Select committee: Justice Committee

Open justice: court reporting in the digital age

Closed Opened 17 Sep 2021 Closed 14 Sep 2023 13 recommendations 32 conclusions
Inquiry scope (the committee's words)
This short inquiry sought to understand how digital technology has affected the way that the media and the public access and report on the courts. Read the call for evidence to find out more about this inquiry .

Where it stands

The inquiry is closed, opened 17 September 2021.

The committee has published 1 report, most recently Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age on 1 November 2022.

The government's response

Published 16 January 2023. The deadline was 1 January 2023.

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The Government states that it "remains committed to upholding the principle of open justice" and responds to the Committee's recommendations by citing existing and planned work, a 2023 call for evidence, and some stated reasons for not taking forward certain recommendations.

  • On legislating for open justice, the Government says it sees "no clear need to legislate in this area", citing common law, Article 6 ECHR and the flexibility this gives the judiciary.
  • On re-establishing a courts' inspectorate, it says "the case for re-establishing a courts' inspectorate is therefore not clear", citing existing audit, management information and parliamentary scrutiny.
  • It commits that "in 2023" it will develop and publish a charter for members of the public summarising existing rules on access to hearings and information. It says the charter would not create new rights.
  • On a PACER-style document portal, it states "we do not, at this stage, have plans" to create one, citing resources, and says it plans to explore access to court documents in a call for evidence launching in 2023.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error

Recommendations and conclusions 45 shown

1: MPs need to visit family courts to understand daily justice system issues.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
We would encourage every family court in England and Wales to invite their local MPs to visit so that they can hear accounts of the issues facing the family justice system from those who are responsible for delivering justice on a daily basis.

Link to this item · Read this item

2: Need for a White Paper clarifying public rights to court access in the digital age

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice should consider producing a White Paper that clarifies and publicises the right of the public to attend court hearings and access information on court proceedings in the digital age.

Link to this item · Read this item

3: Government and Parliament must legislate on the proper limits of open justice

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
Open justice is a common law principle, and it is for the courts to determine its requirements in particular cases. However, responsibility for deciding how the principle should operate should not be left to the courts alone. Deciding the proper limits of open justice can often give rise to significant policy questions that Government and Parliament can only tackle through legislation.

Link to this item · Read this item

4: Digital age requires collaboration for balanced open justice without damaging quality

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The internet and social media are changing the way that the public access court proceedings, which is making the work of the courts more accessible; but this also presents dangers for the administration of justice. In the digital age, it is vital the Government, Parliament and the Judiciary work together to ensure that a balanced approach to open justice is achieved so that public scrutiny of justice can be secured without damaging the quality of the justice administered in the courts.

Link to this item · Read this item

5: Concerning decline in news media coverage of courts, especially Magistrates’ courts

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The well-documented decline in the news media’s coverage of the courts, particularly the Magistrates’ courts, is concerning. In acting as the eyes and ears of the public, the media perform a vital role in keeping the public informed on the operation of the justice system.

Link to this item · Read this item

7: HMCTS must enhance direct communication and provide media information to facilitate court reporting

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
As the public receives less information through the media on the work of the courts, HMCTS should do more to enable the courts to communicate information on court proceedings directly to the public. In addition, HMCTS needs to use technology and organisational reform, building on the work done with Courtsdesk News, to provide the media with the information it needs in a consistent manner, as soon as possible, to facilitate court reporting. HMCTS should also pilot the use of regional communication and information officers to support media and public access to hearings. Furthermore, the decrease in the media’s coverage of the courts also strengthens the case for the re- establishment of a courts’ inspectorate, which could help to identify wider issues within the justice system, particularly in the Magistrates’ courts and the Family Court, which are not well covered by the media.

Link to this item · Read this item

8: Practical barriers create a chilling effect on open justice for journalists and the public

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The evidence from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism on its experience of attempting to access possession hearings presents a concerning picture of the practical reality of open justice in England and Wales. The legal and constitutional status of open justice is immaterial if journalists face the sort of hurdles experienced by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Those barriers have the potential to create a chilling effect for journalists and the public by discouraging them from exercising their right to attend hearings. Everyone working within the justice system, especially judges and court staff, has a role to play in translating the principle of open justice into reality.

Link to this item · Read this item

9: Public must be aware of their rights to attend court proceedings and access information

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome the publication of the Reporters’ Charter, which for the first time sets out the rights and obligations of journalists reporting on court proceedings. We note, however, that the rights of access that flow from the principle of open justice are not exclusively for reporters’—it is vital that members of the public are also aware of their right to attend proceedings and access information.

Link to this item · Read this item

11: Need for a single point of contact for all media and public court inquiries

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Reporters’ Charter helpfully directs the media to the MOJ press office and the Judicial Press Office to deal with enquiries and issues on accessing court proceedings and information. There should be a single point of contact for all accessibility and open justice inquiries from the media and from the public. The Lord Chief Justice told us that, if a journalist encounters an issue accessing a court, he or she should “get in touch with their local court and ask why”. In reality, at present there is no formal official mechanism for the media or the public to raise accessibility enquiries or complaints in relation to the courts. The creation of regional communication and information officers within HMCTS could provide that point of contact for reporters and the public. The courts’ inspectorate, as we proposed in our report on court capacity, could have a specific remit to examine the operation of open justice.

