Cameras in court

Anyone that needs proof that cameras could undermine the dignity of a courtroom should watch the OJ Simpson trial, says a Thunder Bay lawyer.

Ontario’s Attorney General Chris Bentley told the Canadian Press last week that he was open to the idea of allowing cameras in courtrooms. He said that the time was right to canvas judges, Crown attorneys and defence lawyers on their opinions.

Bentley’s ministry commissioned a report to evaluate the success of a 2007 project that temporarily put cameras in the Ontairo’s Court of Appeal. The ministry considered the project a success, and the vast majority of those canvassed recommended expanding camera use to all Ontario courts.

The report was completed in 2008, but was never made public.

The Canadian Press obtained the report through a freedom of information request where it recommended the attorney general amend the Courts of Justice Act to allow the use of cameras in Ontario courts. It went on to say their images have "great potential" as a learning tool for students and lawyers.

But not everyone is in favour of the idea.

Defence lawyer Neil McCartney said on Tuesday that he feared cameras in the courtroom would undermine the seriousness of the proceedings and the dignity of the justice system.

"I think you risk cheapening the process. You risk undermining the dignity and the solemnity that’s pretty essential to court proceedings," McCartney said. "The topic of the OJ Simpson trial always comes up whenever anybody considers this issue. My thought is do you want the OJ Simpson trial here or would you prefer the more dignified approach that our Majesty’s courts take on this side of the line."

McCartney said he felt the coverage by media was generally good and cameras could increase the risk of grandstanding.

Defence lawyer Chris Watkins disagreed with McCartney and said that those involved in court proceedings would remain professional and ensure the dignity of the courts remained. He said it was important to have cameras to ensure transparency.

"It would just be part of the chronicling of the event," Watkins said Wednesday. "I think cameras have a place in the courtroom. The reason I believe that is courtrooms were designed for public viewing. The times have changed and technology has changed and I think there’s always been a benefit to the public being aware of what happens in the justice system."

Although Watkins said there will have to be exceptions if a judge places a publication ban on a specific case. If that were to happen the lawyers involved would just have deal with it on a case-by-case basis, he said.

"I personally think that adding to the existing public access through cameras is something that would be productive for members of the public to have access to their justice system with the exception of the matters that are publication banned," he said.