The UK government has published the outcome of its call for evidence which sought comments on ten areas relating to open justice and transparency. This included questions on the principles around open justice and transparency, as well as specific areas of the justice system, particularly those that have undergone a period of rapid change over the last decade.
The key points raised are set out below.
Open Justice principle
Respondents emphasised the value of the principle that justice must be seen to be done to ensure transparency and hold the judiciary and courts accountable. Respondents noted the importance of the judiciary’s independence but felt there was a lack of public understanding about the role of judges and their independence, with calls for action to increase public awareness. Public understanding of the courts system and how decisions are reached was seen as a key element of the rule of law, to keep the law accessible and maintain confidence in the system. Several respondents felt that consideration needed to be given to the delivery of open justice in a digital age, given the context of more online hearings, digital documents, and (in the civil and family jurisdictions) more settlements outside of courts and before formal court proceedings have begun.
Remote observation and livestreaming
Respondents highlighted various benefits of remote observation and livestreaming, including increasing access to hearings, enabling broader media coverage, and improving public understanding of the justice system. Respondents noted several risks including the risks to privacy and an increased risk of contempt of court, for example, through unauthorised recording of the proceedings. Respondents were also concerned that parties may feel intimidated, and this may affect victims’ and witnesses’ ability to provide evidence or take part in proceedings. It was suggested that these risks could potentially be mitigated through judicial discretion and appropriate safeguards.
Data access and reuse
Respondents felt that justice data should be made more accessible for research and innovation, with appropriate safeguards for personal data. This would allow for better scrutiny of the justice system, support academic legal research, and enable development of tools that could transform the UK legal services and LawTech sectors. Current barriers provided by respondents included unclear processes and routes for request, inconsistencies around the format and structure of data sets, and the time taken to access data.
Broadcasting court proceedings
Respondents felt that broadcasting had the potential to increase public understanding and trust, but identified a number of risks and therefore suggested that any plans to expand broadcasting should be developed with a cautious, iterative approach. Respondents raised concerns around potential privacy breaches and the potential for broadcasting trials to act as a deterrent for witnesses or victims to come forward. The potential for sensationalism and inaccurate reporting from social media users and bloggers who were less familiar with reporting rules was also raised.
Listings
Respondents noted the importance of access to accurate and timely listings, which display information on upcoming court cases, in facilitating open justice. Some respondents reported that, in their experience, listings were not always published in a timely and consistent manner. Opinion on the level of detail that should be included in listings varied. Several secondary uses for listings were suggested including statistical analysis to better understand the types of cases being heard in courts and tools to aid media, NGOs and court watchers in tracking cases from start to finish.
Access to courts and tribunals
Respondents felt more could be done to ensure ‘in-person’ public access to courts and tribunals, such as ensuring courts and tribunals were fit for visitors and observers, and the importance of clear signage and staff support. Wider barriers to access mentioned included inconsistent access to court documents and the lack of contact details for specific courts. Some respondents highlighted the importance of the judiciary’s role in this, for example, by ensuring reporting restrictions were clear, granting access to remote observers where appropriate, and aiming to minimise complex legal language throughout proceedings.
Single Justice Procedure
Respondents raised concerns about the transparency of the Single Justice Procedure, especially for defendants who did not respond to notices of prosecution. Suggestions for improvements included increased guidance and support for defendants. Respondents also felt the Single Justice Procedure needed greater scrutiny, with better data publication around the process and outcomes.
Publication of judgments and sentencing remarks
Respondents were generally positive about centralising the publication of court judgments and tribunal decisions into a single online platform. The importance of making judgments available in machine-readable formats was emphasised. Concerns were expressed with the current limited availability of judgments online which was seen to restrict the public’s ability to understand the reasoning behind specific decisions, potentially impacting public trust and confidence in judicial decision-making overall.
Access to court documents
Respondents reported that the cost of obtaining court documents can act as a deterrent to individuals or organisations seeking access. Respondents offered suggestions for improving the accessibility of documents including setting up a central database, standardising rules and procedures across jurisdictions, and reducing the costs for accessing documents.
Public legal education
Respondents reported a lack of public understanding of the justice system, with various factors contributing to this, including complexities across jurisdictions, the complex language used in legal proceedings, difficulties in accessing affordable legal advice, lack of access to court documents, and the lack of easily accessible public information about the justice system. Respondents suggested various methods to increase knowledge, including government information campaigns, inclusion of justice education in the school curriculum, community outreach and using the media (particularly social media) as a vehicle of communication.
There were various overarching themes:
- The importance of the MoJ delivering in accordance with its legal responsibilities, ensuring there is appropriate consistency in the way open justice and transparency of the justice system is delivered across courts and jurisdictions.
- Ensuring open justice and transparency principles are embedded as the justice system continues to be digitised, and there is a move to resolving more cases out of court and potentially before formal proceedings have begun.
- The importance of reliable and accessible data to scrutinise the justice system, both on individual cases and across the whole system.
- The need to ensure appropriate safeguards when implementing open justice and transparency policies, ensuring balance with other principles such as the right to privacy and judicial independence.
Next steps
The insights shared by respondents will inform the government’s policies to modernise and improve the transparency of the justice system, with the aim of ensuring it upholds the rule of law.