Link to this item · Read this item

12: Public understanding of court proceedings and attendance rights requires enhancement.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
HMCTS should institute a programme of open days to encourage the public to visit their local courts, for example during Justice Week. This programme should be used to improve the awareness of both the public and HMCTS staff of the public’s right to attend court proceedings. Furthermore, there should be a programme to encourage schools to organise visits to their local courts to improve public legal education.

Link to this item · Read this item

14: Lack of coherence and consistency in remote hearing access for public and media.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
Remote hearings are still a relatively new and innovative feature of the justice system in England and Wales. The evidence to our inquiry suggests that there is a problem with a lack of coherence and consistency in relation to the ability of the media and the public to access remote court hearings.

Link to this item · Read this item

15: Gather and publish detailed data on remote court proceeding observation requests by jurisdiction.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
We recommend that HMCTS gathers and publishes data on requests to observe proceedings remotely. In particular, it would be useful to know the number of requests received and the number of requests granted by jurisdiction.

Link to this item · Read this item

18: Consider expanding digital portal to include all court information, results, and restrictions.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
We request further information on when this service will go live and what improvements are planned to the level of information on the lists and the accessibility of the service. We recommend that HMCTS considers whether the proposed digital portal should be expanded to include all court information, including results, reporting restrictions and court documents.

Link to this item · Read this item

20: Establish streamlined digital portal for court document and reporting restriction access.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government and HMCTS should establish a streamlined process for accessing court documents, including courts lists, using a digital portal modelled on Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) in the United States. This should also be used to inform the media of reporting restrictions, including automatic restrictions and notice of applications for reporting restrictions.

Link to this item · Read this item

22: Reporting restrictions show inconsistency in notification and ineffective compliance on social media

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
Reporting restrictions play a key role in securing the fairness of the justice system. However, it is clear that there is inconsistency in the courts’ approach to notifying the media when restrictions are in place, and they are often not effective at ensuring compliance, particularly on social media. This is an important example of where the modernisation of the infrastructure of open justice is long overdue

Link to this item · Read this item

25: Explore AI-powered transcription pilots and review contracts to improve court transcript accessibility

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
HMCTS should explore whether greater use of technology, such as AI-powered transcription, could be piloted to see whether it can be used to reduce the cost of producing court transcripts. HMCTS should also consider whether the sentencing remarks in the Magistrates’ courts could be routinely recorded and transcribed on request. HMCTS should also review its existing contracts for transcription services to ensure that transcripts are more accessible to the media and the public.

Link to this item · Read this item

27: Reform judgment collection, storage, and publication to reduce reliance on commercial publishers

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
HMCTS should reform the way that judgments are collected, stored and published so that there is less reliance on commercial legal publishers. The judgments of courts are the product of a publicly funded justice system and the public, the media and the legal sector should not have to pay significant sums for access.

Link to this item · Read this item

29: Require Government to provide status update on open justice project funding and completion

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
We are concerned over whether the Ministry of Justice has allocated sufficient funding to ensure that the court reform programme can overcome some of the barriers to public and media access to information on courts. We ask the Government to provide a status update on any ongoing projects that are designed to enhance open justice, outlining how much funding has been allocated to deliver them and providing a date by which they will be completed.

Link to this item · Read this item

30: New legislative framework enhances open justice through remote court observation

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome the new legislative framework for remote observation of court proceedings. The combination of this framework and improvement of the technological facilities of courts has the potential to enhance open justice by making it easier for the public and the media to observe proceedings.

Link to this item · Read this item

31: Evaluate the new remote observation framework considering court resources and transmissions

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
It is right that judges are in control of the decision as to whether to allow remote observation. In some cases, judges will find these decisions difficult to make. It is crucial therefore that the effect of this new framework is evaluated. The concerns raised by the Lord Chief Justice and the Senior President of Tribunals, in particular in relation to the impact on court resources and the potential for unauthorised transmissions, will need to be followed up by an evaluation of how this new framework is operating in practice.

Link to this item · Read this item

33: Livestreaming court proceedings offers significant potential to enhance open justice and public accessibility.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The power to allow the transmission of proceedings to designated livestreaming premises has great potential to enable more people to observe court proceedings and enhance open justice. If students were able to observe cases in classrooms and lecture halls, or if community centres could host livestreams of court proceedings, the accessibility of court proceedings would be greatly enhanced.

Link to this item · Read this item

35: Commission research to identify suitable civil and criminal proceedings for broadcast and video archiving.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
More widely, we recommend that HMCTS and the Judiciary commission research to determine which civil and criminal proceedings could be suitable for broadcast and video archiving. In principle, we would support the extension of broadcasting and recording to civil trials that do not involve oral evidence. In the criminal context, the broadcast and recording of sentencing in Magistrates’ courts could also be beneficial. However, we do not support the broadcasting of any elements of criminal trials other than the sentencing remarks of the judge.

