Open justice online: Let’s give credit where credit is due

With talk of judicial review proceedings being broadcast, and the family court reporting pilot being extended across England and Wales, it is a good time to acknowledge parts of the courts and tribunals system already doing things to improve accessibility and openness. In an increasingly questionable ‘social media as news source’ landscape, access to reality has never been more important.  

Our first credit goes to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, which has made a major recent update to the way it handles documents. Now, when a document is referred to in proceedings, it is added - where appropriate - to the listing of the case for all those observing the hearing to read.

Previously, getting hold of a document required chasing and, no doubt, more emails and admin than tribunal staff had time or resources for. This was needed just to get some of the most basic of documents, like the Rule 12 statement – the equivalent of an indictment or charge sheet.

While sometimes the document is redacted, if that has been decided to be necessary by the tribunal, at least it is there. This move helps the tribunal to seem more transparent and ensures there is no confusion as to why an individual, or a firm, is appearing before it.

Another example of technology being done right is in the Rolls Building hearing of the group claim in Municipio de Mariana & others v BHP. Despite many different moving parts, proceedings seem to be working seamlessly (we are more than two months in so there has been time to iron out any issues). Observers on the remote link can see the documents referred to, both in Portuguese and English, have a clear view of both counsel and witnesses and get a direct Portuguese or English translation (depending on your preference) as well as captions. It’s a beauty to behold.

Open justice does not necessarily mean broadcasting every hearing or publishing every document. Open justice means that any member of the public is able to walk into our court buildings, or click onto a link if remote, and listen to our justice system in action. It means they can easily access certain documents and judgments to read and decipher (a shout out should be made here for all the hard work that goes into the National Archives' Find Case Law service).

Just because many people do not take up this opportunity, does not make it any less important. Public sat in the court, and media reporting on cases, helps bring discussion, scrutiny, and hopefully, if necessary, change. None of that can happen without open justice. It is a right worthy of protection and a foundation of our legal system to be proud of, even in this ever changing modern world.

And while objections to ‘trial by media’ are valid, they can be overdone. Our full-time court reporters are responsible and they know their stuff. They do not want to prejudice a trial and are all too aware of the court’s limited time and resources. Either way, a judge, magistrate, or tribunal member is supposed to be above the considerations of society at large and instead focus on the case at hand and the laws and procedures that apply to it.

In fact the best way to remove the threat of ‘trial by media’, is to make access to hearings and documents as easy as possible in the hope that those interested will listen and learn. In time, understanding will deepen and develop and proper scrutiny can follow. After all, courts and tribunals, despite best efforts, sometimes get it wrong.