Some members of the legal fraternity have expressed support for a proposal being mooted by the Government to provide live streaming of select criminal and civil court cases as a means of promoting transparency in the judicial system.

Plans to implement this new system appear to be firming up, as Justice Minister Delroy Chuck announced on Friday that discussions are now under way with Chief Justice Bryan Sykes, Court of Appeal Acting President Dennis Morrison, and several parish judges across the island on the matter.

Chuck, who was speaking at the opening of the Port Maria Justice Centre in St Mary, said the move is also in a bid to enhance accountability.

“This (accountability) must exist in the courts (so) that they function efficiently and that people can see how justice is being delivered,” the Jamaica Information Service quoted Chuck as saying.

Yesterday, attorney-at-law Linton Gordon said this is a sound idea which should be implemented as swiftly as possible.

“I don’t see anything wrong with it… There is nothing wrong with broadcasting the proceedings in court, except for cases that are held in-camera, such as certain Gun Court cases and sexual offence cases and other cases that judges determine ought not to be made public (and) cases relating to children and so on,” he told the Jamaica Observer.

Gordon said live streaming could, in a sense, be seen as going “back to the basics”, as citizens should be entitled to sit in court and follow the proceedings.

“All that would be happening is that rather than taking the bus down to King Street, or St Ann’s Bay, or Port Maria to sit in the court and watch the proceedings, you can now tune in and watch the proceedings on your television; so there would be nothing new apart from greater access to the courts being granted to the public, and it’s for this reason I consider it a positive move,” Gordon said.

He argued that the benefits could be extensive, as broadcasts of cases would enhance the public’s understanding of how courts operate and allow citizens to form opinions on some of the issues affecting the island’s courts, such as whether delays are caused by defence counsel or the prosecution; “whether police officers are not bringing witnesses on completion of statements and so on, whether the presiding judge is speaking a little longer than you would expect him or her to be speaking. All these are factors the public will now be given an opportunity to form an opinion on”.

The attorney added that public understanding of the court system will, in fact, assist attorneys with their work.

“Citizens will be having first-hand information of the process by observing what is taking place in court …so I think it’s a good development, and the quicker it is done, the better it will be for all of us,” he stated.

Attorney-at-law Andre Earl agreed, saying that live streaming could be a “good thing” both for criminal and civil court proceedings. He, too, noted that in certain matters, such as rape cases, there is already a layer of protection with provisions in place for in-camera proceedings, and for parties to request the same for other cases which are considered sensitive.

“On the civil side, a party can always apply to have a matter done in-camera, so the protection is there as well. If a party really feels that for whatever reason it’s very sensitive, you always have the jurisdiction under the civil procedure to have that done privately without the public being present.

Added Earl: “Justice, in a sense, is public. You can see the proceedings in court. Right now law students, for example, and other members of the public can sit in the back of any courtroom. I believe that sufficient safeguards are in place that for those types of matters which ought to be made private you can exclude streaming in those cases,” he said.

Earl pointed to the live streaming of some cases at the United Kingdom-based Privy Council, Jamaica’s final court of appeal. “If the highest court in the land allows that, then why not,” he remarked. “The safeguards are there, so you can’t just use images as you would want. It is made clear that there are certain conditions under which you can view the material and there is no ability on your part, legally, to reproduce it for any purposes at all without permission of the Privy Council.”

He said that he supported live streaming in Supreme Court and Court of Appeal cases, as submissions must be presented in writing, with substantial notice for matters, and a lot of the material has to be pleaded.

Senior counsel Ian Wilkinson, QC indicated that he, too, would support the development.

“I think that it is a very good idea and will assist with transparency and can serve to educate citizens regarding how their court/justice system operates,” Wilkinson, who was president of the Jamaican Bar Association from 2011 to 2014, told the Observer.

“Persons have a constitutional right to visit the courts to see the daily proceedings, subject to matters in-camera, such as carnal abuse or rape cases and some sensitive civil matters,” Wilkinson said.

“Provided the necessary safeguards are conceptualised and implemented regarding, for example, the security of witnesses — including protecting their identities, etc — in highly delicate matters, this can be a positive step forward for the country.

“Another possible salutary effect of the proposal is that judges, lawyers, policemen, et al, who know that they will be broadcast to the public, will have to conduct themselves with much more decorum,” Wilkinson added.