Journalism News on Twitter pointed out an interesting campaign today started by one frustrated journalist.
Heather Brooke’s article in the Times today highlighted the illogical persistence to keep recorders out of the courts in the UK.
In my limited experience in the courts I can agree that there are problems with the current ‘lack of transparency’.
For a start what is really the difference between allowing the press to take notes and recording proceedings on a device?
Surely this would only improve the accuracy of reporting if anything.
For long and drawn out cases, it can be a nightmare to have to scribble down everything that is said no matter how fast your shorthand is, your hand is going to give up eventually.
Many countries allow recording and even broadcast court cases, and reasons for not adopting it here seem to be about court control rather than media manipulation.
As well as the recording issue, transparency is an issue in a supposedly ‘open system’.
Getting access to information from the courts is far from ideal, well in fact it’s nearly impossible.
Unless you are present at a case to take the details down, it’s extremely hard to get any information.
Ultimately this means that a lot of things will go unreported, especially as dedicated coverage from reporters has decreased.
And who can blame them, who wants to sit in a court all day, not knowing if anything worth reporting is going to happen.
And if you get word of an interesting case or judgement, it’s probably too late afterwards because you won’t be provided with much to go on from the courts.
I recently had to attend an inquest which raised some of these niggles.
First, I showed up at the building it was supposed to be in, only to find out it had been moved. Great start.
I found the place it had been moved to, and when the inquest started – I took my notes down in shorthand as best as I could.
Two hours of witnesses later I wondered how long the case would go on for. I didn’t know, I wasn’t told anything.
So I decided to leave and grab lunch. After lunch I rang the courts to find out if it was going to continue in the afternoon.
“Oh well I couldn’t say but they will be meeting up again after lunch which should be in about half an hour.”
“Oh wait, they’ve gone in about 5 minutes ago.
Me- “Well, would I be able to get any information on rulings?”
“No, we wouldn’t give out anything like that.”
So, I decided to trudge back down to the courts, sneaked back into the court room as quietly as I could.
Arriving just in time to hear that the inquest would continue next month sometime as the coroner needed more time to consider evidence and hear from witnesses.
When it’s a guessing game to report on the courts, the attraction of finding a story there can soon wane.
Heather Brooke’s article has spurred a campaign for transparency in the courts.
And if justice is really being carried out, then there’s no reason why the courts should oppose the move.
Louise in NI 