Supreme Court photography?

[Warren Toda]

In Ontario, no photography is allowed anywhere inside a court building. Yet this past week, it appears that lots of pictures and TV were shot inside the Supreme Court building in Ottawa. Is an exception made for this court building or does this court fall under different (federal) laws?

[Andy Clark]

When I worked in Ottawa in the early 1980s I remember shooting pictures inside the Supreme Court foyer no problem. We could photograph any and all comings and goings. Under no circumstances could we shoot through the open doors of the Federal Court room which was on the left inside the main door nor under any circumstances could we walk up the stairs towards the hollowed Supreme Court. I spent many days in there while Constitutional arguments were made during the Trudeau government's repatriation of the Canadian Constitution from Britain. They also did allow during major decisions one pool photographer to stand at the back of the room during the decision. I suspect those rules are all the same today....I have no idea why this is allowed but not in Ontario or other provincial courts. I am sure its a provincial decision...I also think that photographers wandering around inside provincial court houses would run into plenty privacy issues. The Supreme Court in Ottawa also does not have your day to day felons coming and going but rather high paid lawyers and people or organizations looking to change or overturn laws and or decisions and in many cases not even present.....

[Keith Morison]

I've always understood that in provincial courts (Alberta, at least) a judge has the ability to allow cameras if they so choose to - but that none (or few) have.

[Warren Toda]

I've always understood that in provincial courts (Alberta, at least) a judge has the ability to allow cameras if they so choose to - but that none (or few) have.

I once asked the Chief Justice of Ontario about allowing cameras in the court. He said it wasn't up to him but rather it was the decision of the province's Attorney General. So I then spoke with the Attorney General and he said it wasn't up to him but rather the Chief Justice.

When I said the Chief Justice had referred me to him and now he, the Attorney General, was referring me back to the Chief Justice, his only response was to laugh and say, "Well there you go." 

It does seem that provincial judges can make decisions on a case by case basis but, as Keith mentioned, no one (?) has yet made the decision to allow cameras in the courtroom during a trial.

When I covered a trial in Cobourg, (fantastic courtroom by the way), they sort of allowed cameras in the courtroom. Photographers could bring their gear into the courtroom (since there was no other place for photographers to put their equipment) but had to promise not to take pictures. We were allowed to shoot in the foyer.

[Ken Gigliotti]

 Many years ago when this controversy was brewing in US , a decision was made that a hallway outside a courtroom was not a courtroom , from there cameras were allowed inside the courthouse  and later inside  courtrooms . In Canada  this issue seldom  “brews” , it takes brewing , many years or relentless efforts . An effort seldom seen in Canada . The question  I would ask the judge to consider , if it is allowed in the US then why not Canada ? Is a hallway a courtroom ? I guess it would be like asking taxpayers if they want their taxes raised . This goes back to including photography as a part of the media . The rules date back to pre photography times , I guess . But this exclusion pops up at different times in different ways but always has the same root . Is photography a part of media in a legal sense ? It has never been approached from this angle . It would raise the level of the challenge from “my courtroom , my rules”.
 Regarding privacy laws , I am not sure how anyone can talk about privacy  in this day of the secret wide range  of collection of medidata  from email  ,social networks , public surveillance and other forms we may never hear about. Media seems to get tagged with restrictions that curtail freedom of the press  as an inalienable right . Reporters can  use plain sight ,  basic un-secret  means of standing outside a courtroom asking questions but not   taking pictures . Does the public have the right to see a photo of the subject of a major court case ? Pictures and words are an intrinsic part of  media . Media is an intrinsic part  the basic freedoms of a just society . The process and access should also be a normalized  part of the  overall open court system  . Does the public have a right to see how the basic court system works . It is clear  from  radio , Tv and print reporting , that   something is missing . The public clearly cannot understand how  decisions  made by judges are arrived at.