Link to this item · Read this item

36: Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 changes require evaluation of impact on open justice.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The changes to criminal procedure in the Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 should be carefully monitored. After one year of their operation, the Ministry of Justice should initiate an evaluation of how the changes are operating in practice, including their impact on open justice.

Link to this item · Read this item

37: Documenting and timely online publication of court information can mitigate open justice concerns.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
The potential effect of these changes on open justice might also be mitigated by ensuring that the relevant information that would have otherwise been said in open court is documented and published online in a timely fashion.

Link to this item · Read this item

39: Review the Single Justice Procedure to enhance transparency through timely publication of information.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government should review the procedure and seek to enhance its transparency by ensuring that any information that would have been available had the cases been heard in open court is published in a timely fashion.

Link to this item · Read this item

40: Strengthen open justice governance by formalising Data Governance Panel and establishing user group.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
The Government should clarify and strengthen the governance structures on open justice. The Senior Data Governance Panel should be formalised and its powers and remit should be defined and published. It is vital that the decisions made by the Panel are as transparent as possible. The positive work of the Media Working Group should be built upon and it should be empowered to make recommendations that are then considered and decided upon by the Senior Data Governance Panel. A separate court information user group should be established to represent the interests of groups other than the media, such as court observers, NGOs, researchers and law tech that can also make recommendations that are considered and decided upon by the Senior Data Governance Panel.

Link to this item · Read this item

41: Ask Law Commission to propose reform of Section 12 for better transparency-confidentiality balance.

Recommendation · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Recommended (the committee's words)
We agree with the President of the Family Division that there should be a review of section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960. In our view section 12 of the Act should be reviewed and reformed so that it can replaced with a much more targeted measure that respects the principle of open justice. The Government should ask the Law Commission to produce a proposal for the reform of section 12 of the Administration of Justice Act 1960 that provides a better balance between transparency and confidentiality.

Link to this item · Read this item

42: Media access to Family Courts supported, but resource allocation and reporting interest remain uncertain.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
In broad terms, we support the Transparency Review’s principal recommendation that media representative and bloggers should be able to report, subject to the relevant restrictions, on the cases they observe in the Family Court. We would caution, however, that given the decline in the number of court reporters in recent years, it is unclear whether media outlets will necessarily dedicate greater resources to reporting on the family courts as a result of these changes. We look forward to seeing the results of the pilots.

Link to this item · Read this item

43: Success of informative family court lists pilot depends on identifying cases of public interest.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome the commitment to produce more informative family court lists. The success of the proposed pilot will depend on journalists and bloggers being able to identity cases that will generate wider public interest.

Link to this item · Read this item

44: Target to publish 10% of judgments faces concerns about anonymisation unit resources.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome the Transparency Review’s proposal to set a target of every judge publishing 10% of their judgments. If achieved, this would make a significant 56 Open justice: court reporting in the digital age contribution to the transparency of the Family Court and to open justice. It is crucial that the public and the media are able to access a greater number of judgments from the Family Court. However, we share the concern raised by witnesses as to whether sufficient resources will be allocated to enable the proposed anonymisation unit to function as effectively as it needs to in order to ensure that a consistent and representative number of judgments are published and to minimise the number of anonymisation errors.

Link to this item · Read this item

45: Provide requisite resources to establish anonymisation unit for safe publication of Family Court judgments.

Conclusion · Fifth Report - Open justice: court reporting in the digital age · Addressed to Ministry of Justice

Concluded (the committee's words)
His Majesty’s Court and Tribunal Service should ensure that the requisite resources are provided to enable the establishment of an anonymisation unit that facilitates the publication of at least 10% of Family Court judgments without the risk of identification of the parties involved.

Link to this item · Read this item

Reports

1 report

Oral evidence sessions

2 sessions

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

Date Session and witnesses Source
11 Jan 2022
Oral evidence session
Dr Natalie Byrom · Faculty of Laws, UCL, John Battle · Media Lawyers Association, Sir Andrew McFarlane · Family Division
View ↗
9 Nov 2021
Oral evidence session
Dr Judith Townend · University of Sussex, Ms Emily Pennink · Press Association, Ms Maeve McClenaghan · The Bureau of Investigative Journalism
View ↗

Who gave evidence

6 witnesses

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

WitnessOrganisationSessions
Dr Judith Townend · Senior Lecturer in media and information law University of Sussex 1
Dr Natalie Byrom · Honorary Senior Research Fellow Faculty of Laws, UCL 1
John Battle · Chair Media Lawyers Association 1
Ms Emily Pennink · Old Bailey Correspondent Press Association 1
Ms Maeve McClenaghan · Journalist The Bureau of Investigative Journalism 1
Sir Andrew McFarlane · President Family Division 1