European best practice recommendations for
Remote hearings in criminal court proceedings with adult parties During and after the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of remote hearings in criminal proceedings increased significantly. A remote hearing in a trial is when a person participates in the procedure in real time via video link, rather than being physically present in the courtroom. This can include hearings where individuals join from different locations or from different rooms within the same building. In these recommendations, the term ‘remote hearing’ is used throughout. In other contexts, similar practices are commonly labelled, e.g., ‘online hearings’, ‘virtual hearings’ or ‘videolink hearings’.
investigations as evidence in court’ for a more detailed literature review. This policy brief presents best practice recommendations for remote hearings in Europe based on empirical research (see Annex 1 for a description of the data collection). It focuses specifically on how the digitalisation of criminal proceedings affects encounters with and hearings of participants (i.e., complainants and defendants) and how the capacity of criminal justice actors (judges, public prosecutors, lawyers) to operate in this context can be strengthened.
To date, there is little research-based knowledge from Europe on the effects of remote hearings. While some studies examine differences in credibility assessments between in-person and remote hearings, there is little empirical research on how remote hearings affect communication and interactional dynamics between professional (judges, prosecutors, lawyers) and non-professional participants (defendants and complainants/witnessess/ victims). While it is generally acknowledged that the digitalisation of court communication has many potential (mostly practical) benefits, concerns have been raised about how it might affect courtroom communication and interaction and, consequently, both the experienced fairness of the proceedings and the normative quality of procedural justice. In other words, digitalisation may influence not only how fair, respectful and legitimate parties feel the proceedings to be, but also the extent to which the process actually meets the normative standards of fair trial and due process, regardless of the final outcome of the case. See the ‘Background paper on the use of remote hearings and recorded pretrial
Prior to finalising the recommendations, feedback was collected from legal professionals and experts in the field. The recommendations are formulated especially for courts and judges but are also relevant for other professionals who participate in these procedures. The recommendations are written with a view to the substantive (court) hearing of a criminal case before a judge, but they are equally relevant to other formal contact moments or hearings, such as hearings relating to pre-trial detention or appearances and examinations before the investigating judge. The relevance, applicability and feasibility of these recommendations depend on the national (legal) context, the type and seriousness of the case or hearing, the procedural stage and the specific individual characteristics of the remote participant. 1