Virtual Hearings and the Fundamental Rights of Incarcerated Persons
the Impact of Videoconferencing on the Experience of Incarceration
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17655/rdct.2025.e0005Keywords:
Human rights , Normalisation , Criminology , Digital vulnerabilityAbstract
The increasing use of remote hearings in criminal procedures produced a prolific debate about their impact on the procedural rights of suspects, defendants, and accused, as well as the need for a new normative framework on fair trial in remote hearings. The article claims that there is a gap in the debate, regarding two aspects of the matter, namely the existence of a tendency towards the systematic and widespread use of remote hearings in cases involving prisoners for managerial purposes and the fact that the systematic and widespread use of remote hearings involving prisoners produce a restrictive impact on prison regimes and, consequently, on prisoners’ fundamental rights. It also proposes the establishment of basic rules for the development of a normative framework on the use of remote hearings in criminal procedures involving prisoners, based on the principle of normalisation and related standards developed within the International Human Rights Law.
References
BIRAL, M. The Italian Route towards Digitalisation of Criminal Proceedings. The Latest Developments in the Field of Remote Justice. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, v. 10, n. 2, 29 jul. 2024. Disponível em: <https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/1007>. Acesso em: 19 jan. 2025.
CAMPOS, G. Zurich justice system uses videoconferencing to cut costs. Croydon: AV Magazine, 11 abr. 2018. Disponível em: <https://www.avinteractive.com/news/collaboration/zurich-courts-use-videoconferencing-cut-costs-11-04-2018/>. Acesso em: 24 ago. 2024.
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. General Secretariat of the Council of The European Union. Guide on videoconferencing in cross-border proceedings : European e justice. LU: Publications Office, 2013.
CREWE, B. Depth, Weight, Tightness: Revisiting the Pains of Imprisonment. Punishment & Society, v. 13, n. 5, p. 509–529, dez. 2011.
CREWE, B. Inside the belly of the penal beast: Understanding the experience of imprisonment. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, v. 4, n. 1, p. 50–65, jan. 2015.
DE VOCHT, D. L. F. Trials by Video Link after the Pandemic: The Pros and Cons of the Expansion of Virtual Justice. China-EU Law Journal, v. 8, n. 1–2, p. 33–44, nov. 2022.
DE VOS, Helene. Normal, Normality and Normalization: Towards a Context-Based Analysis. Em: DE VOS, Helene. (ed.). Beyond Scandinavian Exceptionalism: Normalization, Imprisonment and Society. Londres: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023. p. 31–69.
DOWNES, D. Contrasts in tolerance: post-war penal policy in the Netherlands and England and Wales. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.
DUMOULIN, Laurence; LICOPPE, Christian. La visioconférence comme mode de comparution des personnes détenues, une innovation « managériale » dans l’arène judiciaire. Droit et société, v. 2, n. 90, p. 287–302, 7 jul. 2015.
ENGBO, H. J. Normalisation in Nordic Prisons—From a Prison Governor’s Perspective. Em: SCHARFF SMITH, P.; UGELVIK, T. (ed.). Scandinavian Penal History, Culture and Prison Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2017. p. 327–352.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR THE EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE. Study on the functioning of judicial systems in the EU Member States. Straiburgo: CEJEJ, 06 abr. 2022.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR THE PREVENTION OF TORTURE AND INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT. 26th General Report of the CPT. [s.l.]: Council of Europe, abr. 2017.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR THE PREVENTION OF TORTURE AND INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT. Transport of deteinees. [s.l.]: Council of Europe, 22 jun. 2018. Disponível em: https://www.coe.int/en/web/cpt/transport-detainees. Acesso em: 27 out. 2024.
EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. Case of Marcello Viola v. Italy - Judgment. Legal Tools Database. 05 out. 2006. Disponível em: <https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/e227cb/>. Acesso em: 26 jan. 2025.
FACTOR, R. et al. Videoconferencing in Legal Hearings and Procedural Justice. Victims & Offenders, v. 18, n. 8, p. 1557–1579, 17 nov. 2023.
FALCONE, A. Online Hearings and the Right to Effective Defence in Digitalised Trials. In: BACHMAIER WINTER, L.; RUGGERI, S. (ed.). Investigating and Preventing Crime in the Digital Era: New Safeguards, New Rights. Berlim: Springer International Publishing, 2022. p. 189–212.
FERGUSON, A. G. Courts Without Court. Washington: American University Washington College of Law, 2022. Disponível em: <https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=4051790>. Acesso em: 8 dez. 2024.
GARLAND, D. Penality and the Penal State. Criminology, v. 51, n. 3, p. 475–517, 2013.
GIBBS, Penelope. Defendants on video – conveyor belt justice or a revolution in access? Transform Justice. 08 out. 2017. Disponível em: <https://www.transformjustice.org.uk/publication/defendants-on-video-conveyor-belt-justice-or-a-revolution-in-access/>. Acesso em: 16 jul. 2024.
HAYES, D. Ben Crewe on the Bench? Bringing the Dimensional Pains of Punishment into the Courtroom. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, p. 0306624X231159885, 18 mar. 2023.
HUCKLESBY, A.; BEYENS, K.; BOONE, M. Comparing Electronic Monitoring Regimes: Length, Breadth, Depth and Weight Equals Tightness. Punishment & Society, v. 23, n. 1, p. 88–106, 1 jan. 2021.
HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE. General comment No. 35: Art.9, Liberty and security of person. Viena: UN, 16 dez. 2014.
KLIP, A. The Right to Be Present Online. 20 mar. 2024. Disponível em: <https://brill.com/view/journals/eccl/32/1/article-p1_001.xml>. Acesso em: 30 jun. 2024.
MCKAY, C. The pixelated prisoner: prison video links, court “appearance” and the justice matrix. London; New York: Routledge, 2018.
MCKAY, C. Glitching justice: Audio visual links and the sonic world of technologised courts. Law Text Culture, v. 24, p. 364–404, jan. 2020.
MCKAY, C. Remote Access Technologies, Clinical Evaluations of People-in-Prison and Digital Vulnerability. RDW, v. 43, n. 2, p.68-88, 31 Out. 2022. Doi: 10.5553/RdW/138064242022043002005 2022. Disponível em: <https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/29772>. Acesso em: 19 ago. 2024.
NEGRI, D. Atti e Udienze “A Distanza”: Risvolti Inquisitori di Una Transizione Maldestra alla Giustizia Digitale. Em: CASTRONUOVO, D. et al. (Ed.). Riforma Cartanoa: La Nuova Giustizia Penale. Padua: Cedam, 2023.
NIR, E.; MUSIAL, J. Zooming In: Courtrooms and Defendants’ Rights during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Social & Legal Studies, v. 31, n. 5, p. 725–745, out. 2022.
PEPLOW, D.; PHILLIPS, J. Remote Parole Oral Hearings: More Efficient, but at What Cost? Criminology & Criminal Justice, p. 174889582311632, 7 abr. 2023.
PERISTERIDOU, C.; DE VOCHT, D. I’m Not a Cat! Remote Criminal Justice and a Human-Centred Approach to the Legitimacy of the Trial. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, v. 30, n. 2, p. 97–106, 1 abr. 2023.
PERROCHEAU, V.; ZEROUKI, D. La Visioconférence Dans Le Procès Pénal Français, d’un Rituel a l’autre? (Videoconferencing in the French Criminal Trial, from One Ritual to Another?). Oñati Socio-Legal Series, v. 8, n. 3, p. 346–362, 2018.
PLOTNIKOFF, J.; WOOLFSON, R. Preliminary Hearings: Video Links Evaluation of Pilot Projects - Final Report. [s.l.], abr. 1999. Disponível em: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344220066_Preliminary_Hearings_Video_Links_Evaluation_of_Pilot_Projects_Final_Report_Video_Link_Pilot_Evaluation_Contents.
POVYLIUS, K. Virtual Criminal Proceedings: The Lithuanian Experience. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, v. 17, n. 1, p. 21–45, 1 jun. 2024.
RANSBOTHAM, S. et al. Special Section Introduction—Ubiquitous IT and Digital Vulnerabilities. Information Systems Research, v. 27, n. 4, p. 834–847, dez. 2016.
ROSSNER, M. Remote Rituals in Virtual Courts. Journal of Law and Society, v. 48, n. 3, p. 334–361, 2021.
ROWDEN, Emma; WALLACE, Anne; GOODMAN-DELAHUNTY, Jane. Sentencing by videolink: Up in the air? Criminal Law journal, v. 34, n. 6, p. 363–384, 1 jan. 2009.
SANDERS, Anne. Video-Hearings in Europe Before, During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal for Court Administration, v. 12, n. 2, p. 1-21, 06 maio 2021.
SHAMMAS, V. L. Pains of Imprisonment. Em: KERLEY, K. R. (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Corrections. [s.l.]: Wiley, 2017. p. 1–5.
SIGNORATO, S. L’ampliamento dei casi di partecipazione a distanza dell’imputato tra logiche efficientistiche e menomazioni difensive. La legislazione penale, 20 nov. 2017.
SYKES, G. M. The society of captives: a study of a maximum security prison. [New ed.] with a new introduction by Bruce Western and a new epilogue by the author ed. Princeton (N.J.): Princeton University press, 2007.
TURNER, J. I. Remote Criminal Justice. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. Disponível em: <https://www.ssrn.com/abstract=3699045>. Acesso em: 2 mar. 2025.
UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME. Manual on Videoconferencing: Legal and Practical Use in Criminal Cases. New York: UN, 2017.
UNITED NATIONS OFFICE ON DRUGS AND CRIME. Input Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Viena: UNODC, 30 ago. 2024.
VALCHEV, I. Can You See and Hear Us, Ms. Smith?: Protecting Defendants’ Right to Effective Assistance Of Counsel When Using Audio and Video Conferencing in Judicial Proceedings. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, v. 110, p. 655, 2020.
VAN DE RIJT, J.; VAN GINNEKEN, E. F. J. C.; BOONE, M. M. Normalisation by Default and Normalisation by Design: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies on the Normalisation of Prison Life. Incarceration, v. 4, p. 26326663231196671, jan. 2023.
VAN ZYL SMIT, D.; SNACKEN, S. Principles of European prison law and policy: penology and human rights. Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
WALKER, C. Defendants’ Experiences: Video Hearings from Prison(s) to Court(s). The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice, v. 63, n. 2, p. 127–141, 2024.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Law and Context Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
