Opinion: it would be compelling and legally instructive for the public to access TV coverage of many important court cases
The Irish Constitution supports a system of government with three separate branches of power: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. The legislature passes the law; the executive puts it into operation and the judiciary interprets it. Both the functioning and accountability of the legislature and the executive are transparent to the public with Oireachtas TV, but the judiciary is not.
The recent coverage of the Public Accounts and Media committees' deliberations on Ryan Tubridy and RTÉ catapulted the viewing figures for Oireachtas TV from its usual 29,000 minutes per Committee hearing, to a massive nine million minutes of online viewing. In the US, the January 6 Committee hearings have shown the power of televised testimony. The Supreme Courts of Canada, the UK and numerous other countries allow their people to see their justices at work. However, Ireland, and the US Supreme Court, do not allow cameras in court.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ News in 2017, Supreme Court proceedings filmed and broadcast for first time in history of the State
But there were cameras in Ireland's Supreme Court in 2017, when the Courts Service of Ireland, along with RTÉ News, broadcast two Supreme Court judgments live for the first time. Though originally mooted by former Chief Justice Susan Denham, it was her successor, Mr Justice Frank Clarke, who permitted televising judgments of the Supreme Court. He considered it a means of demystifying the courts process with a view to "expanding coverage", including "televising the parties making their arguments." Just two months after the first historic broadcast, the project grounded to a halt after a second televised coverage of six judgments from the Supreme Court.
Under Article 34 of the Irish Constitution, justice must be administered in public. if you live in Dublin you can pop in and see proceedings in the Supreme Court, the Central Criminal Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court. Not so, if you live outside the capital, where you must content yourself with your local District and occasional Circuit Court. Opponents of cameras in the courtroom will undoubtedly point to ample newspaper and television court coverage. Moreover, judgments from the higher courts are available online.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's News At One in October 2017, RTÉ Legal Affairs Correspondent Orla O'Donnell reports on the broadcasting of Supreme Court judgements for the first time
Nonetheless, the public deserves Cúirt TV. How compelling and legally instructive would it be for the pubic to access TV coverage, for example, of the legal arguments of the forthcoming Supreme Court appeal case of Graham Dwyer. His appeal is based on seven grounds relating to the admission of mobile phone call data records at his trial for the 2015 murder of childcare worker Elaine O'Hara. Moreover, if the President was to refer a proposed Bill to the Supreme Court, under Article 26, to test its constitutionality, how riveting and revealing it would be to see arguments for and against its constitutionality before seven judges.
In the UK, cameras broadcast from the Court of Appeal for the first time in 2013 and from the Old Bailey in 2022. However, safeguards in criminal cases were introduced, permitting the filming of sentencing remarks, but prohibiting any filming of victims, witnesses and defendants. Moreover, footage could be used in a news and current affairs context but not in other genres such as satire, entertainment, or advertising. Why can’t these safeguards be introduced in Ireland?
In America, much of the disquiet regarding cameras in court emanated from the 1935 Lindbergh baby kidnapping trial. This spurred camera bans in courtrooms after Bruno Hauptmann, the man convicted of kidnapping and killing Charles Lindbergh Jr, claimed, in an unsuccessful appeal, that the presence of courtroom cameras denied him a fair trial. Renewed debate on cameras in the courtroom emerged with Court TV's gavel-to-gavel coverage of the trial of former football star O.J. Simpson and the controversy surrounding his not-guilty jury verdict.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
From RTÉ Radio 1's Liveline in 2018, callers talk about convicted murderer Catherine Nevin
Nonetheless, cameras in the courtroom cannot be wholly to blame for sensationalising proceedings. The Irish press media was famously cautioned by Justice Mella Carroll, in 2000, when the trial of Catherine Nevin, dubbed the Black Widow, turned into public spectacle, due to excessive media attention on her appearance and demeanour. Justice Carroll was compelled to limit reporting to evidence and legal interaction, to ensure a fair trial.
Although cameras are prohibited in the US Supreme Court, a major change came in 2010 when Chief Justice John Roberts began releasing same-day audio recordings of court proceedings. During the pandemic, Roberts began a practice of broadcasting audio of arguments in real-time, which continues today.
Is it time for the Irish public to watch our judicary make landmark legal decisions on our behalf?
In Ireland, the Supreme Court is more than the ultimate arbiter of the law; it is a symbol of our sovereignty. Prior to independence, this function was reserved for the House of Lords in Westminster, a reminder of Britain’s colonisation of Ireland. With the creation of the Irish Free State, an immediate task was the establishment of a new court system. W.T. Cosgrave, President of the Free State’s Executive Council, declared in January 1922 that "there is nothing more prized among our newly won liberties than to construct a system of judiciary after a pattern of our own designing."
Our current Supreme Court emanates from 1961, comprising of a Chief Justice and nine ordinary justices. Is it time, then, for the Irish public to watch our judicary make landmark legal decisions on our behalf?
The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ
