Essay
Page 23
The Eagle x DU Law Society: Article Competition Winner The Courts and COVID: Justice over Zoom By Ámhra Carey, SF Law The US Conference of Chief Justices has written that, “the pandemic is not the disruption the courts wanted, but it is the disruption that courts needed.” The COVID crisis has forced their hand and in doing so has also forced their uncomfortable position in the modern world into stark reality: the integral principles of open justice and access to justice have been pushed to breaking point in the face of this disruption and in the hands of a judiciary unfamiliar with the digital world. However, COVID has also presented the courts with an opportunity to definitively step into the modern world, while preserving and enriching their principles. Feeling among Judges and Lawyers In May 2020, the Law Society Gazette reported that Irish judges were apprehensive about the move to digital platforms for court hearings, fearing that “not every matter can be dealt with remotely.” This was understandable, as the scheme was being implemented in an emergency without “detailed engagement and testing.” However, one year on the Court Service has declared the introduction of virtual courts a success, reporting that there have been over 5,000 virtual court sessions, and that there is popular support from the legal profession for a ‘hybrid model’, with 92 per cent of survey respondents being in favour of continued use of virtual courts for minor procedural hearings. The Bar of Ireland has also published its opposition to ‘widespread’ remote hearings, although it supports the “use of remote hearings to deal with short or uncontroversial procedural business.” It is worth noting that the figure of 5,000 virtual court sessions is not so impressive when compared with other jurisdictions, such as Texas, which held 1.1 million online court hearings in the same period. Lawyers’ enthusiasm for online hearings has been explained by Sir Geoffrey Vos Mr in the following terms, “To be blunt, remote hearings can boost their earnings potential.” These are still encouraging signs that demonstrate the success and support of the move to virtual courts. Access to Justice The principle of access to justice is enshrined in Article 6 of the ECHR, and is defined as a principle of the rule of law by the UN. The British Courts have held that “it is a principle of our law that every citizen has a right to unimpeded access to a court,”and it has been protected as an “elementary right under the [Irish] Constitution” under the unenumerated rights doctrine. Considering this strong protection, the move to online court hearings has rightfully brought up the issue of the inability of some to access a necessary device and internet connection. The Irish government could and should have taken steps to allow those without the necessary facilities to access the courts in a safe manner throughout the pandemic, such as keeping libraries open. However, there is evidence that the shift to online hearings has generally improved access to justice internationally: In Michigan the rate of defendants showing up for court has increased from roughly 11 per cent to nearly 100 per cent. The Irish Courts Service has also reported that: The attendance by participants at remote hearings before the Examiner has exceeded what would have been
