1. COURT REPORTING
OPEN JUSTICE?
5/7/2018

2. OPEN JUSTICE PRINCIPLE
Scott v Scott (1913)
Reasons for Open Justice:
Courts under scrutiny
Encourages witnesses
Discourages perjury
Advances knowledge of courts and law
5/7/2018

3. JUSTICE & SECURITY ACT
Justice & Security Green Paper - introduced in October 2011.
Acknowledged concern that some cases are unsatisfactorily resolved because some of the evidence is high security material.
Act introduces new law to allow some evidence to be heard in ‘closed proceedings’ to avoid a ‘catch-22’ position
5/7/2018

4. REASONS FOR LEGISLATION
Previous situation was ‘unsatisfactory for everyone’
For full report See Hansard 19th October 2011.
Legislation has generated considerable discussion/criticism e.g. threat to ‘open justice’
Note - this relates to CIVIL proceedings
5/7/2018

5. Article 6 ECHR Contains qualifications to right to fair trial
Is Art 6 wider/narrower than UK law? Are the qualifications to right to fair trial in open court too narrow?
Consider the competing arguments – see Robertson & Nicol/Barendt
Press have better access to courts than the public e.g. family hearings
5/7/2018

6. When can proceedings be held in private?
Possibility of disorder in courtroom
Identity of a witness needs protection
Public hearing is detrimental to future prosecutions
A case concerns prosecutions under the Official Secrets Acts - see trials of Keogh & O’Connor and Wang Yam - even extends to speculation about content.
5/7/2018

7. CATEGORIES OF CONCERN Future trials (s.4 Orders)
Children in adult courts
Committal proceedings
Victims of sexual attacks
Victims of Female Genital Mutilation – anonymity for life
Family Proceedings
Court of Protection cases
5/7/2018

8. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE RULES 2013 (PART) 16
summarise courts’ powers to impose reporting restrictions
Emphasise importance of public justice
Require that press be notified & given opportunity to make representations
Define procedure for achieving this
5/7/2018

9. CHILDREN
S.39 ORDERS - important for anonymity of children but note new changes
R v Central Criminal Court ex parte Godwin & Crook (1995)
R (JC & RT) v Central Criminal Court (2014)
Mrs R v Central Independent TV (1994)
Some proposals included in broadcasting codes even though not brought into law.
5/7/2018

10. REASONS FOR CONTROL
Does material interfere with child’s upbringing or development?
BBC v Kelly [2001] 1 All ER 323 – order not granted
Nottingham Council v October Films The Times 21st May 1994 – order granted
Re Z [1997] Fam. 1
5/7/2018

11. JIGSAW ID
What is it?
See Editors’ code and Ofcom codes for what should be avoided
Applies to Children and victims of sexual attacks- difficulties - no ‘bright lines’ Z v NGN Ltd.[2013] EWHC 1371 (Fam)
See KM case
5/7/2018

12. Trials held ‘in camera’
The Wang Yam trial - murder trial
R v Incedal – ongoing. See restrictions on accredited journalists attending.
Appeal to CA in October 2015
5/7/2018

13. S. 4 (2) orders
Proposals in hand to introduce online recording of these orders so that the media will know what is in force.
5/7/2018

14. Privacy rights of arrested persons
PNM v Times Newspapers Ltd & Others (2014) Oxford sex ring case. Claimant had been named in trial several times.
Media ‘ride- alongs’ - See ACPO/College of Policing guidance. - name suspects ONLY when charged and NOT arrested except in exceptional circumstances e.g. threat to life & limb/help prevent /detect crime/public interest or other policing purpose.
5/7/2018

15. Rights of Arrested person - 2
See example of Paul Gambaccini
On bail for over 12 months before being told no further proceedings
Effect of publicity of arrest
Should there be privacy of arrested person until charge?
See arguments for and against
5/7/2018

16. FAMILY PROCEEDINGS
Concern over the lack of reporting rights leading to miscarriages of justice – see e.g.Brandon Webster case
Pilot Scheme introduced 2009
Children, Schools and Families Act 2010
Act passed through parliament very quickly just prior to General Election. Unlikely to come into force in present format.
5/7/2018

17. FAMILIES continued
‘It is important that the family justice system is properly understood and commands public confidence. At the same time, there is a clear need to protect the privacy of vulnerable children & adults involved in cases in the family courts…the govt. wants to look closely at the changes the act would introduce before any decision on implementation is taken’ (Min. of Justice)
5/7/2018

18. SO…… Can forget this act for now.
Instead see : ‘Media Access & Reporting’
Commended by President of the Family Division & Director of Society of Editors
Available online from Judiciary website
Also a new report published in May 2012 ‘Confidentiality & Openness in Family Courts’ (available online)
5/7/2018

19. SIR JAMES MUNBY’S SPEECH
Has called for greater openness in family courts and also regarding judgments.
Families should also be able to talk to press if they wish.
‘Transparency in the Family Courts and Court of protection’.
5/7/2018

20. SOME CASES
R(Y) v Aylesbury CC [2012] EWHC 1140 (Admin) – anonymity of child defendant under s.39- child’s welfare must be balanced against public interest in open justice.
R (Press Association) v Cambridge Crown Court [2012] EWCA Crim 2434 – No power to order anonymity of defendant to protect ID of victim. Protection of victim matter for reporting with care by press.
5/7/2018

21. Other areas of concern Anonymity in inquests – Litvinenko case
Press access to court documents and hearings
Courts Martial – Marine A in recent murder case – now named
Publishing reports of proceedings in private
Private hearings/closed material
5/7/2018