CourtWatch Reports on Open Justice in London's Magistrates' Courts

The CourtWatch London initiative has just published its first report on the openness and accessibility of the capital's Magistrates' Courts.

The 23 page report, which can be read in full here, summarises the experiences of 82 volunteer members of the public who recently visited courts over a six month period. The overwhelming majority of visits were to Highbury, Thames and Croydon Magistrates' Courts, with only around five percent taking place elsewhere. Given recent events, it is somewhat of a relief that Statford Magistrates' Court has been avoided.

Among other things the Courtwatchers, each armed with pre-printed observation forms, took detailed notes about the decisions taken by the court, the manner in which defendants were treated and their experiences as an observing member of the public. They also recorded observations about the court environment in terms of security, facilities and the availability of information.

As I have previously mentioned, I have concerns about the level of reporting and public observation that takes place in our courts. It is now five years since I wrote that article and I have to say that it is still fairly unusual for a journalist or member of the public to be present in court. Those few members of the public that are, generally have some connection to one of the cases or some other wider interest in the criminal justice system. Walk ins, where a member of the public visits entirely out of curiosity, are virtually unheard of, although they are very welcome.

Turning now to some of the report findings. It is reassuring to see that 97 percent of Courtwatchers considered the security staff to be respectful, but a few voiced concerns about security checks feeling intimidating and intrusive.

One Courtwatcher with an injured hand reported that they were unable to repack their pac-a-man raincoat, having removed it from its pouch for inspection. The security officer they were dealing with blanked repeated requests for assistance, rudely adding: "I'm ignoring your question".

Courtwatchers also reported that the information displayed on the court lists was often inaccurate and subject to last minute changes. On a few occasions there were no lists on display at all. The courts in question had information desks (many don't nowadays) and the staff were perceived as helpful most of the time.

There were also some difficulties with visibility and accoustics within the courtrooms, with some Courtwatchers saying it was very difficult to see information displayed on monitors and hear people speaking from behind screens. They also noted that the practice of addressing the Bench was not very helpful for those trying to listen from the rear of the room.

A hearing impaired Courtwatcher recalled being given permission by the usher to sit in the well of the court, only to be told to return to the public gallery a few moments later by another member of staff.

In 56 percent of cases Courtwatchers reported that they were asked their reasons for being there by "someone in authority". This was often followed up by an offer of assistance, but it was noted that the spirit of open justice was broken by the question being posed. The report comments: "People should not need to explain why they are observing and such questioning risks intimidating anxious observers."

In a few cases Courtwatchers were asked to provide their name and identification. They were also incorrectly told that they needed permission to observe proceedings and take notes.

Concerns were also raised about the state of the court buildings, with reports of filthy carpets, blocked toilets and damage caused by graffiti and chewing gum.

The report concludes with ten suggestions for making Magistrates' Courts more open and accessible:

1. Send "secret shoppers" into courts to check how accessible and welcoming they are.
2. Introduce airport security technology at entry so less personal searching is needed.
3. Conduct an audibility audit in all courtrooms and address any problems revealed.
4. Provide better online and written information about how criminal courts work and about rules for court observation (including where laptops and phones can be used). Put a poster of "who's who in the courtroom" in every court waiting area.
5. Create better, more detailed open access court listings online and on paper. Trial an electronic board with up to date court listings (like an airport departure board) centrally in the courthouse and outside each courtroom.
6. Train court staff and judges in the principles of open justice and in how to enhance the understanding of public observers.
7. When courts are being designed or renovated, prioritise improving accessibility for public observers, defendants, witnesses and victims.
8. Try to give public observers access to the same written or CCTV evidence which is available to the parties and professionals.
9. Provide a clear route for public observers to feedback about problems they have had accessing and understanding hearings. Give a response to that feedback.
10. Clarify legislation as to what behaviour justifies a public observer being excluded or thrown out of the courtroom.

I think point 6 would be a pretty good starting point.

We need every member of staff to know that visiting members of the public are welcome and encouraged.

They need to be able to see and hear proceedings clearly. They need to have access to information about which cases are happening and where.

Court staff need to be friendly, knowledgeable and approachable - not standoffish or suspicious.