Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 23 October 2012

23 Oct 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Role of the Media in Criminal Trials

Macdonald, Lewis Lab North East Scotland Watch on SPTV

Members will know that it is not only in this place that the relationship of the media with the criminal justice system is under scrutiny. Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry has heard a good deal about the impact of press intrusion on criminal investigations and court proceedings and, today, the director general of the BBC has had to respond to the opposite—to allegations of cover-up in the Jimmy Savile scandal. Those inquiries are just as pertinent to Scotland as they are to other jurisdictions.

A few weeks ago, the United Kingdom Government said that it would legislate to allow filming of some aspects of court proceedings in England and Wales. Here, as we have heard, the Lord President announced just last week a detailed review of policy on the use of television cameras in court. That review will no doubt take account of the evidence to the Justice Committee, which, as we have heard, has so far been largely—although not entirely—sceptical about or hostile towards increased media access.

As has been said, filming in court has been permitted in Scotland, on the basis of consent, for the past 20 years. Christine Grahame mentioned the amendment to the notice that was made earlier this year. In practice, only very limited parts of a very small number of court cases have been broadcast in that time. I have no doubt that what Lord Gill intends to hold is a review of whether now is the right time to increase such coverage, as is happening elsewhere, or whether it should be curtailed.

It is important to consider the wider context, starting with the European convention on human rights. The minister referred to the existence of almost universal values in this area, but Governments are also under specific obligations. The ECHR requires that an accused person be given a fair trial, that individuals’ right to privacy should be respected and that a free press should be able to

“impart information and ideas on all matters of public interest”.

That is a set of obligations that are potentially in conflict. As the minister said, it means that legislation must be properly balanced to protect the rights of all who are involved in court proceedings, as well as the rights and duties of the people who report them.

Later this session, ministers will propose new laws on support for victims and witnesses, and I believe that that should be the starting point for and the centre of this afternoon’s debate. In dealing with the issue of filming in court, Alan McCloskey of Victim Support Scotland told the Justice Committee that

“From the perspective of victims and witnesses, coming to court is one of the most traumatic things that an individual has to do ... The potential to be in the media spotlight and to be part of that circus adds a different dimension.”—[Official Report, Justice Committee, 2 October 2012; c 1779.]

In other words, witnesses could be deterred from coming forward if trials were televised. They might be concerned about the impact that giving evidence could have on their families or on themselves.

Indeed, although witnesses might be given assurances about confidentiality in a particular case or in relation to their evidence, they might find those assurances difficult to believe if they were seeing other cases being played out on television or their broadcasting being repeated in detail after the trial.

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 23 October 2012

In the same item of business