A landmark decision by an Alberta judge to allow a television camera inside his courtroom for the long-awaited verdict in the Travis Vader murder case could usher in a new era of transparency and trust between Canadians and their judicial system, according to one legal expert.
Court of Queen's Bench Justice Denny Thomas granted the unprecedented access after he heard submissions from lawyers representing a consortium of media outlets -- including CTV News. However, Thomas made it clear to the court that this is a one-time ruling.
Travis Vader pleaded not guilty to two counts of first-degree murder in the 2010 deaths of Lyle and Marie McCann, who vanished on a camping trip. The couple in their late 70s were last seen fuelling up their motorhome in their home town of St. Albert, just north of Edmonton, before heading to British Columbia. Their burning vehicle was found two days later in a remote area west of the city.
Thomas will deliver an overview of his verdict Thursday.
Media lawyer Peter Jacobsen says while Thomas’s decision was “pretty unusual,” he hopes it will pave the way for other judges to allow those beyond the courtroom to see the judicial system in action.
“The public needs to have a better understanding of the system,” Jacobsen told CTV News Channel. “What better way in 2016 than to actually show people what’s going on in the court room.”
Most provincial and municipal court proceedings are not televised, but there have been several exceptions over the years at the discretion of various judges. The Supreme Court of Canada has broadcast most of its hearings since 1995, and has provided webcasts since 2009.
Opponents of the practice say the presence of cameras intimidates witnesses, encourages lawyers to grandstand, and robs victims and their families of privacy.
Jacobsen says those fears are “greatly exaggerated,” noting that public inquiries have been televised for decades without incident.
“We have not seen lawyers acting out more, or pandering to the camera. We have a very different system here than the United States, which is where those fears come from,” he said.
Jacobsen says Canadians would have more faith in their judicial system if the courts dropped their camera-shy culture and allowed verdicts, and eventually the vast majority of cases, to be broadcast publically. It’s a change he says is already underway in many legal circles.
“I think that our courts are moving towards an understanding that whatever slight harm people think might arise out of cameras in the court room will be greatly outweighed by the good it does, and by the fact that it will allow people to understand . . . why things that happen in our courts happen the way they do,” said Jacobsen.
He even recommends that Canada adopt a measure similar to the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would bolster press freedom, thereby granting greater public access to the courts in cases where it is prudent to do so.
“For the vast majority of cases, there is no reason why we shouldn’t allow cameras into the courts in much the same way they do in the U.S.”
With files from the Canadian Press
