The Ministry of Justice has spoken out against video recordings of closed court hearings

The introduction of video recording of court hearings may be postponed until 2020. The Ministry of Justice proposes to introduce such an amendment to the government bill, already adopted by the State Duma in the first reading, which provides for the introduction of mandatory video recording of hearings in civil and criminal cases, as well as the creation of conditions for storing these recordings for 10 years, Vedomosti writes .

The law is to come into force in 2018, after the courts are equipped with video recording systems. This will cost 1.9 billion rubles one-time and 840 million rubles annually, the White House calculated. The draft amendment, which provides for a delay in the innovation, has been submitted for discussion to the government commission on legislative activity. Another innovation proposed by the Ministry of Justice is a ban on video recording of sessions that will be held behind closed doors. The Ministry of Justice did not answer Vedomosti's question about the reason for the need for such changes.

The bill on the introduction of mandatory video recording of court hearings was adopted in the first reading in March of this year, but it caused a lot of criticism from deputies and judges. The Supreme Court's review noted that the federal target program (FTP) "Development of the judicial system for 2013-2020" planned to equip 10,600 courtrooms with audio recording systems by the end of 2017 and only 1,250 with video recording systems. In such circumstances, it would be more appropriate to discuss the issue of maintaining audio recording of the proceedings, the Supreme Court noted.

In addition, the introduction of video recording requires an answer to a number of procedural questions: the status of the video recording remains open (is it part of the protocol, should it be continuous and can it be considered evidence along with the written protocol, what are the features of the video recording in the event of the absence of persons participating in the court hearing, or if it is declared open, etc.). The response of the Accounts Chamber emphasized that the planned implementation of the project at the expense of the Federal Targeted Program for the Development of the Judicial System implies a change in the priorities of the program and "entails the risks of not achieving the expected final results of its implementation."