Clarke: Court Filming Ban To Be Overturned

Filming in courts will be allowed to improve public understanding of the legal system, Justice Secretary Ken Clarke has announced.

It will be the first time that cameras will be allowed in courts other than the Supreme Court.

But filming will only be allowed for the judge's summary remarks. The ban on filming victims, witnesses, offenders and jurors inside court will remain.

Mr Clarke said broadcasters will be allowed to screen footage of judgements in England and Wales for the first time, as part of "unprecedented plans to improve transparency".

Plans have also been announced to publish information about the performance of courts to enable members of the public to see how their courts are working.

The breakthrough comes after the Head of Sky News, who has spearheaded a campaign to televise court cases, wrote an open letter to Mr Clarke.

John Ryley told him the public would have better understood controversial sentences passed on rioters, had judges' remarks been televised.

Broadcasters have been pressing for cameras to be allowed into courts for years.

At present cameras - including video cameras - are banned from courts in England and Wales by section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925.

The one exception is the Supreme Court where, for the past two years, cameras have been allowed to film proceedings .

Mr Clarke told Sky News he would first look at televising parts of the Court of Appeal and then go on to crown courts.

He said: "There's no good reason for not allowing people to see the judge, hear the sentence in the judge's own words, with his own explanation...

"We are going to proceed cautiously and I think the obvious place to start is the Court of Appeal but I am looking at going on to crown courts as well."

He went on: "What we need is public information, public confidence and above all transparency in the way the system works...

"What we don't want is theatre. We don't want to alter the behaviour or conduct of the trial. We want to encourage people to have confidence in it."

Sky's home affairs correspondent Mark White said the changes were a "significant development".

White said the move would probably see broadcasters allowed to air the sentencing remarks of judges rather than entire trials.

Mr Ryley's proposal, put together with senior management at the BBC and ITN, was for limited coverage of court proceedings, which would not show vulnerable witnesses.

He said: "Sky News welcomes the decision and looks forward to working with the judiciary to bring about more transparency in our justice system."

Legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg said he was surprised the Government was moving to change the guidelines so soon after the renewed campaign.

"You will see someone convicted, you will see someone being sentenced, but the witnesses who might otherwise be discouraged from giving evidence won't be shown under what we understand the Government's plan to be," he said.

Mr Rozenburg said the law will have to be changed in Parliament - meaning it might be up to a year before the first court television pictures are aired.

Sadiq Khan MP, Labour's Shadow Justice Secretary, said: "I welcome the announcement that certain aspects of court proceedings will be televised.

"Allowing the broadcast of judges' sentencing remarks could make the sentencing process more transparent and understandable.

"However it will be extremely important to ensure that careful controls are in place to protect jurors, victims and witnesses.

"We do not support the televising of anything that might make jurors, victims and witnesses vulnerable to intimidation."

In January 2010, Mr Ryley announced a campaign to get TV cameras into other courts, which he said would include legal challenges to the current ban on cameras in court.

:: You can watch continuous live TV coverage from the Supreme Court on the Sky News website .