The limitation on recording and filming in court hearings is a violation of journalists' right to report.

In the draft amendment to the Law on the Organization of People’s Courts, the Supreme People's Court proposes that recording audio and video during court sessions should only take place during the "opening, sentencing, and announcement of decisions," and must be approved by the presiding judge. Recording the images of other court participants also requires their consent.

This proposal is currently under consideration by the National Assembly and has not yet been approved. However, recently, during many public trials, journalists have faced difficulties or have been prohibited from bringing computers and recording devices into the press room.

On April 4, the Nam Từ Liêm District Court held a public trial for Nguyễn Minh Thành, the leader of an online gambling ring, and his accomplices, who programmed and managed two gambling games, earning over 160 billion VND.

Nearly 20 reporters arrived by 7 a.m., presenting their press cards to enter and report on the trial, but were stopped at the gate, being told that they needed a letter of introduction from their organization.

Believing this requirement to be "unreasonable," the reporters cited the Press Law, stating that "when journalists are working, they only need to show their press card," but the court clerk insisted, "Without a letter of introduction, you cannot enter."

Some had to return to their offices to retrieve the letter of introduction to meet the requirements of the Nam Từ Liêm District Court. However, upon entering to report on the trial, reporters were not allowed to bring recording devices or phones. The speakers in the courtroom often malfunctioned, making it very difficult for attendees to grasp the content.

In response to this situation, one journalist expressed frustration: "This is a public trial for gambling offenses; why are reporters being obstructed from doing their jobs?"

In several recent high-profile trials at the Hanoi People's Court and the Ho Chi Minh City People's Court, such as the Việt Á test kit case, the violations at Tân Hoàng Minh Group, and the appeal of the "rescue flight" case, reporters were only allowed to bring paper and pens into the press room and had to follow the proceedings through a screen.

A reporter covering the "rescue flight" case via a screen in the press room in July 2023. Photo: Danh Lam.

"Not allowing audio and video recording of court proceedings makes it very difficult for reporters to convey information to readers, especially given the large volume of testimonies from defendants and the complexity of many major cases," said journalist Vũ Ân from Dân Việt. He added that recorded audio and video help journalists verify information and avoid legal risks.

Having covered trials in Hanoi for many years, journalist Nguyễn Hoàng Hải believes that not allowing reporters to record audio and video of court proceedings hinders the press and contradicts the principle of "public trials" established by the constitution. The 2013 Constitution states that the People's Courts conduct trials publicly, allowing closed sessions only in special cases that require state secrecy, protection of morality, or the privacy of minors or legitimate requests from involved parties.

Lawyer: Information from court sessions should serve the national interest

From an expert’s perspective, Nguyễn Quang Đồng, Director of the Institute for Policy and Media Development (IPS), argues that given the current development of information technology, "it is unacceptable to restrict journalists from recording audio and video of court proceedings." The proposal to only allow reporters to record during the opening and sentencing phases, as stated in the draft law, "strips away many rights of journalists."

According to him, the Civil Procedure Code, the Administrative Procedure Law, and the Press Law all permit journalists to attend and report on the "developments" and "activities" of public trials. From the defendants' standpoint, they have the right to a fair trial, which needs to be monitored by the public through the press. This is also a valid reason for journalists to be able to record the entire proceedings of public trials.

"The judiciary must train judges to enhance their composure and qualities, ensuring they are not distracted by cameras, rather than limiting journalists' rights for this reason," expert Nguyễn Quang Đồng countered the Supreme People's Court Chief Justice Nguyễn Hòa Bình’s view that reporters pointing cameras at the court could distract judges, prosecutors, and lawyers.

He stated that Vietnam is building a rule-of-law state where citizens have the right to access legal knowledge. Trials are the clearest manifestation of law enforcement. This is also the greatest benefit of public trials. Therefore, public trials "should be viewed as opportunities to promote and educate the public about the law." The judiciary must recognize that journalists’ rights to record audio and video during court proceedings serve societal benefits.

"The rights to record audio and video of journalists during trials must be protected," expert Đồng emphasized, arguing that the draft Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts should be designed to benefit society as a whole, rather than just "protecting the narrow interests of the judiciary."

Similarly, lawyer Trịnh Văn Tuyến from Giang Thanh Law Office analyzed that recording audio and video is a unique aspect of journalism, especially for public trials of significant social interest. Data from audio and video recordings ensures the accuracy and verifiability of media reports compared to information on social media.

Citing the 2014 Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts, which states that "the court, on behalf of the state, adjudicates criminal, civil, family, commercial, labor, and administrative cases," he argued that reporting on public trials "should be considered a public activity for the national interest, contributing to crime prevention."

"Therefore, the media's use of images of the parties involved in court proceedings does not require their consent. The judiciary cannot use the argument of ensuring human rights to restrict the media from recording audio and video during court proceedings," he stated.

According to him, the Press Law has "covered" all aspects of journalists' activities, including ethical standards and operational conditions. The Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts only regulates the activities of the judiciary. Mixing journalistic regulations into the Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts would lead to overlaps, complications, and decreased effectiveness of legal implementation and judicial reform.

In commenting on the draft Law on the Organization of the People’s Courts, on February 28, the Vietnam Journalists Association sent a letter to the Standing Committee of the National Assembly, stating that "journalists from media agencies need to be ensured access (recording audio and video) to the proceedings from the opening until the trial concludes." When covering, journalists need to ensure the personal rights of attendees.

"The ability of journalists to record audio and video at trials will make the judges' statements, decisions, and debates between parties more standardized," said Nguyễn Mạnh Tuấn, Deputy Head of the Inspection Committee, Vietnam Journalists Association, in an interview with VnExpress.

Trương Việt Toàn, former Deputy Chief Justice of the Hanoi People’s Court, stated that preventing audio and video recording is akin to "cutting off their hands" for reporters.

(This translation was provided by an automated AI translation tool)