Law Society president says high-profile cases should be broadcast

The new SA Law Society president says court cases should be broadcast to promote open justice.

Law Society president says high-profile cases should be broadcast
High-profile state court cases should be filmed and publically broadcast, according to SA Law Society president, David Caruso said.

Caruso, who began his one-year term this month making him the youngest ever SA Society president at 33, think that broadcasting cases will promote open justice and popular understanding of the system.

“Provided the proceedings were appropriate for broadcast, and those who were being broadcast consented to it, there is no reason why technology should not give us every reason to consider public access to justice being more than just physically attending,” Caruso said, citing the Oscar Pistorius murder trial in South Africa as an example of where broadcasting was key in public understanding of the verdict.

The SA Opposition has strongly backed the suggestion while the government has said that selective broadcasting could do “more harm than good”.

“Public televising is just modern communication of it being an open court system,” said opposition deputy leader Vickie Chapman.

“In the criminal law system, yes that can be done, and it should be done.”

In an interview with The Advertiser, Caruso also suggested major changes to the way courts are managed, including taking the approach of the Federal Court by having a single judge run cases from start to finish, in a bid to cut costs and remove backlogs.  He also suggested elements of the European inquisitorial system where judges could ask more questions and take a role on witness selection to speed up judgements.

Courts have the power to allow filming of cases but it is rarely used.  In 2013, the Supreme Court rules were changed to allow Twitter-reporting.

“Our courts are open.  Anyone can go there anytime, but we’re all busy people,” Caruso said.

“Provided the proceedings were appropriate for broadcast, and those who were being broadcast consented to it, there is no reason why technology should not give us every reason to consider public access to justice being more than just physically attending.

 “As technology improves, and can be introduced into courtrooms in less intrusive ways, there is no reason the legal profession would not welcome consideration of being publicly accessible.”

He did note that controls were needed, along with victim and witness consent.

“Broadcasting of court proceedings raises many issues,” said acting Attorney-General Susan Close.

“Selective broadcasting may do more harm to public understanding of the justice system than the status quo.”
 
 

Free newsletter

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter service and we’ll keep you up-to-date with the latest breaking news, cutting edge opinion, and expert analysis affecting both your business and the industry as whole.

Please enter your email address below and click on Sign Up for daily newsletters from Australasian Lawyer.

Recent articles & video

Insolvency and restructuring expert joins Hall & Wilcox as specialist partner

Allens supports long-term client on $1.225bn debt refinancing

Paralegal files suit against US litigation firm and former partner for alleged sexual assault

NRF helps telco company achieve landmark ASX listing with $16.63bn IPO

G+T beefs up corporate advisory practice with lateral partner hires

Ince boosts APAC team with new HK partner

Most Read Articles

Cooper Grace Ward partner looks forward to more flexible work arrangements in the long term

KHQ Lawyers lures 4-man team from HWL Ebsworth

Logie-Smith Lanyon bolsters team with new senior appointments

Simmons & Simmons boosts Singapore investment funds group with new team