Cameras in the Court

The first time the Supreme Court of Canda allowed a camera into court was in 1981 to broad cast it decision in the patriation reference case. Famouse other cases as like the, O.J. Simpson case, the Menendez case, the Bobbit case and the W. Kennedy-Smith case, thousands of cases are televised each year locally, regionally and nationally. 

 In the Canadian Charter of Right and Freedoms shows under s2(b) that a fundamental freedom is " freedom of expression'' , including freedom of the press and other media of communication.

From her 1993 confirmation hearings, Judge Ruth Bader Ginsberg comments on cameras in the court. Judge Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the second female justice and the first Jewish female justice.

For more information : http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/cameras-in-the-court

Advocates of more camera access see that as contrary to the public interest; opponents see such prohibitions as a salvation for the whole trial process.

Supporters of greater camera access usually offer some variation on these arguments:

• Most Canadians can't attend courts in person.
• TV is the main source of news for most people.
• Witnesses will be more likely to tell the truth when cameras are there.
• Lawyers will be better prepared.
• Televised trials educate the public and show differences between the U.S. and Canadian legal systems.
• The whole trial process is more open to public scrutiny.

Opponents of camera access have their own list of concerns:

• Witnesses could be reluctant to come forward if cameras are present.
• Lawyers could grandstand for the cameras.
• Jurors could feel pressure.
• The media would focus on sensational cases or testimony.
• Stress on trial participants would increase.
• Invasion of privacy in sensitive cases.