6- Accordance with pilot programs approved by the Judicial Conference

Romania

Romania has introduced audio recordings in all courts of the country. Romania has made this decision to increase overall efficiency of the judicial system in the country. As the handwritten notes were kept by the clerks in the court, which raises a problem to hold the judges accountable because many of the judges were corrupt and unprofessional. 

Now, these audio recordings will be accessible to the parties in the court, and the request for the recordings is a trend in the Romanian judicial system. 

Croatia

Croatia has been following up the rule for audio and video recordings of the judicial proceedings in the court. All courts are not fully equipped with the equipment for recordings, around 90 courts have been certified for recordings. 

Mainly the recordings are done in criminal cases, not in usual constitutional and civil cases.

Malaysia

The country has allowed video and audio recordings of the court’s proceedings, which is done for both Criminal and Civil cases.

Singapore 

Singapore is using technology to cover the recordings, it uses real-time digital transcription (Converts audio to writing). Parties in a contract can use the recording by requesting it from the court, the party requesting must pay for the transcription service.

Australia

The courts of Australia were allowed full-fledged to record the proceedings from October 2013. The country has moved up ahead another step by providing access to the general public for all the recordings. Accessing the recordings is an easy process as no verification is required.   

Ukraine

Courts in the country have been recording the proceedings since 2014, in 2017 a new initiative was taken to tape the court in V.R. (360-degree recordings).

Situation in India

India is currently proceeding in the direction of video recording of Judicial proceedings. Through many decades the infrastructure of the Indian judiciary is in a disastrous stance. There are not enough courts in the rural areas and the government is not doing enough to improve the situation & stand of the courts and judicial system. 

Corruption is something that the judiciary is suffering from, therefore, in a situation when the proceedings will be recorded many of the staff will do the work as duly commanded, in the fear of being recorded. Which will put a barrier in front of the corruption practices.  

You should know that few states in India allow the courts to record the proceedings, but the discretion is totally upon the courts. The court also must maintain the integrity and status of the judicial system for the general public. Courts are also allowed to put restrictions to the recordings(if recorded) and any other direction the court seems fit.

Conclusion

India is a wide nation combined with vast types of culture, the only common thing which can be found is poverty and uneducated people. “Education is power” and so if more people will know about the justice system the better the society. Showing people the telecast of a court proceeding will provide the person knowledge and exposure of law and the most important of them all the trust.

Mandatory video recording has its own cons and pros but the pros overwhelm the negative side of it. It can also be seen by the other countries who have applied this system in their judicial reform. 

Countries like Ukraine have successfully enacted the idea and are now moving forward towards the next stage of 3D recordings. India has every resource to enact this system which will be done shortly.