High Court Judge Permits Tweeting In Court
Twitter has been approved as a legitimate method of reporting live from the courtroom
The Lord Chief Justice has given journalists the green light to use Twitter during court proceedings, as long as their tweets do not interfere with the judicial process.
Issued today by Lord Judge, the interim guidance applies only to courts in England and Wales and works on a case-by-case basis. This means journalists have to ask for permission from individual judges, who would then determine whether the use of social media is appropriate.
“There is no statutory prohibition on the use of live text-based communications in open court. But before such use is permitted, the court must be satisfied that its use does not pose a danger of interference to the proper administration of justice in the individual case,” explained Judge.
His ruling takes immediate effect. However, a review is to be conducted.
Ruling prompted by WikiLeaks hearing
Judge’s interim guidance was prompted by the hearing on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s bail application last week.
At the City of Westminster Magistrates’ court, two journalists asked District Judge Howard Riddle if they could tweet live updates. Their request met no objection.
“Judge just gave me explicit permission to tweet proceedings ‘if it’s quiet and doesn’t disturb anything’,” tweeted Alexi Mostrous, special correspondent for The Times.
However, the use of Twitter was later banned at Assange’s follow-up bail hearing at the High Court when Justice Ouseley withdrew the permission.
Only journalists can tweet in court
Under the current ruling, journalists are allowed to use mobile phones or laptops to tweet live from the courtroom. However, recording sound or images remains illegal.
Meanwhile, Lord Judge also mentioned that the danger was “at its most acute in the context of criminal trials,” warning that Twitter could increase the “potential for prejudicial material” to be published online.
Currently, his interim guidance is limited to only journalists and media organisations. Members of the public could be prohibited from doing so as their actions might stir additional distractions, Judge added.
