Towards a "filmed justice"? "There would be less dictatorship of opinion"

INTERVIEW

He wants to carry this project "before the end of the five-year term": Monday, Éric Dupond-Moretti told Le

his wish to see in the near future the trials "completely" filmed and broadcast, while the capture of images is now 'hui limited to certain audiences.

This proposal, rejected by many actors in the judicial and administrative sectors, finds favor in the eyes of Me Basile Ader, lawyer specializing in media law.

The former vice-president of the Paris bar explains it at the microphone of Europe 1.

>> Find Europe Matin in replay and podcast here

For Me Ader, "justice is done in the name of the French people and there is no reason to hide it".

Filming and broadcasting the images of a trial would therefore be logical, because "one of the conditions for good justice is that it be rendered publicly".

And the lawyer summons ancient Greece to justify the need to see the litigants judged before the eyes of the public: “Traditionally, justice is done in the center of the village, the city, on the agora, among the Athenians. Everyone needs to be able to see that it is done in a fair way. It has an educational side. "

"Better inform the public"

More effectively, filming the trials would make it possible to "better inform the public," said Me Ader, former secretary of the Paris Bar conference: "Today, we report daily on the trials that interest him, but a little blind. There, we would see how it goes and there would be less dictatorship of opinion. The more we show things as they are, the less there are fantasies ", wants to believe the lawyer .

Opponents of this proposal, for their part, believe that filming a trial would undermine the proper conduct of pleadings and judgments.

This is what the Constitutional Council advanced in a decision rendered in December 2019, stressing the need to guarantee "serenity of the debates".

"The magistrates are especially very afraid of social networks and agree in hollow that this absolute ban is abnormal", replies Me Ader.

"It is no longer the question of the serenity of the debates that worries them, but more their safety. And I do not see how the images would undermine the presumption of innocence."

Better decisions made?

Should we show everything from each trial?

"The principle should be the authorization and the prohibition the exception, when a legitimate interest justifies that one protects", specifies the lawyer, who sees the need for "rules" to frame the capture and the diffusion of images out of court.

Still, according to Me Ader, the judges could make better decisions: "I think that if the magistrates know that they are watched and that we can use the images, some would have a more impartial and dignified attitude than in some jurisdictions, "he says.